Latest Column

“speculation” = “Bone-chilling terror.”

Now to read it….

Wrong guess. Acquiescence, mostly. Ornstein’s comment illusrates a way that McCain could make his apology, though. A joint, antipork appearance in favor of an infrastructure bank could do it for him.
.
Joe– is there some chance that we can reexamine the risk of “Islamic extremism?” I think there’s a pretty story to be told that it is overblown–more like Basque separatists and the Tamil nationalists than like the Nazis or the Soviets.
.
Also, you need to consider the possibility that Obama’s prioritizing energy conservation and reduced dependence on oil supplied by some states that, either officially or unofficailly, are engaged in, for what danger it represents, Islamic extremism.
.
The US is way overdue in shifting away from the use of imperialist application (or threatened application) of military force to addressing the root causes involved with separatist movements in allied countries.
.
And in the same use of force dealing with countries that express opposition to the US, but have no mechanism for acting on that opposition, and, perhaps, no actual interest in doing so, other than for domestic political consumption.

My comment is crossposted, and visible at the lagoon:

http://politicallagoon.blogspot.com/

My comment, while in limbo, is accessible here at the lagoon.

Joe-
Off topic, but I’d be curious to know your thoughts about how Dubya will take to the role of Elder Statesman.

Joe Klein,
.
I have a question/observation that I would love to get some clarity on. Much has been made about John McCain’s ability to work “across the aisle” to get things done in Washington. However one thing kind of sticks out ot me about that work. In most cases it was a Democratic policy that he ended up embracing which made it a bipartisan effort. What I mean by that is from the record as I see it the “reaching across the aisle” that McCain did was mostly just agreeing with Democrats on a few issues. But what I hardly ever see is John McCain bringing Democrats over to Republican issues. I would think truly “working across the aisle” would include the ability to convince Democrats on occasion that they are wrong and the Republicans are right. I am not saying by any means that Obama has McCain’s overall record BUT I do think that when Barack Obama
.
A. Worked on ethics reform and
.
B. Worked to get a google for government involved so people can see who is behind all the earmarks.
.
Obama had to actually bring some of his party kicking and screaming over to the middle with him to pass those bills. When did McCain have to drag his party with him to the middle to get legislation passed? It seems to me all he did was align with Democrats when they needed a few votes to pass legislation but he never brought his party with him. As I recall when he had pushback from his party on illegal immigration reform, one of the things “journalists” point to as proof that he is a uniter, he walked away from it and took his name off the bill.
.
I won’t hold my breath for an answer but I do think this is something that should have been put into perspective along time ago and might have been if credible journalists had stopped drinking the kool aid with McCain when he called himself a “maverick”.

I think the longer your post the more likely you get into moderation

Joe Klein,
.
I have a question/observation that I would love to get some clarity on. Much has been made about John McCain’s ability to work “across the aisle” to get things done in Washington. However one thing kind of sticks out to me about that supposedly bipartisan work. In most cases it was simply a Democratic policy that he ended up embracing which made it a bipartisan effort. What I mean by that is from the record as I see it the “reaching across the aisle” that McCain did was mostly just agreeing with Democrats on a few issues. But what I hardly ever see is John McCain bringing Democrats over to Republican issues. I would think truly “working across the aisle” would include the ability to convince Democrats on occasion that they are wrong and the Republicans are right. I am not saying by any means that Obama has McCain’s overall record BUT I do think that when Barack Obama
.
A. Worked on ethics reform and
.
B. Worked to get a google for government involved so people can see who is behind all the earmarks.
.
Obama had to actually bring some of his party kicking and scre@ming over to the middle with him to pass those bills. When did McCain have to drag his party with him to the middle to get legislation pa$sed? It seems to me all he did was align with Democrats when they needed a few votes to pa$s legislation but he never brought his party with him. As I recall when he had pushback from his party on illegal immigration reform, one of the things “journalists” point to as proof that he is a uniter, he walked away from it and took his name off the bill.
.
I won’t hold my breath for an answer but I do think this is something that should have been put into perspective along time ago and might have been if credible journalists had stopped drinking the kool aid with McCain when he called himself a “maverick”.

ok I give up. I tried to resend the same post and mod proof it but its back in mod he!!. Swampland sux

Joe B-
.
I can tell you that. On his bike.
.
sg–
.
Yes, the more characters you type the more likely you will have an offending string. It’s no coincidence that comments have gotten shorter and less substantive in this environment.

put it up at the lagoon as a comment sg.

Jay,
.
I just tried but then the lagoon went haywire saying I wasnt logged into wordpress. I will try again in a little while. It also wouldnt accept my google blogger account. I don’t know whats going on

Odd. [looking around for my own high sheriff. Oh. That would be me.]

I dunno, Joe. Wouldn’t this mean a Republican SecDef since 1998 or so? That has been pretty bad for America, the military, and the world.
-
Also, didn’t Clinton conclude that his mistake was leaping to controversial issues, rather than building consensus? That is certainly Obama’s style. I doubt he’ll make the Infrastructure Bank priority #1.

I’ve turned off the logon requirement. Should work now.

Yes, elvis, this would be a very bad idea. The democrats need to reclaim a role in determining security policy, and very soon. The only way to fund the programs that will needed to be funded domestically is by reducing expenditures on occupation of friendly countries–and wars against unfriendly ones.
.
The idea that the US needs “continuity” from the most disastrous US foreign policy regime in the postwar era is absurd. “Reversal” is the operative word.

Lets not forget who it was that dragged the country into the quagmire in Iraq, Republicans. Leaving them in control of national security makes no sense to me. It also plays to the myth that Republicans are better at it.

You should do a blog about this Obama ad:

It is sexist and disgusting.

You should do a blog about this Obama ad:

It is s*xist and d*sgusting.

I was fine with playing the who will be VP game, but not gonna talk Cabinet until after the election. Wouldn’t be prudent.

Thanks jay,
.
By the way, I think the Exxon/Mobil earnings report might be for Obama the eqivalent of what a bin Laden tape would have been for McCain. To see them making almost 15 billion in a quarter 5 days before an election is going to pi$$ a lot of middle america off

newliberty,
.
Thats the GREATEST ad EVERRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!

I disagree strongly on one point. While Obama might be somewhat satisfied with the National Security team that’s currently in place, he is certainly going to have to make an assertive move on arrival if for no other reason than to remove all doubt that HE’S in charge. The last thing we’re going to need is for any second guessing along the chain of command, especially if some of his strategic decisions happen to be unpopular with the troops themselves.

sgwhiteinfla
I’m so sick of the personal insults…let’s make fun of Sarah Palin for being cute and attractive…let’s spend millions on dozens of ads calling McCain “confused” and “erratic.”
Personal insults shouldn’t have any place in politics.

You guys don’t understand Obama if you think he won’t keep or appoint Republicans to his cabinet. Look at his time running the Harvard Law Review when he had to balance a wide ideological spectrum.

Obama knows that as the first black president, there will be tremendous pressure for performance and competence. Luckily, because of his short time in Washington, he doesn’t owe as many chips (I hope). Maybe that will give him the freedom to pick the best person for the job. Gates will be there, at least for a couple years, ESPECIALLY because of Biden’s observation that the new president will be tested in the first 6 months. Obama won’t want a neophyte there learning the ropes and learning the situation while he himself is getting his bearings. Keeping Gates there will let him focus on the economy and Treasury. That will be his single most important appointment during the transition. I hope he picks Geithner, but it’ll probably be Summers.

This is ridiculous.

http://phd9.blogspot.com/2008/10/someone-explain.html

This was held for moderation.

newliberty
.
you mean like calling Obama a socialist, marxist, liar, anti american, robber, radical, terrorist sympathizer, enemy of israel, baby killer, kiddie sex educator, dishonorable, sexist, naive, candidate?
.
I can’t WAIT to hear your outrage about THAT!

newliberty
.
you mean like calling Obama a soc!alist, marx!st, l1ar, anti american, robber, rad!cal, terror!st sympathizer, enemy of israel, baby k!ller, k!ddie se x educator, dishonorable, se xist, naive, candidate?
.
I can’t WAIT to hear your outrage about THAT!
.
Trying to navigate the mods

Paul-
Try “a$$ertive”.

It will be important to give Obama some time. I view his Administration as being rolled out in phases. In Phase 1, he will have to provide some evidence that we didn’t just elect a Marxist Muslim. He’ll want to make bipartisan picks, quickly get some press as being on board with Petraeus, and start appointing some committees to look into the economic mess. He’ll want to show a little spine with respect to Pelosi/Reed, even if it’s a fake play. There will be a lot of scene setting for the first few months.

Reed = Reid.

I disagree strongly on one point. While Obama might be somewhat satisfied with the National Security team that’s currently in place, he is certainly going to have to make an a$$ertive move on arrival if for no other reason than to remove all doubt that HE’S in charge. The last thing we’re going to need is for any second guessing along the chain of command, especially if some of his strategic decisions happen to be unpopular with the troops themselves

I agree he’ll show strong initial leadership. I also think it will be carefully planned as theater, because it is. Obama’s whole campaign from the primaries forward has been a well-staged epic. 49′ers coach Bill Walsh was famous for having the first plays of every game completely scripted. I think Obama will attempt that. After that, of course, it’s in the hands of Achmedinejad, the Dow, etc.

Thank you Joe.
.
One point to make. You speak of our energy and our national security policies in terms of priority, as if they can be separated- they cannot. The continued failure to address them in an inclusive and comprehensive way has been very detrimental.
.
We rely predominantly on one energy source, oil, which generally comes from the most volatile regions of the world (domestic drilling will not alter that reality). It necessitates policing these regions, which, of course, creates enemies, stokes radicalism, shakes our allies, costs an un-godly sum and causes instability. Having real options will change that dynamic.
.
Obama’s alternate energy initiative is crucial to national security and the economy as he sees it. He considers it an investment that will make us safer, lower the cost of energy (and lessen price fluctuation) and create new industry (factories, jobs, exportable technology).
.
Certainly, we can debate the merits of his plan, but we can no longer separate energy policy from national security and the economy.

Would it be rude for Obama to name McCain to the new post of “Secretary of Losing.” It would, wouldn’t it?

Obama is no fool – he knows how to surround himself with brilliant people. In this time of world despair each of us owes Senator Obama our gratitude. An open letter to the Senator. …………..

http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/10/29/senator-obama-to-sir-with-love-2/

newliberty – I LOVE that ad!

What’s offensive and disgusting about John McCain’s own words, and Sarah Palin’s own schtick? I mean, other than John McCain’s own words and Sarah Palin’s own schtick ?

Arrgh!

.
newliberty: …let’s make fun of Sarah Palin for being cute and attractive.
.
No, we make light of Palin because she is clueless and annoying…It is nice to know what qualities you are looking for in a Veep, Libbie.
.
Personal insults shouldn’t have any place in politics.
.
What sg said.

@pintortwo

I agree that the interrelatedness of all the various issues in underreported and underappreciated. As I said over at poltical lagoon:

You can’t discuss the economy without disussing the war. You can’t discuss the war without discussing energy. You can’t discuss energy without discussing the environment. You can’t discuss the environment without discussing the shortcomings of unfetterd deregulation.

If your unwilling to step back and look at core assumptions then you are doomed to repeat all the mistakes of the past.

I agree that the interrelatedness of all the various issues in underreported and underappreciated. As I said over at poltical lagoon:

You can’t discuss the economy without disussing the war. You can’t discuss the war without discussing energy. You can’t discuss energy without discussing the environment. You can’t discuss the environment without discussing the shortcomings of unfetterd deregulation.

If your unwilling to step back and look at core a$$umptions then you are doomed to repeat all the mistakes of the past.

Can we 86 the talk about who’s who in an Obama administration, until November 5th, please? To paraphrase Bill Belichick, “Obama hasn’t done anything yet”…not until the results come in after the election, please.

Feel free to speculate about something else.

Joe, I take it you’re NOT hearing any speculation about what happens if McCain wins?

Rasmussen makes its calls.

he is certainly going to have to make an assertive move on arrival if for no other reason than to remove all doubt that HE’S in charge.
.
The whole business about Petraeus in Joe’s interview with Obama made that very point, which I’m surprised (given your point) that he didn’t refer to. Given what we’ve heard about the transition team, and the very disciplined way the campaign was run, clearly under Obama’s (and not a chief handler’s) direction, I think we can be confident that he will make it very clear who is in charge.
.
Normally, it wouldn’t bother me if he did so in a bipartisan way, by, say giving DoD to Hagel or Lugar, along with a brief that included a reinvigorated approach to reducing proliferation (again, addressing root causes instead of regimes the US doesn’t like). But we cannot let stand the idea that only republicans can handle national security issues. It’s plainly false–just look at the wreckage. I’d like him to appoint Jack Reed. Make a clear statement. He’s not gonna be hamstrung the way Clinton was by a weak majority. And there is no risk of a Republican “revolution” in 2010. They’ll be hard-pressed to hold their Senate seats, even if things go as badly as they might.

My reply to your comment is at the lagoon Dirks. As to why the best comments seem to be the most like to be put into limbo, it’s as sg said. The longer, the less likely to get through. And it takes more that two sentences to make a point.

We rely predominantly on one energy source, oil, which generally comes from the most volatile regions of the world
.
This is not coincidence. If a new discovery made diamonds the perfect energy resource, Botswana would suddenly become one of the most volatile countries in the world.

newliberty – I agree thoroughly with you that namecalling is out. So I guess you need to let your party know what you think about Sarah Palin being called “rogue,” “diva,” and “whacko.”

I’m excited about the plan to transform energy in this country as the number 1 issue. So many things tie into it: long-range energy uses, national security, the environment, jobs, international economy, outsourcing technology instead of jobs, food crises and therefore global poverty. To have an organizing principle for so many ills increases the likelihood of enlisting more of us.

It’s funny. That Sarah Palin wink, standing alone, is sexist. But in the context of the campaign, where she has consistently demonstrated she has zero policy understanding, zero understanding of how the government works, and has deliberately portrayed a completely false personal image, it’s more than fair to characterize her by that wink.

Not to mention that among many women I know, they regard the choice itself as a sexist act by the McCain buffoons.

You know, it’s a running theme over in atriotland that haloscan sux as a commenting environment. And it’s got this wordpress implementation beat all hollow.

Great question about Bush the Lesser.

My feeling is Laura will push him toward some kind of involvement but at heart he just wants to go home to Texas and leave all that hard stuff alone. However, he is very competitive and the fact that Clinton’s stature as an elder statesman has grown and that Bush himself is despised and reviled abroad might light a fire under his feet.

I suspect he will found some kind of organization akin to Clinton’s.

Maybe he’ll fund about a dozen presidential history chairs at various universities. Kinda like loading up the judiciary….

Over at atrios, and elsewhere, Joe the Plumber no show at McCain rally.

@ jay: 11:06 “This is not coincidence.”
.
Absolutely. And if we assume you are right, then we must also assume that if we have a number of energy options, including homegrown, those “volatile” regions will become more stable.

you mean like calling Obama a soc!al!st [never called him a soc!al!st, said the policies he was proposing resembled soc!al!sm], marx!st [again, no one on the McCain team used that term to describe Obama], l!ar [They have used this one back and forth on eachother...and frankly, Obama has lied multiple times on multiple issues that are so transparent, even a troll like myself can pick them up], anti american [no one on the McCain campaign ever said Obama was anti-American. In fact, McCain addressed one of his supporters to tell him that Obama was a good man and loved America], robber [what?], rad!cal [again, talking about his ideas], terror!st [no one ever said that, and the supporter in the audience who DID say that, was called out on it by McCain himself], sympath!zer [what would you call it?], enemy of israel [no one on the McCain team ever said that], baby k!ller [oh COME ON!!!! No one EVER said that!], kiddie s*x educator [again, no one ever used that phrase to describe Obama...haha...cute though, I appreciate your creativity], dishonorable [actually, that would be Obama who has called McCain dishonerable in an attempt to attack his strength], sex!st [no one ever said OBAMA was sex!st...but his campaign has been sex!st], naive [I'll give you that one], candidate?

you mean like calling Obama a soc!al!st [never called him a soc!al!st, said the policies he was proposing resembled soc!al!sm], marx!st [again, no one on the McCain team used that term to describe Obama], l!ar [They have used this one back and forth on eachother...and frankly, Obama has l!ed multiple times on multiple issues that are so transparent, even a tr*ll like myself can pick them up], anti american [no one on the McCain campaign ever said Obama was anti-American. In fact, McCain addressed one of his supporters to tell him that Obama was a good man and loved America], robber [what?], rad!cal [again, talking about his ideas], terror!st [no one ever said that, and the supporter in the audience who DID say that, was called out on it by McCain himself], sympath!zer [what would you call it?], en*my of israel [no one on the McCain team ever said that], baby k!ller [oh COME ON!!!! No one EVER said that!], k!dd!e s*x educator [again, no one ever used that phrase to describe Obama...haha...cute though, I appreciate your creativity], d!shonorable [actually, that would be Obama (and Joe Klein) who has called McCain d!shonerable in an attempt to attack his strength], sex!st [no one ever said OBAMA was sex!st...but his campaign has been sex!st], na!ve [I'll give you that one], candidate?

jayackroyd
If you don’t agree with Sarah Palin’s policies or ideas, then attack them. Don’t attack her for smiling and winking and looking cute.

I agree thoroughly with you that namecalling is out. So I guess you need to let your party know what you think about Sarah Palin being called “rogue,” “diva,” and “whacko.”
kathy
You mean the “anonymous” McCain staffers? That is a ridiculous, fabricated, un-sourced claim being ironically repeated by the Obama campaign at every opportunity.

You mean the “anonymous” McCain staffers? That is a ridiculous, fabricated, un-sourced claim being ironically repeated by the Obama campaign at every opportunity.

Kathy and I assume it was at this point you realized that no matter how reasonable new liberty tried to sound at first — he was just another troll flittering in from their alternate universe.

You mean the “anonymous” McCain staffers? That is a ridiculous, fabricated, un-sourced claim being ironically repeated by the Obama campaign at every opportunity.

Kathy and I @ssume it was at this point you realized that no matter how reasonable new liberty tried to sound at first — he was just another troll flittering in from their alternate universe.

And that’s why I think it’s kaybeel ! Always the attempt to sound reasonable while sliming…and being utterly incapable of articulating any sort of actual argument FOR McCain/Palin.