Rahm Emanuel accepts Chief of Staff Job

[dougd]

"BTW Matt, if McCain had been elected, I know that the name would have been different but my disappointment the same. Obama looked like the better guy then and now."

 

Bill, you seem a reasonable person and I appreciate your recognition that Obama "looked like the better guy then and now".

 

Having said that when you state "if McCain had been elected, I know that the name would have been different but my disappointment the same", makes you seem to be a bit of a negative nancy...

 

d

[joblo7]

let the zionists rule.! they are so brilliantly ignorant/motivated.

[billcoe]

I try to look at the glass half full, but it's difficult on occasion. I would have been a lot more negative in general had McCain been elected I suppose. I'll try to check that stuff. However, since I just posted another negative one about Ted Stevens, sack of shit recently re-elected to the Senate in Alaska....please excuse me as it may not happen for a bit.

[dougd]

Steven's re election after what he has taken the people of Alaska through recently is indicative of what Alaskans are capable of I guess. I think it's ok to be incredulous about that one.

 

whew, wtf were they thinking?!

 

d

[ivan]

maybe they were thinking they'd liek to keep their senate seat republican - figuring even if 8-ball had to resign or got kicked out by the senate that palin could appoint her own bitch (of hell, take the job herself?)

[Bug]

maybe they were thinking they'd liek to keep their senate seat republican - figuring even if 8-ball had to resign or got kicked out by the senate that palin could appoint her own bitch (of hell, take the job herself?)

Money.

[j_b]

Emanuel is pro-Iraq war, pro-war OF terror, pro-deregulation, anti-environment and anti-labor, etc ,etc .. He is very bad news for progressives and anyone else who thinks we need a radical retooling of our economy and foreign policy. If you thought that voting would be all that was needed to get rid of the neo-liberal elites that have taken over both main parties, you are about to realize that now the real push for change begins. Hold them to their promises!

[mattp]

Yup. Despite the sludge coming from the RNC and repeated by our own KK here on cc.com, Fox news says the selection of Rahm Emanuel is not a sign that Obama wants to be Hitler: rise to the occasion video

 

So does Lindsey Graham: ABC News article

 

I think Emanuel's been quoted as saying the Democrats should not push for dramatic healthcare reform, too. I hope Obama hasn't chosen him for his policy positions but more for his broadly recognized skill for being pragmatic and getting people to fall in line.

[Off_White]

For the left prepare to have your expectations lowered, for the right you can wake up from your "socialism" fantasies.

 

Nice phrasing, accurate too I think. It's also not necessarily a bad thing either: the red ant/black ant paradigm of politics in this country is really not an asset. Better to think Purple rather than Red or Blue.

[mattp]

I agree. I've already said I don't expect Obama and the Democrats to take a big leap left and it'd be a good thing if Obama can deliver on his promise to be a uniter not a divider but it will require the Republican party to decide not to try to undermine everything he tries to do.

 

In a paradoxical sort of way, the power of "the most liberal member of the Senate" may actually be lessened if Congress can find a way to get back to doing the people's work. If the Republicans decide to play nice they may well strengthen their hand not only in terms of winning power in the short term but they may also figure out how to be a stronger party in the next election cycle.

[Doug]

I agree. I've already said I don't expect Obama and the Democrats to take a big leap left and it'd be a good thing if Obama can deliver on his promise to be a uniter not a divider but it will require the Republican party to decide not to try to undermine everything he tries to do.

 

In a paradoxical sort of way, the power of "the most liberal member of the Senate" may actually be lessened if Congress can find a way to get back to doing the people's work.

 

If you are positioned 10 feet to the right of center, 2 inches left of center is a huge leap. Especially if you consider your 10 feet right of center to be the true center.

 

What I'm most hopeful of is a move back towards a united nation and less of the split thats been so prevalent that last few years.

[mattp]

That was TVash' point yesterday, Doug: after the last 30 years of Reaganomics and the last 7 years of the "war on terror," a moderate set of economic and foreign policies is going to represent a big step left.

 

I AM hoping for a giant leap in our political dialog because I believe our government should work with our allies and abandon the "with us or against" us approach and I think we should scrap the notion that corporate welfare is good but social programs are bad. I also think we should start actually trying to do something about global warming and energy independence. But in terms of actual policy implementation and political pragmatism I don't think the Democrats can pull the plug on Iraq, discontinue all farm subsidies, and mandate solar and wind power for domestic electricity.

 

 

[Fairweather]

 

If you are positioned 10 feet to the right of center, 2 inches left of center is a huge leap. Especially if you consider your 10 feet right of center to be the true center.

 

 

I'll bet your algorithm has a mirror.

[Doug]

Yes, it does. It says if you are positioned 10 feet left of center, 2 inches right of center is a huge leap. Especially if you consider your 10 feet left of center to be the true center.

[Doug]

I believe that the notion of pulling the plug on Iraq is a pipe dream. Though I don't think the notion of a plan to withdraw at the right time (and not when our oil supply is assured) is the definition of pulling the plug. We're there and we have to figure out a way to move on. Moving towards something is progress. I don't believe we've had a good definition of exit criteria (one that stipulated autonomous rule for the Iraqis) nor had we really appeared to be working towards one.

[Bug]

The Iraqis are stepping up.

In "Diplomat speak" they are calling for the US to back off and plan on getting out. If they did not say that, they would be seen as puppets by their own followers.

Meanwhile, the US has to make clear overatures toward acquiescing to the Iraqi demands so as to give them the power they need to succeed at truely governing their own people and controling their military when it is re-established.

That time line is grey but needs to be "played" as existing for the reason above. That is probably the only real difference between GW and Obama on the war in Iraq (now that we are in).

Bush just had no sense of diplomatic protocol internationally.

[joblo7]

very few invaders abandon their conquest.

 

the decision to invade iraq is not the president's.

[Bug]

I do not think we should have invaded Iraq.

Bush broke our own laws and international law by doing so.

Obama voted against it.

But now that we are in Iraq, it would be a mistake to just pick up and pull out. Pull out as soon as sanely possible yes. Just not overnight.

[tvashtarkatena]

Bullshit.

 

We should pull out as quickly as hunanly possible. At 340 million a day, we can't afford not to...never could, really.

 

According to our very own AKA, 70% of the country has been handed off to the Iraqis. Good enough. Let's get the fuck out of there now. The Iraqis will figure things out once they absolutely have to. After all, it's there (free) country, right?

[Bug]

Hmm. So like, pack up on Jan 21 and move out?

Seriously?

 

[Bug]

Do you remember what happened when we puled out of South Veitnam that way?

[Bug]

More people would die in the 30 days after than have died so far.

It just wouldn't make sense.

Give them a slow but steady drawback to 50% over 6 months.

Let them determine the pace from there.

[tvashtarkatena]

Don't be an ass. I said pull out as fast as is humanely possible, not Vietnam style, which was complete chaos. And you know what I meant, too.

[j_b]

Obama has already indicated he'd leave over 50,000 troops and over a 100,000 contractors in Iraq so he has no intention of pulling out. The democrats could have already forced a pull out if they had wanted to, remember a democratic congress was voted in 2 years ago to do just that and nothing happened except more troops were sent in and Iraqis were blamed for our destroying their country. It's becoming obvious that since 'they' are slowly getting what 'they' want, which is control of iraqi oil there is no way they will give up on it unless they are forced to do so.

[ashw_justin]

And thus one of the most blatantly imperialistic moves by a world power in recent history becomes the "only humane solution to protect the Iraqi people and the rest of the free world from being ravaged by islamofascist terrorism."

 

After all, considering all of this sacrifice, it would unconscionable to just cut and run, letting one of the greatest prizes in the Middle East fall into the hands of the terrorists, wouldn't it? (Other, less civilized terrorists, I mean--all the moral dilemmas are solved by applying a little doublethink.)

 

I wonder for how long Iraqis will think back to Saddam, with all his reputed savagery, and reminisce about the good old days (that is, the days before we sanctioned and bombed them into the stone age, and then lit a beacon to which the bloodthirsty jihadists flocked like moths to a light bulb). I wonder if any of them will live long enough to experience anything better. Fuck, what have we done.