| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Dem base angered by Obama's refusal to embrace defeat |
| 2010-10-06 |
| Michael Barone, Washington Examiner ...Obama's refusal in 2007 and 2008 to admit that there was even a smidgen of success to George W. Bush's surge strategy in Iraq -- even today he will only hint that the surge worked -- cannot be chalked up to an intellectual incapacity to assimilate the facts. Don't be too sure of that, but go on. It can only be explained as an unwillingness to rile the base of the Democratic Party whose concerns, as we know from Bob Woodward's account of the president's conduct of deliberations over what to do in Afghanistan, are never far from his mind. Nevertheless, he has left these Democrats disappointed. They hoped to see an abject and abrupt withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq within weeks of the Obama inauguration. They hoped to see a beginning of withdrawal from Afghanistan not in July 2011 but in the early months of 2009. They hoped to see the detention facility at Guantanamo closed and shuttered and the detainees tried in civilian courts or freed to regale the media with tales of torture. The uncomfortable truth is that many -- not most, but many -- Democratic politicians and Democratic voters saw political benefit in an American defeat in Iraq. Many, including Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle, then boss of Obama's new chief of staff Pete Rouse, thronged to the Washington premiere of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11." They tried to give every appearance of agreeing with the "Bush-lied-people-died" crowd and with those who charged that high-ranking officials colluded in systematic torture. It was a lot of fun while it lasted, up to election night 2008 and Inauguration Day 2009. But then Obama had to govern. Knowing little of military affairs, he retained Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has loyally served presidents of both parties. Understanding even if not admitting the great headway Americans had made in Iraq, Obama declined to throw it all away.... In so doing, Obama implicitly confessed that the view of the world held with quasi-religious fervor by the Democratic left was delusional all along. Bush didn't lie, we didn't go into Afghanistan and Iraq without allies and against their wishes, we didn't carry out policies of torture, etc. The effort to cast Iraq as another Vietnam and America under Bush as an oppressive rogue power were perhaps emotionally satisfying but unconnected to reality. Without saying so, Obama has found himself having to teach this lesson to the Adam Serwers of the world. They don't like hearing it. They're keeping their ears plugged up and their eyes defiantly shut. Their MyObama Web pages are inactive and their checkbooks are closed. They've tuned out of the campaign and many of them won't even vote. The president they helped elect -- and the world -- have turned out not to be what they thought. |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #6 I thought that was Latin for "Contains Sulfites". |
| Posted by: Grenter, Protector of the Geats 2010-10-06 11:19 |
| #5 In vino veritas? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2010-10-06 11:04 |
| #4 Me thinks Barone had a few too many Scotch-n-sodas before penning this piece. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2010-10-06 11:00 |
| #3 Still Copperheads. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2010-10-06 10:58 |
| #2 ... were perhaps emotionally satisfying but unconnected to reality. How does this differ from the vast majority of views held by the left? /rhet question |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-10-06 08:01 |
| #1 He will be safe in the bunker with his dog and his dvd's of Mendelssohn and Offenbach. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-10-06 07:48 |