On Obama's Speech

[babylonsister]

http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/12/on_obamas_speech.php

Ta-Nehisi Coates

On Obama's Speech

11 Dec 2009 04:00 pm


Listened to it this morning, and as always, I was impressed. So was Sarah Palin:

"Wow, that really sounded familiar," said Palin, a frequent Obama critic. "I talked, too, in my book about the fallen nature of man and why war is necessary at times."

I'd like to pair this with something I'm hearing a lot these day. After an entire campaign season where Obama was dismissed as a far-left radical, the new meme became that he was actually firmly entrenched in the "right wing of the Democratic party." Now I'm hearing people say that Obama's speech could have been made by Bush, or some such.

There are people who think presidential politics--from a voter's perspective--is about electing someone who will do exactly what you say and enact every single one of your priorities in exactly the same manner as you would.

And then there are people who think presidential politics--from a voter's perspective--is about electing someone who shares many of your priorities, but not all of them, who may not enact them as you would, and yet whose wisdom you trust. That, for me, is the point. Barack Obama is wise. Sarah Palin is not.

In that vein, I didn't object to George Bush because he claimed that there was "evil" in the world. I objected to George Bush because there was so much evil that he didn't see, and he was awful at prosecuting the evil he did see. I objected to George Bush's foreign policy because it married a freshman's view of idealism (Big talk on human rights) with a profane, dishonest take one realism (We don't torture.) It's weak to look two presidents, see them both use the word "evil," and then conclude that they're the same.

I expect Obama to be who he campaigned as. But more than that, I expect him to actually think about the world. I expect him to be curious, deliberative, and cool-headed. That's who he is. I often disagree with him. But I don't regret a thing. I don't understand these people. It's like they thought he'd go to Oslo, hand over the launch codes, and offer twenty Texas virgins in exchange for a pledge from Al'Qaeda to stop being mean to us.

[emulatorloo]

1. "I didn't object to George Bush because he claimed that there was "evil" in the world."

"It's weak to look two presidents, see them both use the word "evil," and then conclude that they're the same."

[janx]

2. Candy Crowley did that on CNN.

The lack of logic made me laugh out loud.

[emulatorloo]

3. Typical Candy. Unfortunately she's not the only one. n/t

[paulsby]

13. and if a rightwinger had made the EXACT same speech obama just made

people here would be making fun of his use of the term "evil" as not "nuanced" enough, etc.

cmon. get real.

i like obama's speech

otoh, i never had a problem when bush derided "evildoers" and talked about the axis of evil

i did have a problem with him invading iraq.

because i also believe some people are just plain evil. not psychologically ill, misunderstood, bla bla

evil

obama's speech also parroted just war theory, which is of course anathema to pacifists, but par for the course for the democratic party, for obama, and for bush.

[treestar]

4. Just another piece of evidence showing how stupid Palin is

There's no way she and Obama are on the same page, yet she thinks they are.

[montanto]

5. Call me weak if you will,

but an unqualified use of "evil" makes me very uncomfortable. It made Bush incredible when he was already ridiculous and Obama's "trust me, evil exists" just doesn't work for me as a motivating factor. It's not an element in a powerful argument for action, its an appeal to emotion and I don't like it. The reason that I am so sickened by it is that I expected him to be above that kind of fear mongering. It's not about whether evil exists, its about whether some nebulous "evil" ought to shape the course of a nation. And as for other evils, those that Bush didn't see, well, I hope we gain the strength to sort those out as well.

[babylonsister]

6. I don't think you are weak at all. But what you call

nebulous isn't so for those making decisions. They know what is lurking out there-I don't.

From Eugene Robinson's column today:

snip/

The president had concluded that beginning a withdrawal—which is what I believed he should do—was too risky, given evidence of “real and serious threats” to the United States still emanating from the Afghanistan-Pakistan region. Leaving troop levels unchanged would have just perpetuated the unacceptable status quo, the president decided, without even a theoretical path to a day when U.S. forces could safely withdraw.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x50800

And I, too, thought we should get out of Afghanistan asap, but I'm not privy to the mounds of info many smart people have.

[janx]

7. You know what, Babylonsister?

I didn't think so...ever. That will make me unpopular around here, but it's true. I protested the Iraq War on more than one occasion and donated and worked for those running for office who opposed it, but I never questioned the rationale for Afghanistan.

When I heard that President Obama was going to make a speech about the reasons for escalation, the first thing I wondered about was whether or not he would mention Pakistan and the border area, etc. People in Pakistan are getting blown to bits more and more often recently. I was working on the day of the speech, so I read the full transcript later. My guess is that the U.S. has made some kind of diplomatic headway with Pakistan.

:shrug:

Edited to add: How are you doing? :hi: :hug:

[babylonsister]

10. Hi, janx.

I'm hanging in there! :)

I just pray they actually do know what they're doing, unlike what we witnessed the past 8 years. Seems a lot more thought has gone into decision-making, and for that I am grateful.

[Pirate Smile]

15. There has been some movement, I believe. It doesn't get much play in the US.

We all know that Pakistan did finally go into the Swat/Tribal region.

I also read that India is pulling some troops off their border with Pakistan. Pakistan has most of their troops over on the India border and we've been trying to get them to shift their focus to the other side - Afghanistan. They had refused for years and stayed preoccupied with India. Our getting India to pull some brigades off the Pakistan border (I read 2 brigades) is huge in that hopefully it will give Pakistan the cover to switch some more troops to going after the Taliban regions.

[montanto]

8. "But what you call

nebulous isn't so for those making decisions." Okay, but the unqualified statement of "evil" intent is nebulous to me, and more objectionably it is an appeal to emotion that is designed to make me submit without question. If the evil is concrete, let them name it, I can handle it, and let me assent out of knowledge, not acquiesce out of fear. I don't want to be told of bogeymen, I want to know why these things are being done in my name and "because there is evil" does not work for me. Not from anyone.

[janx]

9. Bush dwelled on it and used it for years to make a nation cower.

Obama isn't doing that.

[Clio the Leo]

11. I love what Howard Fineman said yesterday....

... and I'm afraid I dont know which show, but I rarely agree with Howard these days. But he said that the sign of a great intellect was one who was able to hold in one minds opposing viewpoints simultaneously .... and overall, he was pleased with the speech. Like I said, Howard is not exactly the official spokesman of the Obama Cheer Sqaud.

I think the speech will prove to be one of those that we cant judge fully until years from now. It will either be a landmark piece .... or a warning flag of things to come. (And I just threw that last part in for half of y'all, I dont actually believe it! lol)

[Cha]

12. How post modern of you.

:) Is that right?

[Clio the Leo]

14. Ha ha! Not quite but it's funny ... and sometimes that's all that matters. NT