This Peter Beinart piece is kind of interesting.
In 2009, Obama chose a Defense secretary and a national-security adviser Washington Republicans loved. This year, he’s chosen a Defense secretary and a national-security adviser they hate. The reason: he no longer needs to care as much what they think.
He’s definitely not thinking defensively. But I think the world has run out of people that the Republicans don’t hate. So, this was kind of inevitable.
I don’t think that’s it.
Between 2009 and 2013, Obama’s foreign policy was to safely land the airplanes that Bush had put in the air. A clean exit from Iraq that didn’t set off a catastrophe as big as 2006; beating back al Qaeda (which had been allowed to come back to its 2001 strength owing to Bush’s inaction and distraction); and as smooth an exit from Afghanistan as possible. People like Gates were already doing that job – they were the old Washington hands that Bush had brought in after he stopped talking to Cheney, to try to clean up the neocons’ mess. They were already more or less landing the airplanes.
Now, he is looking at a very different situation, where he can create his own affirmative policy instead of just keeping the building from falling down around his ears.
Uh, don’t they hate Gates, too? I never got the sense that they loved him…certainly not when the Kenyan Usurper kept him on-board. Maybe I’m remembering wrong. I supported keeping Gates from the get-go, or going for Hagel. Seems Obama’s mind is near mine on this point, as he’s now done both heh.
You’re right. They hated Gates as soon as Obama kept him on. Just like they turned on Hagel as soon as it became known that Obama was nominating him to fill the SecDef job. In a sane world, GOPers should be pleased with Obama’s NatSec picks. But the GOP left any last bit of sanity far, far behind.
They’d actually been hating Hagel for years.
He was Senator Betray-us back in 2006, when he started to publicly doubt the Iraq War.
Beinart totally fell for the Iraq WMD hoax. Prefer to read what more astute observers have to say.
Yeah and the element of just trying to get bodies through the Senate approval gate. Now, it’s legacy time and Obama is willing to drive a Mack truck through Rep obstruction cause he’s got alot of ground to make up.
Love it. People will respond if Obama gets defiant. And they’ll respond positively. If for no other reason than the entertainment value of watching nearby teabeggers froth and roil.
Hmm, if he’s hated why not pick a Democrat?
Because the guy he thinks can do the best job isn’t a Democrat.
And because making the Republicans’ hate-fest look as stupid as possible, which can be accomplished by getting them to target bipartisan-looking actions, is a useful political tool.
Except the TradMed isn’t reporting on the hatefest. Matt Drudge still rules their world after all.
Yes, they are.
Just as they did during the fiscal cliff talks.
The media are actually coming around.
But even more important, the public is coming around. The blame for the debt ceiling and fiscal cliff standoffs was very squarely, overwhelmingly put on the Republicans.
I guess I don’t listen to enough of the TradMed. Call me pleasantly surprised if what you say is true. I don’t mean the blame for the fiscal cliff et. al. I’ve seen the polls on TGOS and other places. I mean that the TradMed is coming around. It’s about damn time.
There are worse sins than not paying enough attention to Wolf Blitzer, I suppose.
It has been a pleasant surprise.
The thing is, I don’t think this represents a durable change. I think the media will go back to “Both sides are the same” as a matter of course. That’s why Obama needs to play this same card over and over.
Wrong pure and simple. In the past century it’s Democrats who have run DoD better especially in times of war.
Hagel at Defense,
Kerry at State,
Rice at NSC,
Brennan at CIA,
Comey at FBI,
Power at UN.
Very, very impressive.
What’s best is the last paragraph;
—————-
So what will Obama pursue? A comprehensive deal with Iran? A new initiative on climate change? A real effort at slashing nuclear stockpiles across the globe? One last presidential push for Mideast peace? He has laid the table for the kind of big, controversial foreign-policy initiative that would have been too risky in his first term. If Republicans are angry now, just wait. The real fun has yet to begin.
————-
He makes it seem like that list is a BAD thing. Of course republicans would be angry, but around 63% of Americans would fully support all of it! How do I arrive at 63%? 100% minus 27%.
It just show how out of touch they have become.
.
That sounds like Republican Math.