SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home The Great Oration Of Barack Obama

THE SPINE JANUARY 20, 2009

The Great Oration Of Barack Obama

BY MARTIN PERETZ

Well, there's nothing that tugs me out of a deep sense of the good more
quickly than one of John Judis' churlish and bumptious obiter
dicta.  His assault on Barack Obama's inaugural address is
a case in point.  It was clear to me that Obama was trying to
establish the moral and practical first principles of his administration,
opening his agenda to as many Americans as are willing to join him. 
He also put on first record two agenda items that will especially
disturb, first, the Republican opposition and, second, many of Obama's
liberal enthusiasts.

What will upset the conservatives are the president's pronouncements on
the environmental calamity into which we are quickly drifting and his
commitment to lift us out of the flood.  (I wondered what good
thoughts Al Gore was having, listening to these thoughts more clearly
enunciated than Bill Clinton ever did.) What will distress important
sectors of the Democratic camp is Obama's thematic homage to those who
fought and died for our country -in Concord and Gettysburg, in Normandy
and at Khe Sanh, yes, Khe Sanh.  But it's not just seepages where
blood was shed long ago.

It is here and now. I suspect that in his intelligence briefings
and military memoranda he learned much that he did not know as a junior
senator and much that he did not care to know as a young man. 
(Frank Foer made this very point to me.)  So this is what the
president cares to convey now, not only this as eloquent words, but this
as both ideal and strategy:

        As for our
common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and out
ideals...   

        Recall
that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with
missiles and

        tanks ,
but with sturdy ideals and enduring convictions...We will not apologize
for our way of life,

        nor will
we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by
inducing and

        slaughtering
innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be
broken; you

        cannot
outlast us, and we will defeat you.
Amen.

These are not welcome words to many of Obama's initial enthusiasts. 
It is no surprise that also John Judis does not like them.

A few weeks ago, he gave us all a reading list, one part
condescending, another utterly irrelevant.  My guess is that Barack
Obama has never read Das Kapital, not even the first volume which
Judis especially recommends.  And the president certainly hasn't
read Paul Baran and Paul Sweezy's Monopoloy Capital, which poor
John has been "reading and rereading" for decades.  Obama
probably hasn't even heard of G.A. Cohen's Karl Marx's Theory of
History, which Judis pronounces "of all the books I've read in
the last twenty or thirty years, it's the best."  
Wow!

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 77 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

77 comments

I sense some tension at the offices of The New Republic.

- Simon Greenwood

January 20, 2009 at 9:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Marty:

Well, there's nothing that tugs me out of a deep sense of the good more quickly than one of John Judis' churlish and bumptious obiter dicta.  His assault on Barack Obama's inaugural address is a case in point.  It was clear to me that Obama was trying to establish the moral and practical first principles of his administration, opening his agenda to as many Americans as are willing to join him.  He also put on first record two agenda items that will especially disturb, first, the Republican opposition and, second, many of Obama's liberal enthusiasts.

George:

Suppose Barry said every single thing he did in his Inauguration speech but he was not as fiercely commited enough to your own agenda in Middle East?

Would you be talking about Barry's, "churlish and bumptious" "obiter dicta", instead?  

So, does Judis get the axe for daring to speak his mind instead of yours?

Please tell me TNR is not going in THAT direction.

gw

- iambiguous

January 20, 2009 at 9:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

George Walton: I wish to thank you for your posts. They provide a lot of entertainment and are unintentionally hilarious. John Judis has been at TNR for a long time and he is likely to remain there. Dissent is permitted at TNR and I bet, more dissent than is tolerated at publications more ideologically in tune with your Weltanschuung.

- liberal reformer

January 20, 2009 at 10:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

how bout we axe walton instead?

- teplukhin2you

January 20, 2009 at 11:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well I'm glad to see that somebody at TNR got it.

The only thing I really quibble with here is that something substantial has changed since the intelligence briefings. In fact, the passage Marty quotes echos what his said on election night. It is consistent with where his views have been at since I started listening to him. To the degree that it disappoints "Obama's initial enthusiasts" it is because they were hearing what they wanted to hear rather than what he was actually saying.

- AhYup

January 20, 2009 at 11:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"What will distress important sectors of the Democratic camp is Obama's thematic homage to those who fought and died for our country -in Concord and Gettysburg, in Normandy and at Khe Sanh, yes, Khe Sanh. "

Whatever.

I'm really really really fuckin' liberal and nothing Obama said, or any of his emphases, bothered me in the least. I found the speech thrilling, particularly that robust call that Americans were gonna have to make some hard choices, which I interpreted kinda as 'buh bye to happy motorin' easy credit gas guzzling exurbia...'

- mmathog

January 20, 2009 at 11:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

hog - Conservatives like Krauthammer, Woolsey, Cliff May and Hanson don't have a problem with that. There will be lots of grand bargains.

What will unite left and right fastest in this country, I think, is a vision of an America in which we go back to MAKING stuff again, by applying our unparalleled genius for solving practical problems through inventions and bringing products to market.

To give you an idea of how absurd the old bubble/flipper economy was, my alma mater's engineering school recently set up a "financial engineering" master's program so that they could meet Wall Street's demand for more of these bullshit artists. That's over, thank god.

Everyone loves Steve Jobs (except Joe Nocera). This nation can produce millions of jobs, and hundreds of Jobs-es, if we can get our brighter kids to choose real engineering instead of financial engineering careers. And yes, we can design and produce the best cars in the world, and the best green and other energy technologies in the world.

We can do it, if we get beyond the partisan pissfests. Let's all work together to make it happen. We have a real leader now, and the dead weight of a million little 2-and-20 leverage scammers and house-flippers is finally off our shoulders. Let's get crackin'.

- teplukhin2you

January 20, 2009 at 11:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

liberal reformer said:

George Walton: I wish to thank you for your posts. They provide a lot of entertainment and are unintentionally hilarious. John Judis has been at TNR for a long time and he is likely to remain there. Dissent is permitted at TNR and I bet, more dissent than is tolerated at publications more ideologically in tune with your Weltanschuung.

George:

Ah, so YOUR the last one in here still reading them!! Thanks.

But I'll be honest with you. Marty scares me sometimes. He is getting older and older [like me], so he knows he has less and less time [like me] to vent his spleen.

But he is ten years older than me. Hell, when I'm 70 years old god knows hot many people I will mow down a day. With words, of course.

Anyway, John might give some serious thought to investing in a bullet proof vest.

Isn't Stepen Glass still wearing his?

- iambiguous

January 20, 2009 at 11:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

teplukhin2you said:

how bout we axe walton instead?

george:

Well, I'd take you on in a battle of wits. But Momma always told me, "son, don't ever have a battle of wits with an unarmed person."

Too liberal, right?

gw

- iambiguous

January 20, 2009 at 11:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

mmathog: I agree with you plus you write good posts even when I don't agree with you: to the point, ranging from plainly expressed to almost vernacular poetry, and smart.

I thought it was a great speech--his best-- and all of a sudden, or not so sudden, this old atheist has become a believer. I'll worship first at the Church of Coltrane, where my ears and spirit have gone for years, actually,  and then of Obama.

It turns out that I had dinner tonight at one of Toronto's finest with my brother's son in law, who was paying off his bet to me that McCain would win. He too, a tremendously bright and financially successful young man, 46 to my 39 for the last 33 years, and a former McCain supporter, is sold on Barack, not from today, but from how B.O. has worked his way into power to want to do the right things. Machiavellian in the best sense for those who properly understand Machiavelli. As some guy pontificating on the CBC said tonight said, if B.O. gave the speech today in Iowa God knows how many months ago, he would not have won those caucuses. Thanks net roots. Now take off aye. Bigger things need to get done.

Itzik --go Leafs go--Basman

- basman

January 21, 2009 at 12:03am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...Well, I'd take you on in a battle of wits...

No contest really.

- basman

January 21, 2009 at 12:28am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

well, this is a weird twist: Like peretz, I fully support Obama and was moved by his election and the magnitude of his inauguration. However, like Judis  I was really disappointed with his address. It was flat and just did not rise above any of his standard campaign speeches. No unifying theme, no soaring rhetoric, just a short version of his acceptance speech. I am sorry to say but it was a middling speech. My post speech let down was palpable all day.

Still, even though peretz has embraced Obama, the old dude still exists in his manichaean bubble: if you disagree with him, you are fodder for his ridicule and snide insinuations and abuse.

And from what I can gather, peretz does not spend much time at the tnr offices and is not a part of the day to day editorial machinations and discussions.

Don't get me wrong - I am thrilled that Obama is our President. I just thought his address kinda sucked.

- thejauntyboulevardier

January 21, 2009 at 12:28am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ditto Ah Yup. Anyone who thinks Obama has changed anything in terms of national security orientation simply hasn't been paying attention--or more likely, has simply been hearing what they want to hear and disregarding the rest.

I think the speach was a work of art. It somewhat lacked the soaring poetry BHO is capable of, and that we will surely be treated to as time goes by, but it fit perfectly with the machine-like pragmatism and self-discipline that are in my view his outstanding characteristics. As throughout the transition, Obama is resolutely managing expectations. He's making it clear that we shouldn't expect miracles, but should expect to be called upon to make sacrifices. Perhaps not what everyone would most like to hear, but certainly what we most need to hear, and what is most likely to facilitate the process by which we may now be able to "get crackin' ".

- Robert Powell

January 21, 2009 at 3:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

jaunty:

...even though peretz has embraced Obama, the old dude still exists in his manichaean bubble: if you disagree with him, you are fodder for his ridicule and snide insinuations and abuse.

And from what I can gather, peretz does not spend much time at the tnr offices and is not a part of the day to day editorial machinations and discussions.

Don't get me wrong - I am thrilled that Obama is our President. I just thought his address kinda sucked.

George:

There are manichaean bubbles and then there are manichaean bubbles.

What becomes crucial here is the raw and naked power at the disposal of the one inside it.

Marty has influence because TNR [print and cyber] is read by people who are more or less influential in persuading the guy who has access to the Football to go either left or right.

But who really knows how these dots get connected.

Anyway, that would be Barry. Barry, of course, may or may not be a dualist. He projects as a pragmatist. But others insist his belief in the Christian God is genuine....and runs deep. And I have never encountered a God that was not described as profoundly dualistic.

We can only thank God [he said figuratively] that Barry is not Dualistic in the manner in which George was.

Can you even begin to imagine George and Dick staring down Nikita in the Cuban missile crisis?

We'd all be dead, for one thing.

george walton

- iambiguous

January 21, 2009 at 3:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

jaunty, I liked that the address was boring. It was. It also was more substantial than repulsive campaign demagoguery. Finally I saw some substance - and it definitely in the right direction.

Anyway, the more he abandons the inspiring bullshit, the better.  Far from finding this trademark rhetoric inspiring, I find it disgusting and it reminds me the Communist dictatorship I knew as a kid. But America is a democracy based on vote, not a kingdom or a dictatorship based on mob rule and worship. America needs a president who does a good job, not a king and a lover. He campaigned as the second, which is why at the time he mostly seemed just a repulsive demagogue building a personality cult. Luckily he seems to throw that bullshit to the garbage now. I hope he does the things he promises. The doirection is surely good, while the direction was wrong with Bush.

I think Obama's presidency may have the added bonus of annoying the hard-left anti-Semites, represented here by ndmackenzie and a few other less regular shits.

The only sour note is the presence of Samantha Power and Larry Summers in Obama's team. Power is an anti-Semite (she is ndmac's only hope here). Larry Summers is one of the people responsible for the deregulation of the economy under the wing of uber-asshole Robert Rubin. What the hell are these two fuckers doing there?

- sleepyavl

January 21, 2009 at 4:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Bill Clinton faced far more opposition upon taking office than Barrack Obama does -- unlike 1992, there is no way in hell the Dem congress would fail to pass whatever first round of legislation Obama presents.

Anyway, onto speech #2 -- I thought Obama said he'd have "a lot to say" about Gaza upon taking office.  He wouldn't deny us the clarity of his opinions just because there's a cease fire, would he?

- Lymon1

January 21, 2009 at 5:23am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Great post, thank you, Mr. Peretz.

Minor point: Calling the President "Barry" has run its course. it's stupid, childish, insulting, unoriginal. "Barry" is the kind of thing that you expect to hear from Limbaugh and Hannity, not read on tnr.

- fougasseu

January 21, 2009 at 5:30am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Calling the President "Barry" has run its course."

The vulgarists are everywhere:

hotair.com/.../stay-classy-obama-cultists-jeer-departing-bush

- noga1

January 21, 2009 at 8:38am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mostly I was puzzled by Obama's speech.  I know he is capable of loftier rhetoric and greater inspiration.  I have become suspicious of my own desire to be inspired.  I was inspired by JFK's Inaugural until it dawned on me years later that "bear any burden, pay any price..." forged a path to 50,000+ dead American soldiers in Vietnam.

I have the inkling that Obama was holding back for a good reason.  The speech was crafted as a strategic overview, laying out the major tasks and the principles that would guide his approach to those tasks, with special emphasis to the ways in which he believes America has gone off the rails.  In my view, he left the programmatic details for later and the soaring inspiration for later.  It was a marker in the sand, or maybe carved in rock.  I think Obama knew exactly what he was doing and what he was purposely not doing, and I'm willing to grant him the benefit of the doubt.

- JackR

January 21, 2009 at 9:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...The only thing I really quibble with here is that something substantial has changed since the intelligence briefings....

Hello chef!

- basman

January 21, 2009 at 10:39am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Although Obama clearly and carefully distanced himself from Bush in several areas, what's missed is the broad continuity between the two of a certain view of America's meaning and purpose in the world.  Obama has re-affirmed a vision of America as the beacon of freedom and democracy to the oppressed masses of this world.  And it's clear that he understands the role in this republic of the religious tradition which celebrated delivery from slavery in its sacred texts.  

For Lincoln freedom from slavery was an absolute good which outweighed the horrors of the civil war, even the death and suffering of all the innocent civilians caught in the currents.  I think that Bush saw the task of overthrowing Saddam in much the same terms.  Unfortunately, he was arrogant, ill-informed, not very sharp and utterly incompetent.  Nonetheless, in their core vision of America's meaning and purpose in the world, I think there's a common thread between Bush and Obama that's commonly missed.  I expect that Obama will fight cleaner, but that his sense of who liberty's enemies are is not so different from that of his predecessor.  And given Obama's talents where Bush had only lacks, I expect he will be much more skillful and successful in gathering support and in pursuing his battles.  

- willjames77

January 21, 2009 at 10:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When you take on Marty's right-wing (because that's what they are) foreign policy and national security views, are you required to have some sort of brain surgery that leaves you unable to understand that today's lefties, however much they still reject the policy behind the Vietnam War, deplore its human cost to *all sides,* America included?  Nowadays it's really not a big deal for a liberal  to pay proper respect to American sacrifice and suffering at Khe Sanh.  

- celibedache

January 21, 2009 at 11:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

all those puzzled or left flat by Obama's speech should watch Jon Stewart Daily Show from Jan 20.  Hysterical intercuts between Obama lines and various Bush43 lines, so eerily similar in point made, though Obama more poetic, and glad to hear the power in his voice return.  

definitely broad continuity, williamjames77.  but so many failed to notice the change in Bush43 since 2006...

- K2K

January 21, 2009 at 11:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"something substantial has changed since the intelligence briefings...."

I noticed that, too.

- noga1

January 21, 2009 at 11:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

K2K:  ". . . all those puzzled or left flat by Obama's speech should watch Jon Stewart Daily Show from Jan 20.  Hysterical intercuts between Obama lines and various Bush43 lines"

Yes, and as "reporter" Jason Jones said in that sketch:  It's different when Obama says it, but who knows why?  Why is grated cheese really good on Italian food but it sucks on Chinese food?

- ironyroad

January 21, 2009 at 12:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ironyroad, if you haven't yet, check this out from TNR: www.tnr.com/.../story.html

- basman

January 21, 2009 at 12:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What irony said. Mysterious. Why is the Star Spangled Banner so much better when Whitney Houston sings it than when Roseanne Barr sings it?

- teplukhin2you

January 21, 2009 at 12:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Does anyone else flinch as I do at referring to Barack Obama as 'B.O.'? I'm the type who silently enunciates words as I read, and B.O. just doesn't sound good to my inner ears.

How 'bout 'B.H.O.'? Doesn't that sound better?

- tomeg

January 21, 2009 at 12:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have referred to him as B.O. without meaning any insult. I won't do it anymore. It's not that time consuming to type, say, "Obama", although everyone's busy.

- basman

January 21, 2009 at 12:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"H."

Reminds us that everyone (except John Hebert-Hoover Roberts) insisted on avoiding the term "Hussein", and that Obama's foreign policy has much more continuity with W's than anyone (except Jon Stewart and Robert Powell) is willing to admit.

Also that H, like W, has got steel in his spine. Unlike W, he's also light on his feet and will pivot when necessary.

- teplukhin2you

January 21, 2009 at 1:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Bush's foreign policy changed after 2006.

- mmathog

January 21, 2009 at 2:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

tep - just want to say happy to have you on the team.

- JackR

January 21, 2009 at 2:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I've decided that trying to figure out what Obama "means" in any given pronouncement is a Sysiphean activity, sort of like parsing the words of the Oracle of Delphi or the witches in MacBeth. How you interpret it says more about you than about him. And when all is made manifest in the fullness of time, the outcome will likely be disappointing and ironic.

- dkrieger

January 21, 2009 at 2:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Larry Summers is one of the people responsible for the deregulation of the economy under the wing of uber-asshole Robert Rubin."

True.

One thing though, Summers is a synthesizer par excellence, maybe literally, earth's best.

This is how I perceive his role.

I'm way more concerned about the Geithner choice, I think Summers is just there to explain complicated shit succinctly and clearly, maybe offer his angle, and let Obama decide.

- mmathog

January 21, 2009 at 2:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Never cared for Candidate Obama, but President H. is my kind of guy.  The Delaware's icy but it's not that wide. We'll get across it. Pass me an oar.

- teplukhin2you

January 21, 2009 at 3:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Minor point: Calling the President "Barry" has run its course. it's stupid, childish, insulting, unoriginal. "Barry" is the kind of thing that you expect to hear from Limbaugh and Hannity, not read on tnr.

George:

I called him Barack Obama throughout the presidential campaign.

Then, one by one, his transition team began dismantling [or greatly diluting] many important promises he made out on the campaign trail.

He has to earn my respect. And when his presidential policies start reflecting the guy Barry played while running for office, he will get it.

gw

- iambiguous

January 21, 2009 at 3:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga1 said:

"Calling the President "Barry" has run its course."

The vulgarists are everywhere:

george:

Is that like being a vulgarian? Or a Vulcan? And wasn't Mr. Spock a half Vulcan on Star Trek? Barry is half and half too. Just a coincidence?

And is calling him Barry truly vulgar? I have always associated vulgarity with scatological tendencies. And not once have I ever...either implicity or explicitly...intimated that Barry is full of shit.

Just very, very clever political personas.

gw

- iambiguous

January 21, 2009 at 3:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's a bit unseemly to see Left and Right try to shove Obama in people's faces like some sort of sports cup.

I'm prepared to wait and see (and fully expect to be very disapointed on FP, at least) how he plays it.

Marty, this post has more to do with your problem with John B than it has to do with your new president.

- The Ignorant Populist

January 21, 2009 at 3:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Presidential act #2: www.timesonline.co.uk/.../article5562302.ece

President Obama used this opportunity on his first day in office to communicate his commitment to active engagement in pursuit of Arab-Israeli peace from the beginning of his term and express his hope for their continued co-operation and leadership,” an Administration spokesman said.

He said that Mr Obama was determined to “work to help consolidate the ceasefire by establishing an effective anti-smuggling regime to prevent Hamas from rearming and facilitating, in partnership with the Palestinian Authority, a major reconstruction effort for Palestinians in Gaza”.

- teplukhin2you

January 21, 2009 at 3:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

jackr:

Mostly I was puzzled by Obama's speech. I know he is capable of loftier rhetoric and greater inspiration. I have become suspicious of my own desire to be inspired. I was inspired by JFK's Inaugural until it dawned on me years later that "bear any burden, pay any price..." forged a path to 50,000+ dead American soldiers in Vietnam.

George:

Maybe, like Howard Beale, he just ran out of bullshit. After all, how many differ combinations can there be of rhetorical cliches?

In each new speech he is expected to sound loftier and loftier. I think at the inauguration, his fans were anticipating nothing less then a speech of biblical proportions. Some came to hear God and heard Him; others came to hear God and did not.

And thank you for that reference to Kennedy and Vietnam. The cruel relationship between rhetoric and reality was never so brutally put on display.

And while many "Generation Xs"...or whatever the hell current post baby boomers are called...are outraged [and rightly so] by the tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians killed in Iraq, they have absolutely no idea of what it was like to endure the daily, weekly, monthly, yearly slaughter that was dumped on us by "the best and the brightest" back then. The casualties were over a million.

I hope Barry has read both David Halberstein's, "The Best and the Brightest", and Frances Fitzgeralds', "Fire in the Lake".

george walton

- iambiguous

January 21, 2009 at 4:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...He said that Mr Obama was determined to “work to help consolidate the ceasefire by establishing an effective anti-smuggling regime to prevent Hamas from rearming and facilitating, in partnership with the Palestinian Authority, a major reconstruction effort for Palestinians in Gaza”....

And what ,if anything, did his spokesman say say that Obama, H, expected from Israel?

- basman

January 21, 2009 at 4:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No idea. Just very interesting that it's splashed all over the head of the home page of the Times of London and completely absent from the Times of New York.

More evidence that Obama is a careful chess player who's good at head fakes and determined to get out front of big issues. Me, I wouldn't waste more than a minute on this tar baby, but H is up to something, has some method to his madness I'm sure.

- teplukhin2you

January 21, 2009 at 4:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

iambiguous:  "And while many 'Generation Xs'...or whatever the hell current post baby boomers are called...are outraged [and rightly so] by the tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians killed in Iraq, they have absolutely no idea of what it was like to endure the daily, weekly, monthly, yearly slaughter that was dumped on us by "the best and the brightest" back then. The casualties were over a million."

That is so true, george.  But when John Kerry was running for president in 2004, a number of people who were involved as military personnel in the "daily, weekly, monthly, yearly slaughter" got the Swift Boat Venom Patrol together in order to paint Kerry, himself a combat veteran, as a wimp and traitor because of his eventual opposition to that slaughter.

So, instead of working yourself and your argument into an anatomical version of a cinnamon twist in order to tie Obama into something that began when he was born and ended when he was 14, perhaps you could explain why a large number of people who fought in Vietnam appear to be so proud of their service that they want to slur people who fought with them but changed their minds about the war's justification.  How about that?

And that might keep you out of trouble and prevent you from blaming Obama for everything from potholes on the highway to world hunger to the resurgence of the Taliban (and you started well before he took office, if I recall).  If Obama fails to withdraw from Iraq within a reasonable time, if he turns Afghanistan into a new quagmire, if if if . . . then will be the time to talk about a betrayal of principle.  Response to a confrontation with reality in the context of limited options cannot be regarded as betrayal, otherwise human adulthood itself would be such.

- ironyroad

January 21, 2009 at 4:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

irony:

But when John Kerry was running for president in 2004, a number of people who were involved as military personnel in the "daily, weekly, monthly, yearly slaughter" got the Swift Boat Venom Patrol together in order to paint Kerry, himself a combat veteran, as a wimp and traitor because of his eventual opposition to that slaughter.

george:

Kerry, alas, was Gore revisited. In both 2000 and 2004, the Republicans steered the narrative from start to finish. And sadly that was because Gore and Kerry let them. I remember reading an analysis of this in [I think] Drew Weston's, The Political Brain. This book [if it's the right one] dissected over and again the episodic potholes that plagued both campaigns. And then he would give a hypothetical argument....a counter narrative...Gore and Kerry could have used to blunt the Republican smear machine. Or, more important still, turn the smears around and bludgeon the Republicans with their own bullshit. And I would read these arguments and think, "gee, maybe I'm Drew Weston". In other words, these hypothetical arguments virtually mirrored my own thoughts and feelings watching Gore and Kerry self-implode. I think it might have worked on Barry too; but the October financial meltdown would have made it a Democratic victory if their nominee was Michal Moore.

About 10 or 11 months after I got out of the Army, I was working in the George McGovern presidential campaign.

[I still remember the day Eleanor McGovern and the actor Nancy Kulp [Jane Hathaway on the Beverly Hillbillies] stopped by our tiny campaign headquarters]  

There I met Mike Dearborn. He and I worked on recruiting at college campuses around Baltimore. It was while doing this that met Robert Fussell. He was involved with Vietnam Veterans Against the War. I went to a couple of meetings with him and also marched in DC with them 1 time. I never ended up joining but I do recall vividly the conversations we had about Vets coming back "to the world" after their tour of duty in Vietnam. And while many were proud to serve their country in Vietnam [and felt bitter at the reaction from "civilians" when they got home---think Rambo] there was also a sizable number of Vets like me and Kerry. And that was because the Vietnam war was fought by large numbers of draftees. We had no volunteers only Army back then. There were tens of thousands of us who served and protested the war.

The Swift Boat smear was not about Vietnam. It was about politcs. It was just something that was put together to trample on Kerry's advantage re Bush's far less substantial "service" back then. I think if someone would "follow the money" it would lead them to a mini version of Nixon's plumbers. More Donlad Segretti ratfuckers.

When Barry starts acting on his campaign promises [or gives a convincing argument why he needs to postpone or change some] then he becomes Barack again. But this is just me...here. I have no power, no influence, no capacity to change anything. Those days are gone. All I have left are words. And the irony here is that I often complain about those in TNR who seem to live in a world of words, as well. But to reconcile that you would have to know me in a way you never will.

george walton

- iambiguous

January 21, 2009 at 7:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

george "The Swift Boat smear was not about Vietnam. It was about politcs. It was just something that was put together to trample on Kerry's advantage re Bush's far less substantial 'service' back then. I think if someone would 'follow the money' it would lead them to a mini version of Nixon's plumbers."

It wasn't "just something" and it was about Vietnam in both a biographical and a symbolic sense.  It was a crucial move -- which Kerry failed to respond to effectively, of course -- that managed to turn a potential plus (his service in Vietnam) into a neutral-to-negative (his service in Vietnam within the frame of his later antiwar advocacy).  It may well have contributed to his loss more than anything else, and it's rather typical of your narcissistic argumentative style that you assume that just because you describe it as "politics" you're dealing with my comment.  You're not.  I know it's politics.  That's what I was saying -- my question was why that politics?  Why was it successful?

george:  "There were tens of thousands of us who served and protested the war."

I don't deny that, I know that and knew many involved, and it deserves respect.  However, my point was that it's not the only position that VN veterans took or take today.

My larger argument was, however, that it's not very illuminating to compare Obama's inaugural speech to Kennedy's for the reason I set out above and don't want to repeat.  And btw I don't require to know you -- or you me.  But I'm surely getting to know your rhetorical style and approach.

- ironyroad

January 21, 2009 at 7:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

A lot of the clever and mean wordplay started with Gingrich. For example, it's not the Democratic Party, it's the Democrat party. There are many, many examples of the witless and snarky diminishment of people on Talk Radio, daily.

I expect to hear President Obama called "Obammy" and "The Messiah" and "B. Hussein Obama" on Talk Radio and on cable, it just saddens me to read it hear. He's not "Barry" to me, but then blogs are a petri dish for cheap shots.

(Petri dishes are intended to be disposed of after one use.)

- fougasseu

January 22, 2009 at 8:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Marty - the more important and lyrical component of that quote you highlighted was "You cannot out last us."  This was so new and so searing and the alliteration alone was excellent (contractions are so deadening, think if he'd said "You can't outlast us" but I digress, ).  

But more important, this was the point of the George Washington reference.  You cannot outlast us - he's speaking to the fact that our enemies think we're weak because we're young.  But he flipped it and threw back it in their faces in front of the entire world.

Iggy Pop, thank you for your witty, astringent idealism - you, basman and others furners (as my redneck great grandmother used to say) keep Americans honest.  We do tend to get distracted without someone grabbing us by the lapels and smacking us-  with proper diction and hilarious reparte of course.

Liberal - a perfect dismissal, well played as always sir.

Tep, your enthusiasm is glorious, but you're scaring me and not just because you sound like I did a year ago. Its that this Obama has always been there. I also think you're counting your chickens. He made it clear that GB 1 was his inspiration for FP back in 2007, he's spoken often with Scrowcroft since 2006 and speaks proudly of that.

This is not GWB's foreign policy - just because he doesn't plan on scolding Israel (he wouldn't be President if he did) does not make him W.  I think the most important thing Obama did was make George Bush sit up on that stage take a shockingly fearless tounge lashing, no more hiding behind selected fans, no more hiding from anyone.  The entire world was watching.  THAT to me was more inspirational than anything he has ever said.  So much more shocking coming from him.  It was beautiful, ahead of his time.  It also said no one escapes this sort of accountability.  

Obama's got that knife hidden behind his toga like all good leaders, he always has.

I agree that Putin knows the jig is up, he ate George W. Bush with a fine merlot and fava beans the first time they met.  You could just see how amused Putin was that it was so easy.  But we'll see on the rest of your assumptions on FP. Say what you will about H. (which I think is a great name), on big picture goals of his, he's usually 3 or 4 steps ahead of everyone.  He has the spontenaity of a supercomputer. But we don't see what he programmed until much much later.

- Wandreycer1

January 22, 2009 at 10:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...Also that H, like W, has got steel in his spine. Unlike W, he's also light on his feet and will pivot when necessary....

btw: nicely said.

- basman

January 22, 2009 at 10:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What American foreign policy always needs most, and too frequently lacks, is continuity. Both our friends and our enemies need to know what to expect.

H knows this, and is well-prepared to adjust -- no throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

- Robert Powell

January 22, 2009 at 12:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If anyone is still in tihis thread, one small side question:

Why have Beyonce, a soulless and empty singer, and JLO--ditto--, and Marc Anthony sing At Last? I have not heard that Etta James is out of commission, and she has in her baby finger more singing talent than the first two at any rate have in their entire, kind of nice, bodies.

- basman

January 22, 2009 at 12:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree basman, Beyonce and JLo are beautiful mediocrities, very coporate and soulless.  I can only guess that these entertainers are big with young people, know how to play to the publicity machine and cameras.  The young and youngish put Obama over the top, I guess he wanted them to stay central.  

Only Aretha's talent fit the majesty of the moment artistically.  I wondered about real gospel music as well, there are vibrant gospel singers in this country - as spine tingling as its ever.

But anyone else singing "At Last" seemed almost beyond forgiving.  

- Wandreycer1

January 22, 2009 at 12:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wandrey, that I'm enthusiastic doesn't mean that I'm going to support everything or even most things Obama does. His ethanol policy is a flat-out disaster. I'm mystified by his decision to grasp the Isr-Pal tar baby on Day One.

But these aren't disappointments, because I don't have high expectations to begin with for ANY member of our political class. Their failure, and our financial class's failure, has been so massive and so devastating that I've entered some Kubler Ross phase in which any smattering of competence, discipline, intelligence and above all HONESTY from the doctor is enough to give hope to the patient. I will continue to criticize the man where I think he's wrong, but from a position of sympathy and support. He's got the right stuff.

- teplukhin2you

January 22, 2009 at 1:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ok - you still scare me ;)

Yes, honesty and competence have been gone from the public square for so long, I wonder if I'm still in shell shock over it.  

H is pretty frigging honest, as honest as I can expect from a politician anyway. But he's not afraid of saying it how it is. He seems to almost enjoy it.  I know this is a very tired analogy, but he IS like my my effective professors - blunt, withholding, sincere - you know when they say you've done well (maybe once a year) its real.  They aren't your friends after class is over either.

I'm becoming more and more suspicious of bailing these banks out in any way, they've already been so arrogant about the money - no accountability is the Bush era, not Obama's.  I'd like for someone to have the respect to make a decent case to Joe Six Pack out here who will have to pay for it.  And not just "the country will explode if you don't get me hundreds of billions immediately."  

- Wandreycer1

January 22, 2009 at 2:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The man will continue to surprise us. In good ways, mainly.

- teplukhin2you

January 22, 2009 at 3:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

One hopes, tep.  We'll see soon enough. I am not convinced regarding his f-p views - can't tell whether he's Carter or a more elegant W.

If you don't like the bank bailout, wait 'til the stimulus does nothing of the kind, Wandrey.  Money, meet rathole.

- butchie b

January 22, 2009 at 4:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jill I agree with you on the reasons why H had At Last sung by the pop 3. It just offends my love of that song and my love and respect for Etta James. A small dissent: no one is a biggger enthusiast of Aretha when she was good. But I stopped going to see her about 15 years ago. I don't think she's had good chops for a while now and was not up to what she sang at the inaug. imho. But she is an inconic figure and gets by with that these days, I suppose. But you should here her C.D., talking about Gospel--I can dig out its title--of her singing in Church when she was about 14, her young voice not there yet, but its brilliance compleeing even then. Going to see her sing in the old days was like going to Church of a certain kind, I'd imagine, but not know, not being a Church goer. It was spirtual

Aretha at 14: ca.youtube.com/watch

- basman

January 22, 2009 at 4:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"We'll see soon enough. I am not convinced regarding his f-p views - can't tell whether he's Carter or a more elegant W."

I most fervently hope that those are not the only options for America, butchie.  IMO Carter has just become a kind of voodoo doll for the Right, and if the rescue mission to Teheran had succeeded he would have been elected for a second term on a landslide.  Nevertheless, the Soviets got very aggressive during his period in office and one can argue that he failed to develop a convincing strategy for countering them.  FDR would be a useful model, as he renewed and improved relations with Latin American countries, for example, an f-p achievement bore fruit in WW2.

As far as Bush's legacy goes, I think the core requirement now is not only a winding-down of the macho posturing (which to some extent has been happening anyway the last 2-3 years) but positing a different calculus of strength and weakness for the U.S., our allies, and our opponents.  It's not 1950 anymore, nor is it 1991, and the global interactions have changed.  I think H. is the first president to really grasp that.

- ironyroad

January 22, 2009 at 5:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You managed to make me cry yet again basman, I promised after inauguration I'd be done for awhile.  Thank you for that clip.  The hair stood up on my arms.  My little boy came in and said "She's a MOMMY isn't she?"  You get the idea of how much I worship Aretha.

I agree Butchie, I've been agreeing with the wingers on this.  I'm a cheapskate and big on accountability,  the whole thing goes against my values.  I need someone to make a better case, I need to see someone - lots of someones - FIRED FIRED FIRED. These people are so arrogant.  

I read that John Thain had a million dollar - that's MILLION - redecorating job done on his office as he was firing people and taking my money.  Can it get any worse?  I'd like to see him in stocks and chains in front of that bull on Wall Street.  

I won't even tell you the stories of the arrogance/cluelessness in the phone calls my husband is getting from old co-workers looking for jobs.   The higher up, the more entitled and in denial.  These people NEED to be spanked.

Hubby is one of the last men standing, works for the French, but he's close to going back to school (at 45) to become and engineer.  He wants to build pipes, bridges, real things people use.  

- Wandreycer1

January 22, 2009 at 5:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hubby's a health economist, right? Maybe bio-engineering? GENE etc are still doing well.

- teplukhin2you

January 22, 2009 at 6:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...and if the rescue mission to Teheran had succeeded he would have been elected for a second term on a landslide."

But it didn't and he wasn't.  There is a reason why failures happen.

After the ''miracle"  on the Hudson last week, my husband, who flies frequently, told me he never takes a  US Airways flight since he witnessed a few years ago how sloppy their ground services were. Some accidents may be freaky but  more often than not, they are due to faulty management and loose discipline. Carter's non-linear emotional and biblical thinking has been in evidence a lot in the last few years. I wouldn't  ascribe his presidential  failures to chance or bad luck.

- noga1

January 22, 2009 at 6:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Carter was/is  a self righteous wimp and was a lousy president. He took the anti imperial Presidency so far as to emasculate the office.

I hope I can live another 30 years or so--i've been 39 for the last 23 years--to see how my good friend history treats Bush 43. But  in any event I'll be watching the early returns and be forgetting about the clatter of now.

- basman

January 22, 2009 at 7:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga:  "But it didn't and he wasn't.  There is a reason why failures happen."

Yes, but it's not a magical reason.  Good people can fail, and bad people can succeed.  The mission didn't fail because basman and butchie don't like him as president (or even as ex-president), or even because he was a bad president, if indeed he was.  In the general run of things, I think Carter achieved the Camp David Accords, solved the Panama Canal problem, and also tried to tell the truth about our energy economy and its national security implications, but we didn't want to hear it then.  Obama said something similar on Tuesday and it seems like we've matured a bit in the intervening 30 years (or some of us have -- I've matured to the level of a good Stilton myself!).

In any case, I would simply emphasize again that Carter and Bush are not the only models available for thinking on foreign and strategic policy, and it's silly to suggest they are.

- ironyroad

January 22, 2009 at 10:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

" Good people can fail, and bad people can succeed."

There, you see, no sooner Carter makes an appearance and you start mouthing Jeremiads...

Funny how you attribute the achievement of Camp David to Carter rather than to the two parties who actually did it. The consequent acerbic relations between Begin and Carter might indicate that the quality and talent of Carter's mediation had much less to do with the "success" of CD than anybody cares to remember.

("Success", because of things like these:

contentious-centrist.blogspot.com/.../zig-and-zag-and-whats-between-them-via.html )

"I've matured to the level of a good Stilton myself!"

How do you know? I myself would have thought you were more like a  very sharp cheddar with a strong bite.  The crystallization within indicates that you have been appropriately aged, and are a curious texture.  

- noga1

January 23, 2009 at 9:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Was it just me or did anyone notice the frost between Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter before the swearing in and during the ex presidential milling? I undertsand that Clinton is furious with Carter for how he is now spinning what happened at the 1993 peace initiative. If I can get in on the cheese metaphor, I'm cheez whiz, ersatz and tasteless, but convenient in a pinch on a Ritz, with any under priced red plonk.

- basman

January 23, 2009 at 9:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am illegally imported  Camembert, made from raw milk.  If You Prick Me, Do I Not ooze?

- noga1

January 23, 2009 at 10:55am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...If You Prick Me, Do I Not ooze? ...

Uhm, aw never mind.

- basman

January 23, 2009 at 11:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yes, basman, and I was hoping that a gentleman, you would not go that way.

- noga1

January 23, 2009 at 11:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"very sharp cheddar with a strong bite."

You know what, Noga?  You're right -- That's me to a T.  I'm tasty on a brown wheat roll, too, with a spoonful of the pickle that I usually get myself into.

- ironyroad

January 23, 2009 at 11:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Funny how you attribute the achievement of Camp David to Carter rather than to the two parties who actually did it."

Oh.  Er . . . Israel and . . . um . . . Egypt, right?

Drew a blank for a minute there.

- ironyroad

January 23, 2009 at 11:29am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Cheddar and pickle?

"I was overwhelmed by a feeling of peace and serenity. Then I went home and had a cheese and pickle sandwich. It was one of the best cheese and pickle sandwiches I've ever had."

mickhartley.typepad.com/.../encounter-in-queens-wood.html

- noga1

January 23, 2009 at 12:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...1993 peace initiative...

Should be 2000 peace initiative.

- basman

January 23, 2009 at 12:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have to agree with Judis on reading Das Kapital. About a year ago I took a graduate level class reading the Political Economists, from Smith to Keynes and Hayek. And The Wealth of Nations and Das Kapital stand the test of time in insight and greatness.

- dabeffert

January 23, 2009 at 1:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I undertsand that Clinton is furious with Carter for how he is now spinning what happened at the 1993 peace initiative."

I'm curious to know where you had learned about Clinton's  response.

"BLITZER: ... major concessions. He said: "Right before I left office, Yasser Arafat thanked me for all my efforts and told me what a great man I was. 'Mr. Chairman,' I replied, 'I am not a great man, I am a failure and you have made me one.' Arafat's rejection of my proposal after Ehud Barak accepted it was an error of historic proportions."

CARTER: OK, well...

BLITZER: That's what the former president wrote in his book.

CARTER: All right. Well, in my book, which I think is accurate --I hate to dispute Bill Clinton on your program because he did a great and heroic effort there. He never made a proposal that was accepted by Barak or Arafat.

BLITZER: Why would he write that in his book if...

CARTER: I don't know.

BLITZER: ... if he said Barak accepted it?

CARTER: I don't know...

BLITZER: And Arafat rejected it."

www.huffingtonpost.com/.../jimmy-carter-iraq-invas_n_35097.html

Someone suggested to me that Carter may not have been physically present at Camp David but He may not have been there physically but he was there, hovering over Arafat's shoulder, serving as a silent consultant. Could he have advised Arafat to reject Barak's offer?   How is it possible that a former president would be working in this clandestine way to frustrate the efforts of a sitting president to broker a peace agreement? If he had any real influence on Arafat's rejection then he has a lot to answer from, including the blood that has flown since on both Israel's and Palestinians' sides.

- noga1

January 23, 2009 at 2:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

..."I undertsand that Clinton is furious with Carter for how he is now spinning what happened at the 1993 (sic) peace initiative."

I'm curious to know where you had learned about Clinton's  response...."

See Dershowitz's The Case Against Israel's Enemies, hard cover, page 41, second full paragraph:

"..Clinton is reportedly furious at Carter for  acceptong Arafat's account over his. 79"

And at page 256 endnote 79 is: "Jennifer Seigel, " 'Apartheid' Book Exposes Carter - Clinton Rift; Clinton: 'I  Don't Know Where His Information Came From,'" Jewish Daily Forward, March 30, 2007."

- basman

January 23, 2009 at 3:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

OK, thanks. Here is a link to the article:

www.forward.com/.../apartheid-book-exposes-carter-clinton-rift

- noga1

January 23, 2009 at 4:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Aye you Noga 1 or Nogal (with an L)?

Anyway thank you too.

- basman

January 23, 2009 at 4:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga 1. For some reason when I signed up to join the boards, TNR refused to accept me as Noga. But they agreed to Noga1. Perhaps there was once a Noga poster who is no longer around, but her cyber- ghost continues to haunt these noble columns.

- noga1

January 23, 2009 at 4:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close