January 19, 2011

Things said about Dick Cheney lead me to reaffirm my decision to vote for Obama.

Instapundit picked up on the Cheney-hate wisecrack I blogged yesterday:
CIVILITY CAMPAIGN NOT CATCHING ON: “Cheney’s heart transplant. Wouldn’t that be the worst day ever? Not only are you dead but they’ve given your heart to THAT prick!”

Plus, from the comments: “Obama ends up adopting half these policies in his continuance of his war on terror. And yet, whereas these policies made Cheney Darth Vader and the Emperor rolled into one, under Obama these policies are not even worth mentioning.” That Obama adopted them too only makes Cheney more evil — for undermining the fierce moral urgency of change. And then mocking The One for going along.
That last link goes to Tom Maguire, who notes Glenn Greenwald's moaning over Cheney's solemn observation that Obama, as President, has recognized the importance of the Bush administration's policies and made them his own:
“I think he’s been through the fires of becoming president and having to make decisions and live with the consequences,” Cheney said. “I think he’s learned that what we did was far more appropriate than he ever gave us credit for while he was a candidate ... I think he’s learned from experience.”
And I just want to say that this is part of why I voted for Obama. I explained my vote on November 9, 2008, just after the election and made a prediction that I think you should now see was right. Here's the key part, where I quote what I blogged on October 30:
October 30: I come to terms with the problem of 1-party government:
Usually, I prefer divided government, but that doesn't mean I need to support McCain. I've seen McCain put way too much effort into pleasing Democrats and flouting his own party, and I can picture Obama standing up to the Democratic Congress and being his own man. What, really, will he owe them? McCain, by contrast, will need them. And we've seen that he wants to be loved by them.

Sometimes, I think that letting the Democrats control everything for 2 years would work out just fine. Let one party take responsibility for everything. When they can't whine and finger-point, what will they actually step up and do? It will be interesting to know. And it will do the Republicans good to retool and define themselves, with an eye toward the 2010 election. I'd like to see this clarification after so many years of obfuscation.
This goes along with my problem that McCain had abandoned the effort to define himself as conservative. I could see myself voting for a conservative. I would like some good conservatism. But I did not see it in McCain. Certainly, just bringing in Palin was no substitute for having his own clear principles.
Also in that November 9th post I quote something I wrote on November 3:
One thing I don't like about John McCain is that he never showed respect for Bush. He was all about distancing himself from Bush, but if it's distance you want from Bush, there's Obama. And Obama had no reason to defend the other party's President, but for all his criticism of Bush's policies, I don't remember Obama taking ugly potshots at Bush. McCain treated Bush like an outcast. Was there even a word of defense for the man who protected us from terrorist attacks for 7 years?
Before you bitch about Obama, do a clear, honest visualization of where we'd be right now if McCain were President. Take account of the benefit we have received as the Obama administration has had to embrace many of Bush's policies, and these things have become the norm. And look at what the Republicans have done with their period of exile. Now, seriously picture what the political discourse would be if the Republicans had held onto power.

I know some of you are ready to list the terrible things the Democrats did in their 2 years of dominance. I'm not saying there wasn't a down side. The Democrats did a lot more damage than I thought possible. But McCain would have gone along with a lot of things, and there would be continuing partisan criticism about the wars. Everything having to do with national security would be pinned on McCain and presented in the worst possible light, for the aggrandizement of the Democratic Party.

If McCain had won, we would not have experienced the revitalization of the conservative movement that had such a tremendous effect on the 2010 elections and is shaping the next presidential election. Finally, think about all the angst there would be right now over the lost opportunity to experience the brilliant hope that was Barack Obama. Instead of the wistful imaginings of the glories of Obama administration that could have been, we have the reality. We get to see it, criticize it, and sharpen our conservative politics on it.

176 comments:

Meade said...

They told me if I failed to vote for John McCain, Guantanamo would be closed, enhanced interrogation would be banned, and the US would surrender in the Global War On Terror... and they were wrong!

Henry said...

It was like the French Revolution, but shorter. And now we're ready for a Bourgeois King. There's a silver lining!

Robert said...

It's too bad this could not have been posted on April 1.

It's better to have had Obama because otherwise McCain would have been a target of partisan vitriol, and instead we got to experience the empty mirage of Hopenchange? Really, Professor?

Hoosier Daddy said...

“I think he’s been through the fires of becoming president and having to make decisions and live with the consequences,” Cheney said. “I think he’s learned that what we did was far more appropriate than he ever gave us credit for while he was a candidate ... I think he’s learned from experience.”

I think this is called being mugged by reality.

PaulV said...

Back in 2000 pundits were saying it was a good year to lose election for POTUS because economy was going to tank. President Gore would have been diaster.

SteveR said...

Unfortunately the rationale you use to reaffirm your decision to vote for Obama was not the reason the vast majority who voted for him used. The whole "Hope and Change" deal.

I'm just not confident the "Carter gave us Reagan" scenario gets a repeat. Politics shouldn't have to be chemotherapy.

traditionalguy said...

This post is a fine argument that "as iron sharpens iron, man sharpens man". The GOP is shaped up now. But the RINOs confusing things for Jeb Bush's sake are still against a 2012 a fight to rid us from the ongoing Obama Damages, all so that they can claim the Presidency back in 2016. Firing Michael Steele was pointless except to build obstacles to Palin taking the GOP nomination. This strategy of losing now so that we can win later on is insane.

shoutingthomas said...

Agreed that McCain was a terrible candidate.

He lost me the day he ran back to Washington to put his stamp of approval on the bailouts.

Still, I didn't vote for Obama.

Jason said...

The damned health care bill trumps everything.

You were being too clever and cute with your vote. Like a doctor who decides to let the cancer get worse so the patient won't bitch as much about the more aggressive and painful treatments required later.

You got a sweet, tenured academic gig and a government pension. The rest of us have to scramble in this post stimulus economy.

To support you.

Thanks for nothing, professor!

Thanks for nothing, professor.

Hoosier Daddy said...

There was a lot of discussion after the November elections whether or not Obama was going to 'triangulate' ala Clinton.

Seems Obama is not so much moving to the middle but sprinting to it and his rising poll numbers seem to reflect it. Agressively go after terrorists, agree to extend the tax cuts, propose eliminating job killing regulations. All he has to do is lift the drilling moratorium, sink some wells in that barren wasteland called the 'Arctic Wildlife Refuge' and he'd have my vote in 2012.

Pastafarian said...

I can buy your argument about not voting for McCain because he isn't a conservative, and his liberal policies would have tarnished the Republican brand.

However: The idea that we're in better shape now because we swung the political pendulum so far to the left that it's ready to swing back to the right...that's a bridge too far.

By that logic, we might as well all vote for Obama in 2012. After all, think how great the Republicans' prospects will be in 2016, once the economy lies in total ruin and we have to haul bushel baskets of dollars (each bearing the likeness of President Obama) to buy a loaf of bread.

And in 2016, we might as well vote for...that guy from Daily Kos, or whoever they can find one notch worse than Obama. And on and on.

You're lucky (we're all lucky) that they won't pass cap-and-tax. Had they, then your vote, and the vote of everyone who voted with you, would have damned our country to an economic hell we could never have climbed out of. And they very nearly pulled off their entire agenda.

The notion that Obama's innate intelligence has allowed him to learn on the job and moderate his approach -- that's laughable. He's still a socialist -- just a failed socialist.

AllenS said...

I wasn't fooled at all. I knew obama wouldn't leave Iraq or close Gitmo. You have no reason to say that things would have been as bad, or things wouldn't have worked out if McCain would have been elected. This Tea Party stuff was going to happen irregardless. Maybe you haven't noticed, but the Tea Party has been active against Repuglicans. I laugh at the story line that Bush had this wasteful deficit spending, while obama, who spent 3 times as much, had his spending called stimulous. Only emotional people bought into obama's bullshit.

MayBee said...

Before you bitch about Obama, do a clear, honest visualization of where we'd be right now if McCain were President.

Real, lasting differences. A better health care bill we wouldn't have to be wasting time trying to fix now. No wasteful, ridiculous "stimulus". Actual spending cuts. A smaller deficit.

We would be where we're now trying to go.

Jon said...

The only reason I held my nose and voted for McCain was the Supreme Court. If McCain had won, Souter and possibly Stevens would both probably still be on the bench, and Obama would not have had the chance to lock in their seats for the left for the next 30 years.

alwaysfiredup said...

"I can picture Obama standing up to the Democratic Congress and being his own man"

Lol! Ooookay....

traditionalguy said...

All of the positive comments about Obama coming around to see conservative truths now need to factor in that HE LIES about everything he says.

CJinPA said...

Instead of the wistful imaginings of the glories of Obama administration that could have been, we have the reality. We get to see it, criticize it, and sharpen our conservative politics on it.

Amen. As much as conservatives bitch about Obama, he is simply doing what liberals have talked about doing for DECADES.

I was surprised at how unprepared the GOP was to make a coherent stand against spending, Obamacare, etc. What the hell were you doing the last 30 years? We know what you were doing the last 10, surfing the post 9-11 pro-GOP wave right into the ground, shedding core principles and enjoying the title of Congressman.

It took the Tea Party movement to scare you into action.

Seriously, we had decades to make the case against socialized health care. To offer an alternative or to undermine the claim of “39 million uninsured Americans.” Yet we chose to cram for finals.

Bob Ellison said...

I, too, voted for Obama, mostly because I fell for his pretense of centrism and because McCain was such an obviously unfit applicant, especially with (1) his bizarre suspension of the campaign and (2) his plan to nationalize the home-mortgage industry.

You point to your blog posts near the election day as though you had perfectly gamed it. I call BS. I'm sorry I voted for this disaster of a POTUS. Aren't you? We may never undo the damage Obama has done. Did you predict, in November 2008, the rise of the Tea Party movement? No, and without that, there would have been no 2010 re-alignment election.

One thing McCain would have done right: attempt to control spending. He has been pretty good on that, and on military affairs. He would not be a good POTUS, but he'd be much, much better than Obama.

Your larger point is that genuine conservatism has been well served by having to face the Obama disaster. This presumes that the conservatism would not exist, or would not be as strong, without said disaster. That's wrong. It is there and does not go away. The disaster merely makes the pendulum swing a little more broadly.

tim maguire said...

You're not fooling anybody, just move on.

We're still here reading you, so we've come to terms with it.

Geoff Matthews said...

So, you're taking the frog in boiling water argument?

Do you listen to Glen Beck much?

bagoh20 said...

I agree with Althouse about the clarity presented through the success of her vote, but it had a cost, and that may be irreparable. Two years of rabid liberals getting nearly all the spending they wanted may have put the car in ditch so deep that it will still be there in 50 years when the Chinese drive by and wonder what happened to that old classic. I hate McCain's wobbliness, but I think he would have restrained the spending that is now locked in.

In the end, I admire the the Althouse vote, if I accept it's stated reason, but are you sure you didn't really believe the Dems would do a good job and push things toward your lifelong liberal fantasy? In other words, just another irresistible pull of the Dem lever, with blog cover. I know you are capable deciding as you said, but you never said, you expected them to fail, did you? That would be proof of what you hope we take form this.

Michael said...

I'm sorry. I can't agree with your point because, as others have posted, the damage to the country that Obama has done in two years will take ten years to undo. We are still paying for Jimmy Carter's decisions on Iran and Afghanistan. I think his triangulation will be half hearted and he is not the politician that Clinton is. My biggest worry is the Republicans. Will they actually do what they promised to do ? If the House passes the repeal bill, I think the Senate will, too. Eric Cantor is already daring Reid to bring the bill up in the Senate. Obama will have to veto it and that will focus a lot of people's attention.

knox said...

I'm just not confident the "Carter gave us Reagan" scenario gets a repeat. Politics shouldn't have to be chemotherapy.

Great comment, SteveR!

lyssalovelyredhead said...

I don't ultimately agree with Althouse's decision to vote for Obama, but I can see where she is coming from here. Quite honestly, President Obama has been far better and stronger on issues of foreign policy than I ever came close to expecting. I didn't expect him to be willing to allow himself to be mugged by reality, and I'm glad that I was proven wrong.


I still hold that McCain would have been better, but it would have been more based on images than actions. McCain would have projected an image of proud strength and definance to the world, while Obama is more just riding along (and periodically apologizing for no good reasons).

But, of course, foreign policy is only one issue. The massive spending is a huge problem which continues to hold us back, and it also is feeding the Chinese (potentially raising much larger foreign policy issues than the current Mid-East centric ones), in a way that I'd like to think that McCain would have avoided. The healthcare bill won't be overturned anytime soon, and once it is entrenched, it will be entrenched- it's probably too late to walk back from it. If President Obama gets the chance to replace one of the conservatives on the Supreme Court, we'll see a sweeping change in jurisprudence which will likely last for decades.

Yeah, I'd still vote against Obama, without any qualms whatsoever. Professor Althouse was still wrong.

- Lyssa

shoutingthomas said...

Here's one thing I really like about Obama. Conservatives please note. I keep saying this, but you keep brushing it aside.

The Obama presidency is the expression of black assimilation. The long range outcome will favor conservatism. Being in office is forcing Obama to become more conservative. Black are observing this.

Like all groups, blacks were alienated and radical when they were outside the walls of power. Now that they are inside, the political positions of blacks are already moderating.

Remember, blacks are by far the most religious and church going group. Over the long run, this moderation will eat away at the one block vote that Democrats are convinced they will own forever.

Dust Bunny Queen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
knox said...

This justification *is* a little "too clever by half."

McCain was a horrible candidate. 'Nuff Said.

1jpb said...

"we would not have experienced the revitalization of the conservative movement that had such a tremendous effect on the 2010 elections and is shaping the next presidential election."

The "and is shaping the next presidential election" is, sadly, true.

Too bad this so-called revitalized con movement isn't more focused on the Rs in Congress, today. They were going to cut $100 billion, then fifty, then thirty, and now they're waiting for BHO to lead them (aka "go first").

And, I have zero doubt that the R leadership won't be called out by their so-called revitalized movement. Because the base's attention is easily diverted/manipulated by (retaliative) trivialities.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Although I despise all that Obama and the far Left stands for and am fearful that we my not ever recover from their misguided policies.....I still say that Obama is the best thing that ever happened to Conservatism.

Before Obama, the country was gradually turning more and more to Socialism, Big Government and the people were slowly and irrevocably losing our freedoms that were guaranteed by the Constitution and those freedoms that we just take for granted. The RINOs (McCain) just went along with the program We were like the frogs being slowly boiled to death, unaware of their danger.

NOW.....when Obama and the Left suddenly began ramming their agenda at us, we felt the heat, woke up and saw the danger and many of us have taken action to try to save ourselves, our children and to reverse the damage.

The Tea Party is a product of Obama.

So even though I didn't vote for the giant prick.....I guess I should be thankful that others did.

It woke us up and if we stay alert and vigilant we may be able to save America.

MayBee said...

I'm happy that I did so many drugs I lost my job and became homeless, because it has forced me to be careful with the money people give me.

Clyde said...

Without the incompetence of Jimmy Carter, no Ronald Reagan. Without the o'erweening hubris of Barack Obama and the Nancy Pelosi-Harry Reid Congress, no Tea Party and no Republican "shellacking" of Democrats in 2010 and who knows what in 2012.

MnMark said...

I think Ms. Althouse makes some good points in this post.

george said...

Ann, that is a pretty weak attempt at trying to rehabilitate your reputation. You voted for the one guy that bought into the whole fierce moral urgency argument only to watch him be mugged by reality once in office. Even the people who came up with the meme knew it was just to fool the rubes and the unsophisticated. No one thought one of those rubes would actually be elected just like Frankenstein never thought his monster would roam free and create havoc.

Now you praise Obama for realizing what was obvious to anyone with a pulse and an IQ above room temperature. And all it cost for us to learn this lesson is several trillion dollars in debt and the loss of the legitimacy of our government in the eyes of millions of its citizens.

But hey, if it paints the differences between the philosophies of our major parties clearly enough that even academics can understand them then I guess it was a small price to pay

I have enough respect for Ann's intelligence to think that she does not believe what she just wrote but is just fishing for comments and hits. It is substantively the political equivalent of her short pants posts.

carlbridges said...

No sale, Althouse.

"If the tornado hadn't blown the house down, I never would have found my watch."

bagoh20 said...

shoutingthomas,

I agree with your point. The election of Obama, can release thoughtful Blacks from the automatic outside position to decide policy issues based on the issue rather than how it fits with the "Black Community". I hope it makes more of them feel that they are now part of the whole rather than fighting it. Blacks have suffered substantially from liberal policies, and the more they feel themselves equal, the more conservative they will become. Equality is a bad value to hold above all else. Freedom is the value we all need to prosper, and they, like us all, will do much better when they put liberty above equality.

Pastafarian said...

"Before you bitch about Obama, do a clear, honest visualization of where we'd be right now if McCain were President."

Well...we'd be installing that anti-missile system in eastern Europe. I'll check in with you for a retraction of your victory dance when/if someone starts lobbing ballistic missiles.

As Jon pointed out, we'd have 2 fewer very young and very liberal supreme court justices to put up with for the next 40 years. But I suspect that's a feature for you and not a bug. There's not much to teaching constitutional law, if the constitution merely means what it says in plain language.

We'd still have the F35 and F22 fighter programs up and going. China just launched a 5th-generation fighter, we canceled ours. China's developing a carrier-killing missile that we can't stop. China is getting ready to kick our ass in an actual shooting war. Even if the war never comes, their looming superiority will allow them to exert influence over us.

I could go on, and on, and on, unfortunately.

Rit said...

Pretty weak rationale for now claiming your vote for Obama was justified. Obama didn't cause this train wreck all on his own. Obama has had plenty of help in mucking up the works. He's managed to populate the White House with cabinet members and czars that are tax cheats, ideologues and pure partisan hacks. I held my nose in voting for McCain, but there is virtually no doubt in my mind that McCain would have assembled a better cabinet, made better appointments to regulatory agencies, and made better judicial nominations than Obama.

MayBee said...

I agree with your point. The election of Obama, can release thoughtful Blacks from the automatic outside position to decide policy issues based on the issue rather than how it fits with the "Black Community".

I'll feel better agreeing with that point if whomever runs against Obama isn't painted as a racist, as the Clintons and McCain were.

kathleen said...

Is it really that important to you to be so clever all the time? Nothing else seems to motivate you. Subtlety might be nice for its own sake, but it gets nothing done. You treat your thinking process like a delicate piece of china to be displayed in the curio cabinet that is your blog. It's cute, but not as cute as you seem to think. Your thinking is not especially clever, and the reason the rest of us don't indulge in convoluted arguments like yours is because we are trying to change the world, not get its attention.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Re: ShoutingT and Bagoh20 on race-

That's all well and good, but do you think that that will last for one second if Obama loses 2012?

As MayBee indicated, whoever runs against President Obama will be the worst kind of racist. If he loses (or even has an uphill battle), it will be a sure sign of America's continued racism and refusal to give a black man a chance. If he actually loses, I predict that it will be quite horrible indeed, and that that animosity will last for decades. I wish that it were different, but I don't count this one as a win, by any stretch.

- Lyssa

bagoh20 said...

Kathleen sends in a high hard one. Nice!

Henry said...

Ending wildly expensive, and logistically unsupportable weapons' systems is a feature.

Original Mike said...

"I can picture Obama standing up to the Democratic Congress and being his own man."

Uh-huh.

franglo said...

Your conclusions rest on so many taken for granted assumptions that they are essentially meaningless.

The first is that Democrats are "sof on terrorism" and that it's a surprise that Obama has not been. In short, that's a load of horseshit. You should just openly say "Democrats are nancy boys and hate America!" as it's a more honest reflection of your deep analysis.

Second, Guantanamo hasn't been closed but that doesn't equate to an endorsement of it by this administration. The fact that it remains a difficult problem to solve is due to the enormous stupidity of the way it was set up in the first place. Big progress has been made toward closing it, and if the Congress was also on board it could have been closed. To say, as the disgustingly self-serving Cheney does, that Obama "accepted the wisdom" of the policy is also utter horseshit.

"Enhanced interrogation" was stopped by presidential order in 2008.

Finally, calling the deficit spending of the current administration the downfall of the republic is really, really rich coming from conservatives who endorsed and carried water for the Bush administration.

edutcher said...

That "pragmatism" came about 2 years ago. Since then, he's been a mess.

As for Junior, he and Dubya have never liked each other, so that's no surprise. As for what we wouldn't have if he were POTUS, Stimulus I & II, JuniorCare.

PS As usual PB&J is giving the best Kos has to offer.

The Drill SGT said...

Just keep up the rationalization for 2 more years. Barry needs your vote in 2012

bagoh20 said...

I don't think the "racist" charge has any juice left. It makes Obama look weak, when people use it now. It reinforces the "affirmative action" charge, but mostly it's just jumped the shark at this point in the U.S., and way past due. Some losers will still employ it, but some people are poorly equipped, and when you have only one weapon, you have to use it.

Hagar said...

As different as they are, I think John Adams is the former president McCain most resembles.

I think the biggest damage resulting from the Carter presidency was not his many failures, but his expansion of the Federal bureaucracy and the character of the young people who flocked in to fill the vacancies created.

And that may also turn out to be Obama's legacy.

Paul Zrimsek said...

This should cheer the Palin fans as well: further proof (if any were needed) that all the knowledge a president needs of national security policy can be acquired on the job. It can only go quicker if he or she hasn't got so much anti-knowledge to unlearn first.

Pastafarian said...

Penny wise and pound foolish, Henry. All of the development, hell, most of the tooling, was already done. We threw it away in favor of ancient F15s.

When those start dropping from the sky courtesy of China's new fighter, come and tell me how much money we saved. And as I mentioned, the actual shooting doesn't even have to start in order for this superiority to have an effect.

MayBee said...

As for Gitmo, Obama has tried to close it and it was the Democratic Congress who blocked it.
Why would that have been different with McCain?

Or are we saying Obama's election made the press cover things more fairly-- the fact that Pelosi was told about water boarding, the fact that Congress held the purse strings for Gitmo all along?

Calypso Facto said...

bago: I started responding with "Your theory will get tested by how long it takes until Herman Cain gets called an Uncle Tom", but when I referred to Google, I found out it was already too late. Nice MLK-esque idea though.

Richard Dolan said...

Ann makes it all about the narrative, as if politics were a self-enclosed loop and what mattered is how the players evolved. See how defeat strengthened the conservatives while complete victory led the liberals to self-destruct! The truth came out; just deserts were visited on victor and vanquished alike (more of those martial metaphors there - watch out) who promptly switched more than a few places; and at the mid-terms, the body politic was healed after having been administered the political equivalent of an enema.

There is a lot to be thankful for in the reality that the key security and foreign policy approaches of the Bushies have now developed a bipartisan core of support by the simple fact of their continuance under the O-team. Whether McCain could have splintered Dem opposition (which is still there, just quieter; the bipartisanship is more illusion than reality) is a moot question; no one could possibly know. But it bears noting that the Dems were united only in their anti-Bush fervor; on the substance they were always splintered (e.g., when the Patriot Act and changes to the wiretapping laws were adopted during Bush-time).

As for the rest of what happened over the last two years -- mostly, the domestic stuff -- McCain could hardly have been worse. Ann's idea that "I can picture Obama standing up to the Democratic Congress and being his own man" was baseless at the time, and has been proven delusional by events. And her picture of McCain -- weak, unpredictable, volatile, too eager to please -- never gave much credit to the inner strength that got him through some really dark times.

Ann's approach strikes me as an odd way to look at politics. It just isn't all about the narrative.

garage mahal said...

We'd probably still be hemorrhaging 700k jobs/month, the DOW would be at 4000, and we would be in a barter economy trading chickens for checkups.

AllenS said...

First of all, 90% of blacks will never change. They will continue their voting patterns. As far as them going to church, I wouldn't be surprised to find that almost all of the black ministers are no different than obama's black minister was in Chicago.

Kathleen, you nailed it. Why is it impossible for some people to admit that they made a mistake?

Pastafarian said...

franglo said: "Enhanced interrogation" was stopped by presidential order in 2008."

Thank goodness. I'd hate to think of men who saw off heads receiving swirlies, just so we might glean a little information about future attacks. I mean, actual water is poured up their nose (in carefully measured and duly noted drips). Water. Up their nose, for God's sake.

So there is that going for Althouse's vote. High five, Althouse.

Maguro said...

We'd still have the F35 and F22 fighter programs up and going. China just launched a 5th-generation fighter, we canceled ours.

No...Gates cancelled the F-22 while Bush was still in office. And the F-35 is in no way a 5th generation fighter, it's a ruinously expensive bomber with very limited air superiority capabilities.

So this one is not Obama's fault. If you want to blame someone for fucking up US air power, look at Bob Gates and Norty Schwartz. But mostly Gates.

Pastafarian said...

Maguro said: "...the F-35 is in no way a 5th generation fighter, it's a ruinously expensive bomber..."

The JSF? Joint Strike Fighter, that one? So that must be the stealth aspect. Call it a fighter, but it's really a replacement for the B52.

Um, no. It's a multirole fighter, so it will be used for ground support too, as well as more conventional fighter roles. Or it would have. Now we'll dust of F4 Phantoms from Vietnam. They'll make much better targets than the stealth F35 with its advanced electronics.

JAL said...

Give it up Professor.

Too little, too late.

If at all.

CJinPA said...

Your thinking is not especially clever, and the reason the rest of us don't indulge in convoluted arguments like yours is because we are trying to change the world, not get its attention.

Interesting. I don’t spend enough time commenting on a single particular blog to appreciate this kind of blogger/commenter relationship. I was going to call this response “over the top…don’t read her blog if you don’t like it” but there seems to be more going on here.

Pastafarian said...

It's tough love, CJ. We shit all over each other here.

In fact, I have a little streak of my own going -- every day for about 4 or 5 days, someone here has called me an idiot. One day I had one of my comments referred to as "stunningly ignorant." On another, a commenter suggested that I habitually pee on my shoes.

I'm hoping Maguro calls me a moron and keeps my streak going.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

CJ, you're reading correctly, I think. Althouse and her commenters have a very unique relationship that I've not seen in any other blogs. It's definitely deeper than a "don't read it if you don't like it" issue (for most- there are certainly some who come just to be obnoxious and criticize, but Kathleen's not one of them).

We're here to argue (well, at least discuss), and it's darn fun!

- Lyssa

Maguro said...

Pasta - The JSF designation is just a clever bit of marketing. The F-35 is by not a fighter no matter what they call it. The damn thing only carries 2 (!) air-to-air missiles. It obviously does not have the aerodynamic profile of an air superiority fighter, either.

Biggest fraud in defense procurement, IMO.

Paul Zrimsek said...

He said he'd close Guantanamo.
So did he close it? Well, uh, no.
Mmmm, mmmm, mmmm,
Barack Hussein Obama.

Jenner said...

I don't agree with the reasoning upfront for giving Obama the vote, but making lemonades out of lemons, you are correct.

I think we would still be on the path to socialism with McCain - just not as far down it as we are now. I believe the conservative movement would have emerged regardless, though again maybe not as quickly. Part of the reason we would have had problems would have been because the horrible media would not have let up on the Republicans. BUT we would have had a fighter with Palin in there to stand up to them finally and perhaps that could have tempered them a bit.

But it's a big risk you are taking to allow Obama in the White House, while gaming the outcome. Hopefully we will pull ourselves out of it as quickly, but he's done an enormous amount of damage everywhere you look. From healthcare, to debt, to race relations. His actions have been so enormous that it's overwhelming to think of all the areas he's touched in such a short time. I was naive to think it couldn't get this bad so quickly, but I'm awake now.

PaulV said...

Like many I voted for Palin in
2008. She would have stiffen McCain spine and the job killing Porkulus would not have passed and economy would have been better.

CJinPA said...

It's tough love, CJ. We shit all over each other here.

I've seen that elsewhere, Pastafarian. The commenter-on-commenter slams. The sweeping commenter-on-blogger hits are less common. They do it over at Ace of Spades a lot, but on an individual post or theme. Kathleen's hit was pretty broad.

I prize honesty. Maybe not as much as a prize thought-provoking posts. Whatever...it seems to work. We're all here.

Pastafarian said...

Maguro, I assume that those boys at Lockheed Martin know what they're doing. A new fighter program comes about once every 30 years or so, so when it does, the weapons system is expected to be a jack-of-all-trades, and this usually means it's a master of none.

It's not as fast as an F15, and it doesn't have the range; but as I understand it, they wanted to base them on carriers, and there were VSTOL variants. So it would be more fair to compare it to an F16, or even to the Harrier.

But I think we agree: We need to keep ahead of the rest of the world in military technology.

Still, you must admit, I'm a moron. Come on, I've got a streak going. Let me have it.

CJinPA said...

Well. Lyssa, I'll have to comment more then.

Assholes.

Needs work?

bagoh20 said...

Meade said...

" They told me if I failed to vote for John McCain, Guantanamo would be closed, enhanced interrogation would be banned, and the US would surrender in the Global War On Terror... and they were wrong!"

"They" were both sides on these issues, and yes, they were all wrong, so far. In the end, these are relatively small in comparison to 14 trillion and climbing. Those other issues turn out to be a skin rash on a cancer patient. Chemo is what we need, but the cancer has metastasized now. The narrative is meaningless.

Oligonicella said...

"Everything would have been worse if we'd done it your way" makes for a very weak argument, based as it is on clairvoyance.

J said...

I think he’s been through the fires of becoming president and having to make decisions and live with the consequences,” Cheney said. “I think he’s learned that what we did was far more appropriate than he ever gave us credit for while he was a candidate ... I think he’s learned from experience.”

In other words, Kid Obama's learned to follow orders--as with his extension of the BushCo taxcuts (then TARP handouts were also an indication of Obama the centrist).

Hillary's proposals, hardly perfect, were closer to authentic New Deal Democrat roots than BO's.

William said...

I would characterize Obama's Presidency thus far as unsuccessful rather than catastrophic. The left probably has more reasons for disappointment than the right with his tenure. Still, Obama inspires a sense of foreboding. I can see him doing absolutely the wrong thing in a crisis. I don't think anyone on the right would be doing high fives with Rush Limbaugh if McCain was President, but I think McCain possessed more wisdom than Obama. Well, the future is unknowable, and we'll see how it plays out......There's this much to be said for Jimmy Carter. He proved that a white southerner could become President. In like manner Obama proved that a black man could become President, and that's all for the good.

bagoh20 said...

My expectation is that unmanned aircraft are the future, and if we move expenditures there, then I'm fine with cutting off these fighters now. I have to think you could get the same effectiveness in 3 aircraft for the price of one manned one, and the "courage" and poise of commanders running unmanned fighters would be far superior. Imagine one side sending in highly valued trained pilots to die versus an unmanned squadron. I'm no expert, but that seems to be high tech asymmetrical warfare and the advantage with the unmanned.

Mick said...

And of course the "law prof" disregards that BOTH candidates McCain (born in Panama) and Obama (born of a non citizen father who was married to his mother), were NOT eligible natural born Citizens. You should be embarrassed, and you will be when the whole thing comes tumbling down.

bagoh20 said...

So we agree, that a third Bush term would be better than either Obama or McCain.

jr565 said...

lyssalovelyreadhead wrote:
I don't ultimately agree with Althouse's decision to vote for Obama, but I can see where she is coming from here. Quite honestly, President Obama has been far better and stronger on issues of foreign policy than I ever came close to expecting. I didn't expect him to be willing to allow himself to be mugged by reality, and I'm glad that I was proven wrong.

Mccain didn't have to be mugged by reality though, at least when it came to a war on terror. And how do we know that Mccain wouldn't similarly be mugged by reality and become more conservative in regards to the looming tea party movement? In other words, just as Obama had to move to the center, wouldn't Mccain have to move to the right? He's certianly not a conservatives conservative, but he also isn't a liberal either. So you wouldn't have to deal with half the damage that Obama had enacted with his godawful health insurance policies, and half the bailouts that Mccain in fact was arguing against, so would most likely have vetoed.

MadisonMan said...

Has anything reaffirmed your decision to vote for John Edwards in the 2004 primary?

(I agree that the decisions that year were atrocious)

traditionalguy said...

The F-22 was no longer stealthy since the countermeasure of tracking by its ground signature had made ended the main advantage. Rest assured the Air Force is developing another and better fighter.

bagoh20 said...

Good point, jr565. McCain is probably number 2 on the Tea Party hate list. He would be getting a schooling too, unless you buy that whole racism crap.

It would not need to be such a strong opposition to get superior results, and long term, results are what matter here. The Congress still would have moved to the right in a big way. Remember the Tea Party started under Bush.

Pastafarian said...

...And rest assured, tradguy, that Obama will spike it. But hey, he's a frugal guy. A regular tightwad.

Cedarford said...

Bob Ellison - "One thing McCain would have done right: attempt to control spending. He has been pretty good on that, and on military affairs."

No, while McCain likely WOULDN'T have spent as much as Obama, his TV camera tracked "toughness on spending" was all show.
McCain was the guy who would come on and say he was "Fighting!!!" against some earmark for a 21 million research grant some scientists were doing against some dumb citrus canker worm. Then the next day vote for 200 billion in supplemental funds for the Heroes fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and TSA Heroes.
McCain couldn't wait to rubberstamp Bush's 11 trillion unfunded mandate for prescription drugs at premium prices. Then rush out and tell seniors and Big Pharma he was "fighting for them" and just killed a 610,000 grant to some pointy heads studying cyanobacteria genomes.

Horrible choice by REpublicans in the primaries. As bad as his fellow Vietnam Hero John Kerry was for Dems.

Remember McCain was:

1. For a 3rd major war with Iran.
2. Stood proudly at the cameras for every "bipartisan" free trade deal with China since Reagan's time.
3. Amnesty for illegals.
4. Leading the charge for closing GITMO.
5. Lead the charge to call Bush's enhanced interrogation of 3 terrorists as "True Torture" and forced Bush to ban it (on his unlimited moral authority as an endless milker of his POW status).
6. Admitted he didn't "get much of the economic thing the banks he voted to deregualte had done".
7. His solution on the housing crisis was we needed to give 300 billion to distressed mansion owners from non-mansion owners to "stabilize the market". Government equity? No, McCain explained "that would be government intrusion into the lives of homeowners if we made government part owners of homes". His idea was to just give the money to mansion owners, even illegals, until what they owed in a mortgage was affordable based on their income.

McCain was an idiot. A dimbulb frequently out of control on matters. A guaranteed war-hungry, bumbling disaster as President. Who would backstab Republicans in his usual treachery to please Dems and the NY Times and MSM TV media. With further destruction of the conservative movement as McCain had his "dear friend" Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi's back and gave her cover.

Obama at least had potential for a certain competency in office. And if he failed, unlike if McCain had been in the White House - the Dems
would own it and Republicans would resurge.

Original Mike said...

"Has anything reaffirmed your decision to vote for John Edwards in the 2004 primary?"

I don't remember this. Say it's not so!

Kirk Parker said...

Lyssa,

"President Obama has been far better and stronger on issues of foreign policy than I ever came close to expecting."

You have got to kidding! "Not as bad as I feared"? Sure, same here. But to actually use the positive words "better" and "stronger"? GMAB. Remember how he dissed Britain? Snubbed India? Backed out of the European missile defense? Etc etc etc...

Robert Cook said...

"However: The idea that we're in better shape now because we swung the political pendulum so far to the left that it's ready to swing back to the right...that's a bridge too far."

The idea that we swung to the left at all or that Obama was ever anything more than a noncommittal centrist (now running to the right) is idiotic.

bagoh20 said...

C4, In the presence of the Tea Party which would still be here at some level, I just don't see how Obama is better than even your worse case McCain, which is just a caricature anyway.

Calypso Facto said...

I bet Russ Feingold wishes McCain had been elected, too.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Yes, jr565, I believe that I addressed the issues you stated in response to my comment, in the very same comment from which you quoted.

- Lyssa

Robert Cook said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AllenS said...

If McCain was president, he would also be loosing weight. He'd be scared shitless daily, afraid of VP Palin kicking the shit out of him, if he didn't embrace everything Tea Party.

Robert Cook said...

It's no wonder Cheney would praise Obama...one war criminal welcoming another to the fraternity.

bagoh20 said...

"Has anything reaffirmed your decision to vote for John Edwards in the 2004 primary?"

That hair is still a thing to Behold .

lyssalovelyredhead said...

You have got to kidding! "Not as bad as I feared"? Sure, same here. But to actually use the positive words "better" and "stronger"? GMAB. Remember how he dissed Britain? Snubbed India?

Read my message to jr565; it's ditto for you, Kirk Parker. Why are people responding to my post as if I only wrote the first paragraph? Jeeze.

- Lyssa

Jenner said...

This reasoning also neglects the impact Palin would have had. Biden, no impact, doesn't figure into the equation. But Palin - some people only voted for McCain because Palin was on the ticket. Seeing what impact she's had in the last two years, her influence as VP would be formidable.

Hoosier Daddy said...

I can see him doing absolutely the wrong thing in a crisis.

Since he hasn't actually had a 'crisis', its up in the air. The closest thing to a 'crisis' was the BP oil spill and in terms of handling it, well we saw how that went and it wasn't as if hundreds or thousands of lives were at stake.

Embassy takeover? Three thousand Americans incinerated by terrorists? Cat 5 hurricane slamming the coast? China planting nuclear missles in Venezuela? Unlike his predecessors, to date Obama hasn't actually faced a testing crisis and hopefully he won't have to.

Robert Cook said...

"Although I despise all that Obama and the far Left stands for...."

These two things are not alike.

Hoosier Daddy said...

The idea that we swung to the left at all or that Obama was ever anything more than a noncommittal centrist (now running to the right) is idiotic.

A perfectly reasonable view when sitting to the left of Lenin.

Kansas Scout said...

You voted for Obama!!!???
McCain was not perfect but he would not have done all the crap Obama did. You just lost credibility with me. Too clever by half.

Browndog said...

Wierd.

I clicked on Althouse and got redirected to Glenn Beck.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Robert, Obama is, at heart, a leftist. If he was able to work his will, universal health care would be a reality, pre-JFK marginal tax rates would be re-instituted, cap and trade a done deal and the US military would be reduced to a brigade of MPs with Barney Fife rules of engagement. Why do I know this? Because he has said so on numerous occasions.

Why then hasn't this happened? Take note young padwan. Fortunately for the rest of us, our Founding Fathers instituted this brilliant concept of checks and balances and a legislative system that doesn't let one person work its will. Too bad so many on the left either don't understand this or simply despise it.

J said...

pre-JFK marginal tax rates would be re-instituted

You mean, like......Eisenhower-GOP rates? Sod-daddy.

Obama's suggestions on MTR are about equal to Clinton-era policies (ie...demopublican) . Even Reagan until '86 or so kept top marginal rate at 50% or so. Teabuggers not only know little or nothing about economics-- they think history started like 2001 or so.

MadisonMan said...

I don't remember this. Say it's not so!

Link.

garage mahal said...

Obama is like Bush, on all the controversial and/or illegal stuff like war and torture. All the rest he is just like Lenin!

MadisonMan said...

You just lost credibility with me. Too clever by half.

You forgot to add: You, a Law Professor.

Hoosier Daddy said...

You mean, like......Eisenhower-GOP rates? Sod-daddy.

J, if you read my post I said pre-Kennedy, pre- being the operative prefix meaning before Kennedy. Who was before Kennedy? Oh yes it was Ike.

I'm sorry, did you have a point to make?

J said...

Bailouts, Leninist?
Nyet. Even bolsheviks would not hand out stipends to financiers.
Or extend Bush-era tax slashes. Or create a corporate health-care deal which mostly benefits Pharma, insurance, and hospital contractors.

Obama's a centrist. But he's a ...black centrist. Ergo, the typical WASP tea-bugger from Podunkville doesn't care for him , even when he's working alongside the GOP.

bgates said...

seriously picture what the political discourse would be if the Republicans had held onto power

It would have consisted of Democrats virulently condemning everything Republicans did or said or were.

If McCain had won, we would not have experienced the revitalization of the conservative movement

You're justifying your vote based on conservative movements created or saved? Horseshit.

J said...

Yeah, the point being something called History, Sod-daddy: pre-JFK was Ike and GOP, and much higher rates (actually like 90% on upper brackets) than the 40% of Clinton/Obama. For that matter Nixon, and Reagan until '86 rates were higher-- 50-60%.

Those mutha-f-ing tax and spend republicans.

Original Mike said...

"Obama's a centrist. But he's a ...black centrist. Ergo, the typical WASP tea-bugger from Podunkville doesn't care for him , even when he's working alongside the GOP."

Who invited the bigot?

Hoosier Daddy said...

Yeah, the point being something called History, Sod-daddy: pre-JFK was Ike and GOP, and much higher rates

Point taken. Has nothing whatsoever to do with my post other than you confirmed what I said (tax rates were high pre-JFK) but thanks for stopping by. Sorry I don't have any lovely parting gifts for you though.

Phil 3:14 said...

Its late to revisit votes and rationale for 2008. (but I'll do it anyway!)

I saw Barack Obama as:
-an inexperienced legislator. That manifested with BO's send me whatever, and we'll call it healthcare reform approach to PPACA (not to mention stimulus)
-his temperament and tendencies were liberal and for more government. Definitely seen that come to fruition
-little business experience and not likely to have a good relationship with business. Yup
-he would need to raise taxes and given his other tendencies find it very difficult if not impossible to reduce spending. Well we have seen "revenue enhancements" though no overt tax increases....so far
-his foreign policy is "I'm no Bush". I do think he's had a good dose of realism delivered. We should not under estimate the effect of keeping Gates. So he didn't keep that promise...and I'm glad.
-he's new, he's different, he's "Hope and Change". And like a new car that you initially protect and cherish so diligently, once it has a few dents in it and some stains on the carpet and trash in the back you're back to looking at it as a means to get from "here" to "there". I never wanted to go to his "there" and I don't feel any closer to mine.

PaulV said...

J, a bigot losing it. How he hates the Obama tax cuts. Yes, the Rs loved their country and gave BHO, Jr., a chance to bail out his presidency. Unlike the dems & CNN which engages in rhetoric of hate. Too bad the recovery was delayed so that dem partisans could get money from Porkulus. So much debt and money wasted.
PorkBusters started when W was POTUS.

J said...

Heh heh. You lost again HD.

I love the smell of pissed-off A-house regs in the AM. It smells like...victory.

Ciao

Original Mike said...

Edwards in '04. Obama in '08.

If it were me, I'd be overhauling my selection criteria.

J said...

Pork? You mean like Defense pork, the biggest expenditure in the Fed budget, PaulTard (yes, larger slice than entitlements)? the GOP'ers favorite bureaucracy is DoD.

We'll soon see how much pork the TP/GOP will cut . I wager they'll just switcheroo--take billionsh from education/social programs and put it in drones, jets, missiles, supercarriers, etc. The USS Jeeezusss.

Oso Negro said...

The Professor should support Palin vs. Obama in 2012 by these lights. No eastern media establishment Republican. No Bush Administration retread. No cornpone social conservative from Arkansas. Palin vs Obama. If Palin wins, the country is improved by the hard core left stroking out. If Obama wins, the country is improved by the continued advance of the Tea Party. There is also, of course, the entertainment value!!

Cedarford said...

Calypso Facto said...
I bet Russ Feingold wishes McCain had been elected, too
=======================
Yep. Had McCain been elected and given cover to Democrats like his "dear friends" Harry Reid and Nacy Pelosi, the Dems would have kept control of the House and their supermajority in the Senate. Russ would have kept his seat and his good friend John would have all but hugged Russ and defended his great character and vision as co-author of McCain-Feingold.
As was, the rout wasn't as bad as it could have been as Reps fielded unfit candidates in Delaware and Nevada and lost elections they should have won.

*********************
Jenner said...
This reasoning also neglects the impact Palin would have had. Biden, no impact, doesn't figure into the equation. But Palin - some people only voted for McCain because Palin was on the ticket. Seeing what impact she's had in the last two years, her influence as VP would be formidable.


1. The political calculus is not that Palin was a vote-getter, but someone who cost McCain 1.8 independent voters for any rural, conservative sort that Palin attracted.
2. The "impact" of Palin would have been up to McCain, his people, and Cindy McCain to decide on. The VP is essentially, "duties as assigned by the President". But generally, VPs are not allowed, ever, to steal the spotlight from the Prez. Whatever influence "The Goddess of the Religious Right" Palin was allowed was at McCains prerogative.
3. VPs are as big or as little in the Administration as the President and his inner circle wants them to be. Palin would not have been "inner circle", but like Spiro Agnew, Quayle, or Clinton sending Gore off on media splashy escapades of no consequence while the real decisions were made with Gore nowhere near the action. Palin tried "going rogue", McCain would have had a team of NY Times reporters trot out on her the next day with little or no preptime for her, saying Palin would explain the Chinese-US currency matter the Administration was working on and the state of Central and Latin American affairs. Making her look uniformed and ignorant again until properly marginalized, she played ball and Agnewesque - stuck to her role as cheerleader. Of course, Palin could take it or quit, or accept alternate work attending all the funerals the McCains wanted to send her to of various Ecuadorean retired undersecretaries, old dead Senators, etc.
4. An absolute truism in the Republican Party was that if you crossed McCain, he would sabotage you any way, any chance he got. Even if he had to pay a Republican back working with Democrats to get his revenge. Palin of course could quit..wouldn't be the 1st time she had done that.

Of course, we will never know. No way will McCain get a dollar if he decides to run again, no way Palin will run as VP again.

Maguro said...

Maguro, I assume that those boys at Lockheed Martin know what they're doing.

Yes, the engineers at L-M are fist class, no doubt. And it's really not their fault, we'd be having the same problems if Boeing had won the contract.

It boils down to the way that the DoD wrote the requirement. They wanted industry to make them a jet that does literally every mission - fixed-base air superiority and close air support, interdiction, carrier defense and naval strike, bare-base ops with short takeoff vertical landing capability. And it had to be cheap. And exportable. And so on. They asked for the defense equivalent of the ultimate household product - the delicious dessert topping that's also a durable floor wax.

Well, it's all just too much for industry to deliver in one airframe. You can only cram so many requirements in one jet and still have the overall package be anything other than mediocre. The need for STOVL in particular really limited what the engineers could do to optimize the jet for the air superiority mission. And now, they may not even be able to execute the STOVL variant because STOVL is just so damn hard to do. The program is just a mess. Terrible stuff.

Anyway, sorry for the digression. Just wanted to note that this is not Obama's fault. He and his Chicago buddies don't know an F-35 from a P-38. It's really on Gates. He bungled the whole fighter recaptalization effort about as badly as possible.

Phil 3:14 said...

J;
Obama's a centrist. But he's a ...black centrist. Ergo, the typical WASP tea-bugger from Podunkville doesn't care for him , even when he's working alongside the GOP.

That horse is DEAD!

Hoosier Daddy said...

Pork? You mean like Defense pork, the biggest expenditure in the Fed budget, PaulTard (yes, larger slice than entitlements)?

I hate to bring, you know, facts to the table but defense spending is not the largest expenditure, its Medicare and Medicaid, followed by Social Security with defense a distant third.

Federal Budget 2011

Dept. of HHS - 900,853,000

Social Security Admin. 791,681,000

Dept. of Defense - 718,795,000

Linky

Jenner said...

Cedarford,

I disagree that Palin lost votes for McCain. I will take a look at facts if you have them though that suggest otherwise.

I don't disagree with most of the rest of your post about Palin, if she were just any old politician. What we have seen is that she is not traditional, and that I think would make all the difference.

Even during the campaign, when there was supposedly a lot of tension, she didn't appear to be a shrinking violet. I also think that she and the old man McCain have a special relationship that we are not used to seeing between politicians. I think she would have won him over on a few things-or given him the backbone he needed on some others.

Jim Howard said...

"But Palin - some people only voted for McCain because Palin was on the ticket"

Good point. IIRC McCain's first choice was Lieberman, who is pretty far left on domestic issues. It's true that Lieberman is that very rare thing, an honest Democrat who doesn't hate America, but still, he's a Democrat.

Had McCain gone with a RINO or outright Democrat VP I certainly would have voted Libertarian.

Big Mike said...

If McCain had won, we would not have experienced the revitalization of the conservative movement that had such a tremendous effect on the 2010 elections and is shaping the next presidential election.

I beg to disagree, Professor, and I suspect that the root cause of your problem is trying to capture both fiscal conservatism and social conservatism under a single umbrella. The rise of the Tea Party is the rise of fiscal conservatism in response to a runaway liberal Congress. IMAO this would have happened no matter which candidate was president.

Hoosier Daddy said...

I disagree that Palin lost votes for McCain. I will take a look at facts if you have them though that suggest otherwise.

McCain lost votes for McCain. Of the whole slate of GOP candidates, McCain was by far the least appealing. If Palin did anything it was actually closing the loss gap.

MadisonMan said...

I disagree that Palin lost votes for McCain.

Someone has posted a link in the past. It shows McCain's poll numbers, with Palin "events" superimposed. Each Palin event was followed by a drop in McCain poll numbers.

Correlation != Causation, but it is persuasive.

Maguro said...

As I recall, the only time McCain ever led in the polls was immediately after selecting Palin as VP.

Does anyone really think McCain would've won if he'd picked Tim Pawlenty or somebody? Seriously...

chickelit said...

@Hoosier:

It would appear that commenter "J" likes to butter up his guns.

Thanks for the linky.

The Crack Emcee said...

I hear you. I'm not saying I agree with you (too many variables) but I hear you. This bothers me, though:

McCain would have gone along with a lot of things, and there would be continuing partisan criticism about the wars. Everything having to do with national security would be pinned on McCain and presented in the worst possible light, for the aggrandizement of the Democratic Party.

What bothers me about it? It points out, and reminds me, how gullible everyone is. All those awful, evil policies have become nothing now that Obama is in.

I can still remember hearing my friends tell me how terrible those policies were and thinking I was crazy, losing respect for me, because I was outnumbered by their outnumbered asses. Now we don't/can't speak because it's obvious not only that I was right but that they abused my friendship and aren't man or woman enough to say they were wrong and they're sorry. Those friendships mattered to me. many were people I worked with. People I loved. I'm sure it even played a role in my marriage crumbling. It's a terrible thing when anyone is wronged.

I felt that way on election night as well.

Like I said, I hear you. I'm not saying I agree with you, but I hear you.

chickelit said...

MadisonMan said...

Someone has posted a link in the past. It shows McCain's poll numbers, with Palin "events" superimposed. Each Palin event was followed by a drop in McCain poll numbers.

Please provide provenance for that prior post for perusal.

Thank You

Hoosier Daddy said...

@Hoosier:

It would appear that commenter "J" likes to butter up his guns.


Well in fairness, it is a common theme that we spend more on defense than anything else so he can't be faulted for parroting the usual line. Whether or not he acknowledges his error or just is a parrot remains to be seen.

Although I didn't note it, if you click on the Dept. of Education link at the GPO, you'll see that the Fed education budget more than doubled from 2000 to 2011. Whether we will see any tangible benefit from that $70 billion also remains to be seen.

MadisonMan said...

This is an interesting site that splits predicted poll numbers into pre- and post-Palin partitions.

It's not the website I recall, but I found it and thought it interesting :)

prairie wind said...

Haven't read any of the comments yet but assume I won't be the only one giving credit where credit is due.

The absolute best thing Obama has done is to--nearly single-handedly--build momentum for the Tea Party. Everything he has done/touched/said has encouraged the Partiers, has added to their numbers, and has given them more reason to stand up to be heard.

McCain would have done the same, but not nearly so quickly.

Still not sure I like your gamble, though. We are stuck with the healthcare mess and with that $14 trillion debt, after all.

MadisonMan said...

I think this article contains the graph I'm remembering.

Link.

The Crack Emcee said...

Shouting Thomas,

The Obama presidency is the expression of black assimilation. The long range outcome will favor conservatism. Being in office is forcing Obama to become more conservative. Black are observing this.

Like all groups, blacks were alienated and radical when they were outside the walls of power. Now that they are inside, the political positions of blacks are already moderating.

Remember, blacks are by far the most religious and church going group. Over the long run, this moderation will eat away at the one block vote that Democrats are convinced they will own forever.


All true. I see and hear it with every conversation I have with my black friends. They're still proud of Obama but dislike his policies. They're asking me to explain the Tea Party to them. They're covering their bullshit by saying "I'm not as Liberal as you think,..." They're changing, but without wanting to admit it.

Good observation, ST.

In regards to my last comment, now that I think about it, I am hearing from *some* of my old white friends. Not the hardcore Libs, but some.

mccullough said...

McCain voted against Medicare Part D and against the Bush tax cuts. Both of these were fiscally responsible decisions that would not have increased the debt. (Unfortunately, as Cedarford pointed out, McCain was pretty willing to empty the Treasury to bring freedom to the four corners of the earth. Fortunately, a Democrat Congress would have stopped him).

If healthcare is not repealed, and it probably won't be, then it won't matter if Congress and the President are "conservative" or "liberal." The deficits will be so bad, that there will be no choices at that point as to what to cut and how much to raise taxes. There will be no room for discretion as to what needs to be done. (This will carry over to the state level with Obamacare's expansion of Medicaid, which will leave the states with no choices either).

So, with the 2008 election, Obama will takes his place as the third in the troika of big-government liberalism of FDR (Social Security) LBJ (Medicaid and Medicare), and Obama (Obamacare).

Here are your waters and your watering place. Drink and be whole again beyond confusion.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Had McCain gone with a RINO or outright Democrat VP I certainly would have voted Libertarian.

Me, too. I also was considering voting Liberatarian if he selected Huckabee. And I was decidedly not a fan of the Liberatarian candidate.

(Although, to be fair, I live in a state that was clearly red- I probably would have voted for McCain regardless if I'd been in a purple state.)

- Lyssa

Maguro said...

MM, as far as I can see, the graphs simply show that the public's attitudes towards Palin and McCain were strongly correlated.

The Crack Emcee said...

bagoh20,

The election of Obama, can release thoughtful Blacks from the automatic outside position to decide policy issues based on the issue rather than how it fits with the "Black Community". I hope it makes more of them feel that they are now part of the whole rather than fighting it.

I was telling a friend this just two nights ago. Still not sure if he - or anyone else - is buying it (I don't see it) but the potential is there if someone can articulate it right.

chickelit said...

@MadisonMan

She had a mitigating effect. Your linked article supports this, I think.

PaulV said...

Madman
Those links show palin bump. Have you forgot what happened when McCain suspended his campaign. Financial crisis and media letting BHO, Jr., pose as enonomic expert (which we now know nhe is not) worked. McCain should have let Palin be Palin instead of letting his advisors undercut her

The Crack Emcee said...

kathleen,

Is it really that important to you to be so clever all the time? Nothing else seems to motivate you. Subtlety might be nice for its own sake, but it gets nothing done. You treat your thinking process like a delicate piece of china to be displayed in the curio cabinet that is your blog. It's cute, but not as cute as you seem to think. Your thinking is not especially clever, and the reason the rest of us don't indulge in convoluted arguments like yours is because we are trying to change the world, not get its attention.

Ann, if you don't listen to this piece of advice, you're mad. I've said some variation on this since I've been here. You're a great blogger - brilliant, even - but, ultimately, the difference between you and I is I'm not trying to be clever - and I actually care about something - and it shows.

You once said you "loved" me. I love you, too. But it's you (and now Meade) who test it. Smiling as you do so just makes it look malicious.

The Crack Emcee said...

Lyssa,

As MayBee indicated, whoever runs against President Obama will be the worst kind of racist. If he loses (or even has an uphill battle), it will be a sure sign of America's continued racism and refusal to give a black man a chance. If he actually loses, I predict that it will be quite horrible indeed, and that that animosity will last for decades. I wish that it were different, but I don't count this one as a win, by any stretch.

I hate to say it, but I also think you and MayBee are right.

MadisonMan said...

Have you forgot what happened when McCain suspended his campaign.

No. That was a big reason I didn't vote for him.

Some day there will be two good choices. Wouldn't that be great. Even one good choice is rare these days.

1992 and 1996 were pretty good choices, IMO. Either candidate would have competently run the Executive Branch.

The Crack Emcee said...

bagoh20,

I don't think the "racist" charge has any juice left. It makes Obama look weak, when people use it now. It reinforces the "affirmative action" charge, but mostly it's just jumped the shark at this point in the U.S., and way past due. Some losers will still employ it, but some people are poorly equipped, and when you have only one weapon, you have to use it.

And use it they will. The fact it doesn't work just means blacks and Liberals will see resistance -not unexpected resistance - so it's a confrontation waiting to happen.

Original Mike said...

"Some day there will be two good choices."

I think MM's on the sauce.

The Crack Emcee said...

Pasta,

All of the development, hell, most of the tooling, was already done. We threw it away in favor of ancient F15s.

When those start dropping from the sky courtesy of China's new fighter, come and tell me how much money we saved. And as I mentioned, the actual shooting doesn't even have to start in order for this superiority to have an effect.


I wish Americans would stop worrying about the ChiComs. Our only problem there is self-made - our economy. Their new fighter ain't all that and neither are they. It's our loss of mojo that hamstrings us. We've demoralized our men. made them ride in the back of the bus. No nation can be successful that way.

China's no threat to us. We're our own worst enemy. I've been to China. A friend of mine just got back. They're almost a third world country. Stop worrying about them and focus on us:

We're the ones who need help now - from our own people.

The Crack Emcee said...

Richard Dolan,

Ann's picture of McCain -- weak, unpredictable, volatile, too eager to please -- never gave much credit to the inner strength that got him through some really dark times.

The man was done wrong, and I'm proud to have recognized it when it mattered. He was the better man, by far. If anything, we have discovered a weakness in our system of electing presidents which may need some correcting - namely, the role of the press.

The Crack Emcee said...

AllenS,

Why is it impossible for some people to admit that they made a mistake?

They have to be worn down. (I just celebrated a win for skeptics yesterday.) it's called "snapping" but they can't have anywhere left to run for it to work.

And that requires The Macho Response.

The Crack Emcee said...

CJinPA,

Interesting. I don’t spend enough time commenting on a single particular blog to appreciate this kind of blogger/commenter relationship. I was going to call this response “over the top…don’t read her blog if you don’t like it” but there seems to be more going on here.

Yea, we're a pretty tight group - thanks to Ann.

The Crack Emcee said...

CJinPA,

Assholes.

Needs work?


You've got the attitude right; now you just need to work on style.

The Crack Emcee said...

bagoh20,

So we agree, that a third Bush term would be better than either Obama or McCain.

Yes!

Yr. Fthfl. Svnt. said...

So two years after voting for this disaster of a president, you have finally found a way to rationalize having done so.

Cedarford said...

Maguro said...
As I recall, the only time McCain ever led in the polls was immediately after selecting Palin as VP.

Does anyone really think McCain would've won if he'd picked Tim Pawlenty or somebody? Seriously...

================
Palin was good for a novelty "Convention Bump", just like Ferraro was for Mondale...but that was as lasting as Ferraros "bump" as voters looked at both ladies.
Madison Man saw the same correlation I did. As Palin got further beloved and enraptured the Evangelicals - McCain dropped after each major Palin "moment" as independents deserted him. Even when Goddess Sarah was vibrant and pithy at rallies she sort of spotlighted McCain as old, incoherent.

Would McCain have won with another candidate? I think if he had named Romney as VP and made Romney pointman to fix the economy - desperate voters might have gone that way.

1. Not that Mitt would have signed on to what people saw as a dismal McCain candidacy.
2. And if McCain-Romney had won, full blame for the trillions in banks & corporate welfare, mass joblessness due to free trade with China McCain was an architect of would have been square on Republicans.
And further McCain misadventures would have meant endless McCain "deals" with Pelosi and Reid, that would have finished off the Republican Party.

No, better McCain lost. Dems own the problems and lost their "enemy rights", "great affordable healthcare for all", and "tough on the fatcat rich of Wall Street" allure. They also insisted if we only had a black Messiah in office all our problems would go away and the world would love us/ To find out the problems persist, the world doesn't bow to a morally superior black man in charge, and The One is doing 90% of what Bush finally decided he had to do in the Presidency.

AllenS said...

Dems own the problems

No they don't. America owns the problems they created. You'll never hear anybody from the major news bureaus, major newspapers or any tv shows blame anything on the Dems.

The Crack Emcee said...

Re: China.

Terrye said...

Oh please. I am so tired of hearing people explain away their vote for Obama by saying we would not have the Tea Party or whatever. For one thing, I doubt that, for another it is like saying we should be happy the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor because we got a new Navy out of it.

I mean come on.

Kirk Parker said...

Lyssa,

I did read your whole comment, that's why I said I agreed with your "not as bad as feared" conclusion. I merely meant to object to your use of "better" and "stronger" in place of the more accurate "not quite as lame" and "less pathetic".

Maybe I just woke up on the argumentative side of the bed this morning; if so, sorry... :-/

The Crack Emcee said...

Re: China.

Jenner said...

MM,

Thanks for the info. At the first link, a big dip is shown post-Palin, but that is then followed by a big jump, so I don't know how that would show Palin brought the campaign down. At the second link, the graphs show Palin and McCain dropping at the same time ("eerie")(which also supposedly correlates with the economic situation). It doesn't seem strange to me that candidates on the same ticket would follow a similar path (but maybe this isn't normal?). Obama and Biden seem to follow the same general pattern of being similar to each other too, though not as closely.

Regardless, my point was that had she been VP, there would have been an interesting shakeup at the White House. Good or bad, she would have had a substantial effect on where we would be today.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Althouse, That's quite a web you're weaving. However, your vote didn't elect Obama. He would have won without you. Just think, you could have voted for McCain and still enjoyed any perceived upside of an Obama victory. That's a win-win as far as I'm concerned. And just think about all the time and energy you'd save trying to think this stuff up!

Beldar said...

"I'm not saying there wasn't a down side." Oh, that's really rich. That belongs right up there with "Other than that, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"

Cedarford said...

Terrye said...
Oh please. I am so tired of hearing people explain away their vote for Obama by saying we would not have the Tea Party or whatever. For one thing, I doubt that, for another it is like saying we should be happy the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor because we got a new Navy out of it
==========
That actually worked out well for us, the matter of "TELL IT TO THE SACRED VICTIM FAMILIES OF THE USS ARIZONA!!!" aside. And 200,000 others.
It forced us ito a war that we would have been drawn into eventually, with higher casualties than we ended up taking, and ending with the Soviet Empire stretching from Spain to Korea.

McCain would have worked night and day to appease Democrats and his "special friends in Israel and the NY Times" - by giving them 90% of what they wanted.

The difference between McCain and Obama?

1. A modified Obamacare.
2. Same bailouts made by Obama for wealthy Jewish and WASP Wallstreeters and California mansion-owners, but pinned soley on Republicans as "Party of the Rich".
3. Unlike Obama, McCain would have shut down GITMO and Amnestied the Illegals as "matters of personal McCain honor".
4. Plus, a 3rd major war. With Iran. As McCains "best pal" Sen Joe Lieberman (IND-Tel Aviv) requested.

somefeller said...

Three predictions for Election Day 2012:

1. Althouse will vote for Barack Obama (absentee or early voting counts for Election Day 2012).

2. Barack Obama will win re-election.

3. The comments section on Althouse that day and in the days immediately following shall be filled with serious comedy gold.

Conservatives 4 Better Dental Hygiene said...

There ain't nothin' sharp about your conservative politics, Lady.

JAL said...

@ CJinPA but there seems to be more going on here

Yup. There is.

Hey -- maybe a new line for the Prof --
"there seems to be more going on here"

The Crack Emcee said...

JAL,

Hey -- maybe a new line for the Prof --
"there seems to be more going on here"


Or "This is personal" (it does get that way sometimes,...)

G Joubert said...

Me, truly sorry, but I'm not buying it. Too convoluted by half. Occam's Razor says a quintessential case of white guilt.

MadisonMan said...

Three predictions for Election Day 2012:

Who's running?

That should be your first prediction. The others might follow more logically.

Terrye said...

Cedarford:

I don't think McCain would have worked night and day to appease the Democrats and if you would rather see one in the White House, why do you care anyway?

McCain never supported ear marks, he is a free marketer, he is pro life and he did not support the trillion dollar stimulus or Obamacare, that right there is a couple of trillion reasons why he would have been a better president.

Terrye said...

I think the idea that unless and until we can get a 100% total and complete conservative in the White House then we are better off with big spending Democrats is just insane. Crazy. Nuts. And Stupid.

Right now, we are hoping that Congress can cut spending back to 2008 levels. That is seen as a huge improvement. Think about that.

dick said...

MM and Ann,
You both pointed out that when McCain stopped his campaign to be involved in the financial crisis resolution that that was when he lost you. It seems to me that his was the right decision. The point is that whoever was elected president, and it would be one of the two of them, the major problem they would face was the financial crisis. I would far rather the president was involved in analyzing the financial crisis and the approach that the legislature would take and the enforcement that would be required than for the president to wing it, which is what we ended up with thanks to your votes people who voted like you. It just seems that it would be better for the president to be involved than for us to listen to some more photo-ops, which is what the debates ended up being. Actually it was the choice that McCain made that made my final decision solid.

The Crack Emcee said...

dick,

You both pointed out that when McCain stopped his campaign to be involved in the financial crisis resolution that that was when he lost you. Actually it was the choice that McCain made that made my final decision solid.

While there was no way I was voting for anybody associated with either Saul Alinsky or (!) Bill Ayers, I, too, have always found the reaction to Mac's decision to be bizarre. I mean, either we had a crisis or we didn't. I thought a responsible adult (or patriot) saying "Forget kissing babies, we've got work to do!" was impressive, but, of course, the electorate wanted an American Idol contest - that's not a dig at Ann but just how I saw it - and anybody that treated governing like it was important was disqualified.

Sanjaya won.

BAS said...

You can use such logic for anything. Then you should have voted for Gore because for the next eight years we had to hear how stupid Bush was and how clever Al Gore was.

Richard Fagin said...

Prof. Althouse, your arguments are persuasive and you backed them up with evidence of your judgment prior to events takinkg place. The one exception I take to your post is summed up in your statement that, "[t]he Democrats did a lot more damage than I thought possible."

I think the extent of the damage done by the Democrats was as foreseeable as the benefits you predicted for the election of President Obama. In my opinion, the damage done outweighs the benefits, and by a wide margin. Even if McCain would have gone along with some of what the Congress came up with in 2009-2010, the worst of it would likely have been avoided. What good is it if the President finally takes certain national security issues seriously when he and his fellow Democrats have come close to putting the country in a financial hole from which it may well be impossible to emerge?

amba said...

think about all the angst there would be right now over the lost opportunity to experience the brilliant hope that was Barack Obama. Instead of the wistful imaginings of the glories of Obama administration that could have been, we have the reality.

Now THAT is a good point.

Famous Original Mike said...

We needed Pontius Pilate to have Jesus sort of thing?