« Eric Martin: Safeguarding Female Sexuality, One Vagina at a Time | Main | Sotomayor: The Record »

May 26, 2009

Comments

"While there is entirely too much deference to the opinions of military figures in this nation, when it comes to sussing out counterinsurgency doctrine, I'll take Petraeus' analysis over Dick Cheney's any day."

Oh come on, give these commanders more credit than that -- hell, I'd take keyboard cat's analysis over Cheney's!

Dangerous argument for the right position. Sitting generals can't (and shouldn't) take a policy position independent of the administration.

Sitting generals can't (and shouldn't) take a policy position independent of the administration.

Which made Bush's appeal to "listening to the generals" so ridiculous. Especially because he fired or undercut each general that in any way disagreed with the wisdom of his preferred course of action.

But if the GOP wants to treat Petraeus like he walks on water, and that the generals deserve deference on military matters, then they should reap the whirlwind.

then they should reap the whirlwind.

they like the whirlwind. it keeps people from seeing clearly.

This is why (some) blogs are essential. Newspapers may report the news, but reporters often do a poor job of making sense of it. We get better analysis of statements and facts in forums like Obsidian Wings . . .


Keep it up, Eric.

While I personally would be much more pleased if Gen. Petraeus had said something more along the lines of:

"I have listened to Former Vice President Cheney's opinions as to the value of closing our prison at Guantanamo Bay, and have come to the conclusion that this man is a disgrace to this nation, and should shut the fnck up. Permanently."

the General's comments are, well, just what one would expect: reasoned, simple and intelligent. No wonder the pro-torture crowd is likely to go ballistic! I wonder how long it will take for some rightwing blog or talking-head to start dumping on Gen. Petraeus (their Hero) as an America-hating, terrorist-enabling wuss? (if RedState hasn't, already.

Fncking Dick Cheney. May he be remembered as the sucking chest wound of our national political life.

I'm confused, I thought Petraeus was the guy who tried to sell us on the surge and would say anything to further his career.

I'm confused, I thought Petraeus was the guy who tried to sell us on the surge and would say anything to further his career.

Yeah, but since the GOP annointed him The Second Coming, his statements really undermine their efforts to attack Obama over torture/closing Gitmo.

Petraeus is who he is, but in this instance, it helps Obama considerably. Another GOP boomerang.

"Petraeus is who he is, but in this instance, it helps Obama considerably."

I've got no dog in this fight other than to say that you can't have it both ways, Eric. It's got far too much baggage to make an effective boomerang. You can't have Petraeus willing to say anything to suck up to power, and then have his opinion matter.

You can't have it the other way, either. Symmetry!

But I can, and here's why:

Most Americans do not view Petraues as willing to say anything to suck up to power. They view him as the Warrior Poet who won the war in Iraq.

His approval ratings are very high, and generally speaking, Americans tend to like a man in uniform.

Thus, what he says carries weight with most Americans. Especially with those national security minded fence sitters that might be swayed by some Cheney/GOP scaremongering.

It won't effect Obama's base, or the Cheney hardcore 30%, but it will matter with much of the rest.

"Most Americans do not view Petraues as willing to say anything to suck up to power. They view him as the Warrior Poet who won the war in Iraq."

Point taken. Most Americans will surely have a stick with which to beat Republicans.

My "You can't have it the other way" comment was intended to convey that Republicans cannot either have it that Petraeus was the purveyor of all that is true and good while working for Bush, but is now simply sucking up to power and should be ignored.

Side comment: "Warrior Poet" may be a little exaggerated, no?

And, nit:

Cheney 30% plus Obama's base (I'm guessing you're going to want to nail that at 30% or larger) equals 60% of the voting public.

Which leaves 40% or less to stand in for "Most Americans".

NTIM;JS.

/nit

""Warrior Poet" may be a little exaggerated, no?"

Sure, but the real-time hagiography was a little exaggerated as well.

"And, nit"

I know, I saw the math after I posted it and figured there was some punishment coming my way, but you get the jist.

WAY OT:

Radio Free Europe?

So, so wrong.

It was my understanding there would be no math, Eric.

Not, again, That It Matters, really.

"It was my understanding there would be no math"

Ha.

Petraeus could be a lying suckup on matters that concern his immediate job responsibilities when defending his performance or securing his budget, and a truth-teller on other occasions or when something really, really bugs him. There are no Empodoclean Cretans in the real world.

In pointing out this logical flaw in Slarti's argument, I express no opinion as to when, or whether, Petraeus told the truth. This offer void where prohibited.

Oh, granted. Best of all would be if Petraeus lied when he said stuff I disagreed with, and told the truth the rest of the time. I pick that.

Some settling of contents may occur during shipment.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad