The Atlantic - Latest Comments in Not good...

Re: Not good...

trashcanjack — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 22:26:13 -0000

TNC,

You might remember that Sully got you to go along with his claim that Palin would withdraw within days a la Eagleton. Turns out she has given her side an 8 point bounce, caused panic among the dems, and is now the most popular politician in America. Oops. Following Sullivan has you looking very very silly.

Get off this train before you look even worse.

I am happy that the democratic party is shooting themselves in the foot with their hysterical hatred of Palin (check today's Rasmussen numbers) but you are our only pundit who knows what a mind flayer is. Don't throw it all away and wind up like Andrew.

Re: Not good...

Ransom — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 14:27:03 -0000

I can understand some of the reaction to the whole "Bush doctrine" thing, but I can't even fathom how someone could disagree with the bit about the Lincoln quote, which immediately came to mind when I first heard of the "God's will" statement, and which lines up perfectly with what she was saying. When Gibson read her words back to her, he ommitted the first half of the sentence, which aligns perfectly with her explanation. Read the quote more than once. I'm stunned that this is even arguable.

Re: Not good...

Fred — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 10:55:35 -0000

I bring up their kids' service for two reasons:

1) It's nice to see the children of our political leaders serve sometimes. It would have been nice if the Bush daughters had served too.

2) I think both Obama-Biden and McCain-Palin are wrong on their foreign policy ideas with respect to Russia. There's nothing nuanced about NATO membership: an attack on one country obligates us to go to war to defend it. They all want Georgia in NATO at some point. It's a bad idea at any point. It's a reach, admittedly, to hope that having kids in the military might get McCain-Palin to think twice about this, but I do have that hope.

Re: Not good...

jwalden91lx — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 10:10:44 -0000

Fred,

A President/Vice President's offspring is not a valid argument in this case by any stretch of the imagination. The mere fact that those children of our leaders would be "on the ground" some where in a war zone is extremely dangerous for the entire unit. The military knows this. There would be some incredible propagada distributed if they were captured or killed by the enemy. Having our leader's children in the line of fire is very counterproductive to military strategy and anyone who is responsible knows it.

Re: Not good...

&chik — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 09:59:10 -0000

Fred - Wait a minute, I thought the whole "why aren't your kids fighting" meme was out of line. It was when George Bush's adult daughters didn't sign up for service. Now that Obama's elementary-age daughters haven't put down their dolls and taken up arms in Iraq, the argument is back in play?

Ok, so it is back in play. Beau Biden joined the Delaware National Guard in 2003 and will likely be in Iraq by the end of the year. His brigade begins training at Fort Bliss, TX in October.

Re: Not good...

MoeLarryAndJesus — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 09:47:14 -0000

Fred writes: "At least McCain and Palin have some skin in the game; having kids in harm's way in the military might make them think twice about this stupid bipartisan policy if they get elected."

Since there's no evidence that McCain or Palin ever think once about anything, let alone twice, that's just wishful thinking. Palin NEVER BLINKS!

What you refer to as Obama's 'equivocating' actually means that he thinks about issues and comes up with thoughtful responses instead of communicating with the clicks and grunts that conservatives prefer. "Double Gitmo!" Rrrrrooooaaaaarrrr! "Hate us for our freedoms!" Arrrrrrrrrrr!

Re: Not good...

Fred — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 09:21:23 -0000

Membership Action Plans lead to membership. Obama can't equivocate every issue. Does he want Ukraine and Georgia in NATO eventually or not? If so, why? Why in hell should we commit to going to war for former Soviet Republics that have been in Russia's sphere of influence for centuries? It would be like Russia signing a mutual defense pact with Mexico. It's strategic overreach, pure and simple.

At least McCain and Palin have some skin in the game; having kids in harm's way in the military might make them think twice about this stupid bipartisan policy if they get elected.

Re: Not good...

&chik — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 07:59:50 -0000

On the Georgia issue - those who say that Obama also supports (eventual) membership for Georgia and Ukraine are correct, but this is a matter of degrees. In fact Georgia and Ukraine were virtually guaranteed eventual membership after Bucharest in April 2008. Until this debacle, both could have reasonably expected to move to the membership action plan (MAP) stage sometime in the next two years. HOWEVER, possessing a MAP is not the same thing as being an Alliance member. Article V (collective self defense) does not apply to MAP holders, and it takes years to move from the MAP stage to the point of being issued an invitation.

So, yes, I believe Obama supports the decision of the leaders at Bucharest to reassure Georgia and Ukraine that they would eventually ascend. However, this is different from hustling them in (which McCain would like the Alliance to do in December) or from starting a new Cold War with Russia with or without NATO.

Obama is calling for cooperation with the Europeans, who as others have pointed out get much of their energy from Russia and have a vested interest in energy security in Eurasia and the Caspian, and therefore in security and peace in the region.

Re: Not good...

MoeLarryAndJesus — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 02:04:38 -0000

Scott writes: "I felt sorry for her during that interview. She shouldn't be anywhere near this election. Maybe in four years, but not now. She is way out of her league."

Ever see "The Matrix," Scott? The only way Palin will ever be ready is if she exhausts the knowledge-by-injection resources of the Nebuchadnezzar.

Re: Not good...

Scott — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 01:48:13 -0000

Yes, Cal, that did sound (and was) rude. Seems like an emotional response to criticism of Palin.

McCain's only hope at this point is to ride that wave of irrationality into the White House. He's blunted his best argument against Obama, that he's a celebrity/messiah with no experience, with his choice of Palin. Now he's relying on his own celebrity/messiah with no experience to earn him just enough holy roller/white female/low-information votes to win. But, unlike Obama, she is clearly not prepared to handle a stage this big.

I felt sorry for her during that interview. She shouldn't be anywhere near this election. Maybe in four years, but not now. She is way out of her league.

Re: Not good...

MoeLarryAndJesus — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 01:42:08 -0000

ledem writes: "Let me see if I understand what Sarah Palin thinks.

We mustn't second guess our ability to put all options on the table when it comes to not blinking at Islamic terrorists who are hell bent on destroying America and our allies. "

Yup. She's a deep one. Heck, she's deeper than Mrs. Godzilla's tampon.

(Beat that, gocart mozart!)

Re: Not good...

ledem — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 01:10:08 -0000

Let me see if I understand what Sarah Palin thinks.

We mustn't second guess our ability to put all options on the table when it comes to not blinking at Islamic terrorists who are hell bent on destroying America and our allies.

Got it.

Re: Not good...

Whitey — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 01:01:53 -0000

Cal, it's a blog, and an awfully good one. The man can clearly write, but if you want everything to be publication quality, go read one of the guys who spends two hours agonizing over his lone post of the day. TNC has a running conversation with his readers, and I think most of us like it that way. If you want flowery prose, go start your own blog.

Re: Not good...

morzer — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:46:18 -0000

Cal, Ta Nehisi is trying to write in a way that is accessible to you as well as the rest of us. A little gratitude, please.

Re: Not good...

Cal — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:34:55 -0000

Wow what a mangling of Lincoln. That's not even close to what she said. I'm off the fence on Palin, if I ever was. That was an incredibly ignorant interview. She is way scarier than Dick Cheney. She seems to have at best a pedestrian understanding of foreign policy. Incredible.

This will sound rude, but what's incredible is that the Atlantic pays you to produce such simplistic tripe. Pro or anti Palin, no matter. Can't you find a dictionary and at least pretend to be a professional writer?

Re: Not good...

Timothy Sanders — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:42:16 -0000

Anyone who has been paying attention even mildly to America's two wars, has a knee-jerk definition of the Bush Doctrine that can be summed up in two words: unilateral preemption.

This whole notion of it having an amorphous definition is to assume this administration is capable of a complex foreign policy.

Facts are not liberal or conservative, and sometimes perception is solid truth.

Re: Not good...

Fred — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:23:09 -0000

Adam,

"I'm aware that Obama also wants Georgia in NATO.

He also wants to, you know, try diplomacy and sanctions and a billion other ways to solve conflicts in the area besides saying "well, you invade, we go to war".

WTF do you think it means to have Georgia in NATO? It means exactly, "well, you invade, we go to war".

This is one area where unfortunately there is little daylight between Obama and McCain and those of you with man-crushes on Obama don't even think twice about it. Putting Stalin's birthplace in NATO will likely lead to a shooting war with Russia.

Re: Not good...

zacksback — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:44:13 -0000

Wow. This explains a lot...the lipstick B.S., the kindergarten sex education ad that pretty much horrified everyone, the negative Obama push-polling that folks in MI have told Marc about, etc.

It makes sense. The Republicans witnessed the interview; they knew it would look this bad as soon as the film was in the can. If I were them, I'd be trying to throw as much sleaze around to o.

Re: Not good...

WarrenTerra — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:37:44 -0000

Gibraltar is part of Britain (though hardly undisputed, of course) and all countries' embassies are their soil. So if the ability to see an uninhabited part of Russia from an Alaskan Island gives one foreign policy credentials ... well, the mind boggles.

Re: Not good...

Adam Freeman — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:03:03 -0000

The correct answer to the question is that "America should work with a EU allies to show Russia that we are unified in any decisions that we will take"

Europe has a much bigger stake in Russia and having peaceful relationships with Russia than the US.

The EU get 16% of it's natural gas from Russia.

Remeber NATO is a group and their are requirments for membership. Georgia haven't met the requirments with respect to the break-away areas. Second other NATO members have to agree to ally Georgia into Russia.

Re: Not good...

Whitey — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:02:11 -0000

"She looks and sounds like a somewhat-above-average collegian bullshitting her way through an oral exam."

Okay, while I don't want to sound snide, I have to say with responses like that she would have been destroyed by any of my professors, and it's not like I went to an Ivy League school. She looks to me like the below-average collegian with the kind-hearted professor who is willing to help her along, and will probably give her a B- even though it's pretty clear she didn't do any of the readings. But perhaps I'm nitpicking.

Re: Not good...

YTomer — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:53:43 -0000

More than what Palin says, it's the way she says it... She looks and sounds like a somewhat-above-average collegian bullshitting her way through an oral exam. She repeats some phrases, parrot-like, looks for affirmation here and there, uses elaborate elocution to hide a lack of specific knowledge, keeps trying to return the conversation to the one topic she thinks she knows--a mixture of misplaced assertiveness and unreciprocated appeals for leniency. Gibson, for his part, comes across as the veteran professor--unimpressed by her feigned confidence, willing to help her out a bit through a rough patch, but not without letting her know... "You really should have known that one... But let's keep going"

So THIS is what she's been preparing over the last two weeks? If the woman had a reasonable knowledge basis to build on, she might have been alright given the round-the clock training she's received. What little is on display here is clearly perched on the edge of the abyss. There is almost nothing to anchor these opinions to, little in the way of knowledge or prior reflection. It comes off as what it is: almost competent BS.

Re: Not good...

Scott — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:47:42 -0000

I just watched most of the interview on YouTube (is the full interview anywhere on the internet?) and it was painful to watch. She is in way over her head. I'm not sure who has worse judgment: McCain, for choosing her for his running mate, or Palin, for accepting the offer.

Libertarian, James Fallows does a pretty good job of explaining the importance of nuance when you are running for President or VP here:

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/08/my_prediction_about_sarah_pali.php

So, true to Fallows' prediction, she has already tasted an awful lot of her own foot in this, her very first, interview as a candidate for Vice President of the United States.

I hope that many people watch this interview and recognize that, no matter how much they admire Sarah Palin, electing John McCain, at 72 years old and after four bouts of cancer, creates the very real possibility that Palin would have to take over the Presidency of the United States and that she is no way prepared to handle that job.

Re: Not good...

Deborah — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:44:57 -0000

Short and to the point from Hilzoy:

I want someone who might end up being President to have a reservoir of background knowledge to draw on in times of crisis. And Sarah Palin just doesn't have one.

KevDog, you could be president! In fact, you are uber-qualified in that I gather Alaskans must travel to a remote bird-watcher-infested island to see Russia.

Re: Not good...

KevDog — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:36:47 -0000

PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska. "

I can see Canada from my backyard, does that mean I can speak French?

Uhh...no. Unless I studied it, which I didn't.