August 13, 2008
8/13: Throwing Bombs Bursting In Air
Introducing John McCain at a campaign event in York, PA on 8/12, Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) said:
"In my opinion, the choice could not be more clear: between one candidate, John McCain, who's had experience, been tested in war and tried in peace, another candidate who has not. Between one candidate, John McCain, who has always put the country first, worked across party lines to get things done, and one candidate who has not."
Bloggers sympathetic to Obama seized upon "always put the country first," accusing the McCain camp of attacking Obama's patriotism. Alluding to the controversial "Lack of American Roots" memo by Mark Penn, Taylor Marsh wrote, "What, Mark Penn is working for McCain now?" Similar reactions:
- Moderate Voice's Joe Gandelman: "Lieberman has jumped the [shark] because he is saying without actually saying it that Obama is potentially a traitor, if not one already. A patriot puts his country first. So who is craven enough to put his country second? The fact is this: The old Joe Lieberman and the old John McCain wouldn't suggest or come close to calling Obama unpatriotic because he disagrees with them. They would have aggressively challenged him on his positions but never questioned his bona fides as someone who cared for his country."
- No More Mister Nice Blog: "Barack Obama needs to tell the public that this gutter approach to politics will be America's problem if John McCain is elected president, because if he and his crowd campaign this way, they'll govern this way -- by dividing the country, questioning the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with them, and going into character-assassination mode whenever they're challenged."
- Talking Points Memo's Greg Sargent: Just moments ago, the McCain campaign emailed out the same Lieberman quote to its full press list -- putting its official stamp of approval on Lieberman's assertion. This is effectively an abandonment of the campaign's quasi-official position, which used to be that the McCain camp saw questioning Obama's patriotism as off limits. Last month, senior McCain adviser Charlie Black said explicitly that 'we don't want to talk about his patriotism and character. We concede that he's a patriot and person of good character.' That no longer appears to be operative."
But most of the uproar centered on Lieberman being an traitor -- to his party. Ever since losing his Senate primary two years ago (which Obama tried to prevent by campaiging for him, liberal bloggers often point out), Lieberman has steadily drifted towards the GOP, particularly on foreign policy. This year, he has become one of McCain's most vocal supporters, thus alienating Dems to the brink of banishment.
- HotAir's AllahPundit: "The question's no longer whether Joementum's going to split with the Democrats. It's whether he's going to do it in dramatic fashion during his speech to the Republican convention or whether he'll leave it to Reid to push him out by stripping him of his committee assignments. ... If you're Reid, do you take his assignments away now or chance having him take the stage with a national audience and tell the Democrats, 'You can't fire me, I quit'? You don't want to antagonize him before he speaks, but since he's already taken the gloves off, why not cast him out beforehand? Or will that backfire by letting him use his speech to play the victim shunned by a party establishment that can't tolerate dissent within its own ranks?"
- Jed Report: "If Joe Lieberman honestly believes what he's saying, then why did he urge Barack Obama to run for president in the first place?"
- Carpetbagger Report's Steve Benen: "As for Lieberman, just last week, the former Democrat contributed $100,000 to the DSCC. A Lieberman-friendly Democrat told Roll Call why Lieberman made the donation: 'Basically, he doesn't want everybody to hate him. Plus he wants to keep his committee.' At this point, Dems everywhere are going to hate him and he's going to lose his committee. Looking at the big picture, this is, quite obviously, the end of Lieberman's relationship with the Democratic Party. ... Lieberman might as well kiss his committee gavel goodbye, and once that happens, he'll have no incentive to caucus with the party. Lieberman probably realizes this, which will make him an unrestrained Republican attack-dog throughout the campaign cycle. I still wonder, though, if Lieberman has considered the implications for his reputation — not with the party, and not with his constituents, but with the media establishment he loves (and which loves him right back). Lieberman's interesting to pundits and talking heads because he's unusual. The media can't get enough of unusual. Lieberman was on the Democratic ticket eight years ago, he had Obama campaigning for him two years ago, and now he's McCain's Mini-Me. The media can't get enough. But come January, if he's just another Republican hack, he's not quite as fascinating anymore."
- Talking Points Memo's Greg Sargent: "Another day, another unsightly smear of Obama from Joe Lieberman."
Lieberman's "country first" comments seemed his most strident yet, and his escalating role as McCain's attack dog has revived VP speculation.
- The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan: "And so the evolution from hawkish Democrat to Republican attack-dog continues. What Lieberman is doing is what a vice-presidential candidate tends to do: savage the opponent. Or more accurately, what Rove Republican vice-presidential candidates have been trained to do: savage the opponent as a traitor. It's funny but I don't recall him ever being so aggressive when he was Gore's running mate."
- Hartford Courant's Jesse A. Hamilton: "The talk won't go away until, A) Sen. John McCain picks somebody else to be his running mate on the Republican ticket, or B) McCain picks Lieberman."
Huffington Post's Marty Kaplan spots irony in Lieberman's questioning of Obama's patriotism: "Ever since their diaspora, Jews have been accused of putting something else -- themselves, the dispersed Israelite people, then Israel itself -- ahead of their own country. Jewish citizens of Russia, Germany and America, to pick just a few, have been slandered (and sometimes killed) for allegedly putting their allegiances to the Hebrew nation ahead of their patriotism toward the motherland, the fatherland or the homeland. This is vintage Protocols of the Elders of Zion. And yet what do we hear today from Orthodox Jew Joe Lieberman? ... Does Joe Lieberman not realize that he is using one of the oldest anti-semitic tricks in the book to accuse Obama of being the Islamic candidate?"
The conservative blogs didn't pay much attention to Lieberman's comments, and those who did generally thought Obama supporters were overreacting. Don Surber: "I parse it as saying put the country first in legislation, which is not questioning one's patriotism but rather a common parliamentary elocution; we must put our country first, and compromise on campaign reform. McCain has reached out across the aisle many, many times. Obama hasn't. Reasonable minds may disagree with this interpretation. But the reaction was over the top...."
Some right-wing bloggers thought Lieberman's attack should have been even more explicit. Right Wing News's John Hawkins: "Lieberman could have also added that we have a choice between one candidate who has always raised his hand for the national anthem and another who has not. We have a choice between one candidate who spent 20 years in an anti-American, anti-white church and another who did not. We have a choice between one candidate who made a big deal out of the fact that he didn't want to wear a flag pin and another candidate who did not. Just pointing a few things out...again, because those are all relevant points people should keep in mind when they step into the voting booth."
MCCAIN II: Getting Peachy With Georgia
Following Lieberman's controversial comments, McCain stepped up to the stump in York and delivered his most ardent rhetoric in support of Georgia against Russian aggression. McCain said:
"[Georgian Pres. Mikheil Saakashvili] knows that the thoughts and prayers and support of the American people are with that brave little nation as they struggle today for their freedom and independence. He wanted me to say thank you, to give you his heartfelt thanks for the support of the American people. [I told him] I know I speak for every American when I say to him today, we are all Georgians."McCain critics jumped on that last line (many bloggers believed it to be an allusion to Europe's "We are all Americans" sentiment following the 9/11 attacks):
- The New Republic's Michael Crowley: "So says John McCain. ... It may be a noble sentiment, and Georgia is deserving of American diplomatic support. But is he really speaking for all--or even most--Americans? My strong hunch is that precious few Americans want to feel they're the victims of Russian aggression. Instead they want all the foreign-policy madness to calm down already. It hardly seems a winning message for McCain to imply that in their hearts the American people should consider themselves at war with Russia."
- dday: "So today John McCain let me know that we are all Georgians - especially the guys on his staff being paid by their government, I guess. Now, Russia and Georgia set conditions for a cease-fire and withdrawal, under a French framework (French!?), so I guess by 'we are all Georgians' McCain means that 'we are all losers of brief wars where we belligerently try to take over breakaway regions by force using indiscriminate violence and suffer the consequences.' There are no noblemen in this conflict, but to signal some kinship with the Georgians is tantamount to allying with them in a dirty war against the Russians, which is just a fair bit of madness."
- American Prospect's A. Serwer: "I think I speak for most Americans when I say: 'Does he mean the state?' In all seriousness, if the battle over South Ossetia is 9/11, then didn't McCain just commit us to a military response, since that's how the United States responded in the aftermath of the WTC attacks? The election hasn't even happened yet and he's trying to start new wars. Some people might call that 'presumptuous.'"
- Daily Kos's smintheus: "How would the trad media have portrayed Barack Obama if he had behaved as John McCain has done since Georgian President Saakashvili sent troops into South Ossetia? Would it have been 'presumptuous' to issue proposals to intervene in the fighting even before the President had spoken? To stake out an aggressive position far in front of anything the US wished to adopt? To attack a rival candidate for refusing to do the same? ... What if he claimed to be able to speak for the nation?"
- Think Progress's Matthew Yglesias: "Common sense indicates that, no, I am not a Georgian. But John McCain says 'today we are all Georgians.' But does he mean it? Suppose Russia was bombing Atlanta and threatening to advance to Savannah. In solidarity with Georgia (the state) Americans from all fifty states would band together and fight the Russians off. Now I don't think we should go to war with Russia. And I hope John McCain doesn't think we should go to war with Russia. But insofar as he doesn't mean that we should go to war with Russia on Georgia's behalf, what's the meaning of the claim that 'we are all Georgians'? On one level, it’s empty political sloganeering. But on another level it's not empty — it's downright irresponsible, and an example of the sort of irresponsible behavior that got us into this. But this stuff isn't a game — Putin, Shakashvili, the Ossetes and the Abkhaz are all playing for keeps. We shouldn't imply guarantees that we don't intend to keep, which means the public statements of our officials have to be driven by realistic assessments of the situation and of American interests not by mawkish sentimentality."
But The New Republic's Jonathan Chait chastised his fellow liberal: "Does [Yglesias] really not understand this? The point is that we can't physically defend Georgia from Russian agression, but we can make a symbolic stand of unity with a democratic, pro-Western state that has been attacked by an autocratic aggressor. Is Yglesias trying to argue that, since we don't have the capacity to intervene militarily, we can't make basic moral judgments?"
In addition to his words of support for Georgia, McCain continued to sharpen his rhetoric against Russia:
"I think it's very clear that Russian ambitions are to restore the old Russian Empire. Not the Soviet Union, but the Russian Empire."
- I Don't Like You Either's damozel: "And people think this man is 'ready to lead'? He's not even living in the same century as the rest of us."
- Wonkette's Jim Newell: "Many of us freaked out today when John McCain [accused Russia of imperial ambitions]. How does anyone arrive at that after reading about the situation between Russia and Georgia? Jesus. But then again, are we just getting soft? Think back to the glory days of the Republican primary season. All of the candidates launched into over-the-top fear babble of this nature on a daily basis, and it was usually more insane!"
- Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshall: "Watching John McCain speak about the Georgian crisis in the video below should deeply worry anyone interested in a sane US foreign policy -- or the safety of their children. One arch joke from the earlier part of this decade was that the one good thing about the neocons obsession with getting into a war with Iraq was that it distracted them from their much bigger obsessions -- ratcheting up Cold Wars with China and/or Russia. The people that are pulling McCain's strings are the people who want to push us into a new Cold War with the Russians -- and ironically and a bit improbably with the Chinese too. But the Russians are probably more willing to oblige us since their power remains limited to oil reserves and military power. In other words, they're people McCain's folks can understand and vice versa. ... But think for a moment where we'd be if this man were president right now, as he may well be in six months. This man takes the counsel of the people who got us into the Iraq War. On foreign policy, he is in league with the people who were so extreme they've now largely been kicked out of the Bush administration. People like John Bolton and others like him. ... This man is simply too dangerous and unstable to be president. People need to wake up and get a look of the preview he's giving us of a McCain presidency."
Conservative commentary on Obama has dwindled this week because the Dem is still on vacation in HI. But McCain Report's Michael Goldfarb took the occasion to snipe at his boss's rival and contrast the candidates' current schedules: "Barack Obama enjoys a jog at Hawaii's Kailua Beach, keeping focused on his workout even as his fans try to snap photos. Meanwhile John McCain is campaigning in Pennsylvania, has twice spoken with the President of Georgia, and is working to prevent a close American ally from collapsing under the weight of a Russian invasion."
Yglesias hit back: "It seems the McCain campaign has decided to take advantage of the violent conflict in Georgia to score political points against Barack Obama by criticizing him for going on vacation while McCain 'has twice spoken with the President of Georgia, and is working to prevent a close American ally from collapsing under the weight of a Russian invasion.' But, look, nothing McCain is doing is actually helping Georgia. Various diplomats from the United States, the European Union, the United Nations and elsewhere are trying to negotiate an end to the crisis. Obama is trying to relax before the hard months of campaigning ahead. And McCain is . . . engaged in political posturing and a lot of empty tough guy rhetoric that's better suited to a Bill Kristol column than to the White House. A lot of the rhetoric about this situation has, in my view, been over the top but I think it's clear that America has a real-but-limited interest in maintaining a Georgia that isn't entirely under Moscow's thumb. But what's needed are practical steps in that direction, not empty sloganeering and political stunts."
THOUGHT OF THE DAY: At Least He Gets All The Holidays Off
The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg: "Obama Is Not Actually the Antichrist. Because, as those of us who follow these things know, the antichrist is Jewish. Several years ago, I went to see Jerry Falwell in Lynchburg, where he confirmed this to me, and offered up the observation that I, technically speaking, could be the antichrist. I've been following Ross on this subject, and it's a bit silly to think that true pre-millenarian wackadoos believe that Obama could be the antichrist, because true pre-millenarian wackadoos know that the antichrist is a Jew. Unless of course Obama is in fact Jewish. But you can't be Christian and Jewish and secretly Muslim at the same time. Or can you?"
LEST WE FORGET: "Couldn't Be Plainer"
American Prospect's Paul Waldman: "Though there was no particular evidence that the tire-gauge attack was having an effect, the McCain campaign's glee was evident. Just days before, they had alleged that Obama's criticisms of their tactics constituted 'fussiness and hysteria,' and now here they were brandishing small, phallic objects bearing their opponent's name. Meanwhile, McCain himself was sent out to pose in front of working oil rigs, to testify to his thirst for pulling more black gold from the earth. The message couldn't be plainer: See that itty-bitty, little tire gauge? If you vote for Obama, that's how big your penis is. If you vote for McCain, on the other hand, your penis is as big as this rig, thrusting its gigantic shaft in and out of the ground!"
Posted by Chris Bodenner at August 13, 2008 01:26 PM
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.
