April 21, 2009

4/21: The Handshake That Shook The Blogosphere

Nothing seems to anger conservative bloggers more than the perception that Pres. Obama is projecting weakness during his trips abroad. Earlier this month, righty bloggers spent several days in a frenzy over Obama's apparent bow to Saudi King Abdullah at the G-20 summit. Conservative bloggers described Obama's greeting of the Saudi king as a "disgrace" and an "unprecedented embarrassment". Now the rightroots are up in arms over Obama's friendly handshake with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez at the Summit of the Americas. One righty blogger calls the interaction "sickening" while another declares, "I thought Barack Obama couldn't sink lower than he did in his apology tour of Europe. I was wrong."

Liberal bloggers are aggressively pushing back, calling this line of attack "painfully absurd" and claiming that the right's reaction to the handshake episode is indicative of their "extreme emotional insecurity". Many lefty bloggers are directing their fire at ex-Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-GA), who has emerged as one of the leading critics of Obama's approach to diplomacy. The netroots are also praising Obama's response to his critics, in which he mockingly described them as "imaginative."

What else is happening in the blogosphere?

• Conservative bloggers (Malkin, Hinderaker, Impomeni) are accusing the judges of this year's Miss USA pageant of giving the title to Miss North Carolina instead of Miss California because the latter expressed opposition to gay marriage.
• Liberal bloggers (Greenwald, McCarter, Aravosis, Heilbrunn, Benen) are buzzing about the CQ article alleging that Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) was caught on wiretap promising favors to a suspected Israeli agent. While liberal bloggers don't quite know what to make of this story yet, it's clear that many of them (BooMan, Wheeler, Morrill) strongly dislike Harman.
• Liberal bloggers (McCarter, Beeton, digby) continue to urge Congress to impeach Jay Bybee, the former DoJ attorney who wrote one of the controversial interrogation memos and who now serves as a federal judge. Lefty bloggers are also arguing that AG Eric Holder is obligated to appoint a Special Prosecutor if he believes that laws against torture have been violated, regardless of how Obama feels about the matter.
• Conservative bloggers (Reynolds, Morrissey, Riedl, Klein, Freddoso) are accusing Obama of making a meaningless gesture by ordering his Cabinet members to identify $100M in budget cuts. At least one Obama supporter is criticizing the move as well.

CHAVEZ: Venezuela 1, America 0?

Conservative bloggers continue to criticize Obama for smiling and shaking hands with Chavez at the Summit of the Americas (as well as his approach to diplomacy more generally):

• Commentary's Jennifer Rubin: "It is too much to hope that Obama might have followed the example of Richard Nixon's 'kitchen debate', but it is not too much to expect he would firmly defend his country rather than ignore [Nicaraguan president Daniel] Ortega's rant or fawn over Chavez's gift selection. [...] Because of his celebrity status, Obama has the ability to make it cool to be pro-democracy, pro-American, and anti-dictator. Instead, he is signaling it is cool to slam Uncle Sam."
• RedState's Warner Todd Huston: "The real issue is whether or not we think we should grovel at the feet of foreign dictators like Hugo Chavez over any mistakes real or perceived? It just so happens that a patriotic American sees no reason to supplicate ourselves as a nation at the feet of some foreign despot just to make America haters feel good about themselves. Sadly it seems that Obama does."
• Townhall's Hugh Hewitt: "The miscues are piling up ala [Jimmy] Carter, and the costs will follow unless the new president genuinely commits to defending the country and all that it has accomplished and stands for rather than apologizing for it like a tweedy professor in search of the approval of his international colleagues at a conference."
• NRO's Victor Davis Hanson: "Does Obama think that the American people really want to hear their country ritually trashed from those anti-democrats -- who are, at the same time, jostling to keep our borders open to ensure more dollar remittances and more sanctuary for their own fleeing citizens? These Victory Column-like foreign campaign stops are now getting stale, and at some point I think [WH CoS Rahm] Emanuel and [WH advisor David] Axelrod will see that these magical mystery tours have the potential, in their scripted regularity, to really turn off the American people -- and convince bad players abroad that it is about time to test the waters."

Commentary's Max Boot is one of the few righty bloggers who wasn't upset about Obama's interaction with Chavez: "All Obama did was shake the guy's hand, and offer him a smile. Far from being a disaster, this could actually be a smart strategic move. Chavez, after all, derives much of his demagogic appeal from his claim to be an inveterate enemy of Uncle Sam. He thrives off provoking us and using the resulting reaction to 'prove' that we are as bad as he claims. Obama is a lot harder to demonize than George W. Bush, however, and by shaking hands with Chavez the president may be undercutting his appeal more effectively than anything Bush did. If Obama starts making substantive concessions to Chavez or other dictators, I will start to get worried. But I don't think anyone should have a meltdown over a handshake."

CHAVEZ II: The Latest Faux Outrage

Liberal bloggers are mocking conservatives for being outraged over Obama's handshake with Chavez at the Summit of the Americas:

• dday: "The fauxtrage of the day concerns Barack Obama doing this country the terrible dishonor and shame of shaking a foreign leader's hand. IMPEACH NOW [...] Worse, he was smiling! Smiling!!!1!!eleventy! How dare he sell out this nation with his facial expressions! Why, it's positively... well, Reaganesque."
• TPM's Josh Marshall: "We do realize that the US has the most powerful military in the world and Venezuela has little ability to project military power beyond its own borders. It's a non-entity militarily, even compared to Iran and North Korea. Will [Chavez] be emboldened into calling Obama el Diablo? Maybe provocatively give away more books?"
• The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen: "Leading Republicans make it sound as if America's stature is so fragile, it is easily weakened by casual courtesies at an international forum. President Obama, in contrast, acts as if America's stature is strong, and can withstand a handshake with a foreign head of state. Since when does the GOP find it useful to promote the idea of American weakness? [...] Really, though, it doesn't matter. The U.S. president was photographed shaking hands with the twice-elected head of state of a large South American democracy at a forum for hemispheric leaders. That's it. That's the whole story. That's what has Republicans screaming today. It's painfully absurd."

GINGRICH: Only Republicans Are Allowed To Shake Hands With Dictators

Liberal bloggers are blasting Gingrich after he slammed Obama for smiling and shaking hands with Chavez. Lefty bloggers are disputing Gingrich's claim that "we didn't rush over, smile, and greet Russian dictators," pointing out that there are various photographs of U.S. Presidents smiling while meeting with Soviet and Russian leaders:

• Think Progress' Satyam Khanna: "Dr. Gingrich, who has a Ph.D. in European history, should re-read his history books. As the Cold War waned, President [Ronald] Reagan (whose foreign policy Gingrich repeatedly praises) met with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev at four summits, leading to nuclear arms reductions. President George H. W. Bush negotiated the Start II treaty alongside Russian President Boris Yeltsin, and President [Bill] Clinton discussed foreign investment with Yeltsin. President Bush, of course, said he saw into Vladimir Putin's soul after a private engagement. Each meeting had smiles all around."
• Benen: "Does Gingrich even remember the Soviet Union? U.S. presidents didn't just shake hands with Soviet leaders; they also engaged them in direct negotiations -- after the USSR vowed to wipe the United States off the map and pointed enough nuclear missiles at us to make that happen. [...] It's certainly possible that ol' Newt knows full well that his talking points are ridiculous. It's more than likely Gingrich actually remembers the Cold War, and is simply hoping that Americans don't realize that his claims are completely and wildly wrong. But we're left with one or the other -- either Gingrich doesn't know what he's talking about or he assumes we're idiots."
• TAPPED's Tim Fernholz: "Newt Gingrich's criticism of President Barack Obama for shaking hands with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is silly and hypocritical, not to mention embarrassing for the GOP. Seriously, this is the guy who's taking the lead on the Republican foreign affairs message -- the long-retired former Speaker of the House? The ranking Republicans on the congressional foreign affairs committees, [IN Sen.] Dick Lugar and [FL Rep.] Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, haven't made comments on this that I've seen yet. Perhaps they're too busy with their day jobs to try to score political points off a non-controversy."
• Balloon Juice's John Cole: "It goes without saying that Newt Gingrich is a complete and total idiot. Of course our Presidents frolicked around with Russian and Soviet leaders."

Firedoglake's Blue Texan thinks this is a foolish line of attack: "McPalin (and Hillary [Clinton], for that matter) loudly and repeatedly criticized Obama for saying he'd meet with Hitler Ahmadinejad and Castro during the campaign. The country yawned, then enthusiastically installed Obama in the White House. So why Gingrich & Co. think this is a politically useful line of attack -- after it's failed twice -- is anyone's guess."

Meanwhile, Daily Kos' Jed Lewison argues that Gingrich, by criticizing Obama's conduct abroad, is violating his previous claim that "politics end[s] at the water's edge."

OBAMA: Socrates' Philosophies And Hypotheses Can't Define How I Be Droppin' These Mockeries

Liberal bloggers love Obama's response to the right-wing criticism, in which he appeared to subtly mock his critics:

"Venezuela is a country whose defense budget is probably 1/600th of the United States'. They own Citgo. It's unlikely that as a consequence of me shaking hands or having a polite conversation with Mr. Chavez that we are endangering the strategic interests of the United States. I don't think anybody can find any evidence that that would do so. Even within this imaginative crowd, I think you would be hard-pressed to paint a scenario in which U.S. interests would be damaged as a consequence of us having a more constructive relationship with Venezuela."

• Daily Kos' Markos Moulitsas: "Very nice. Conservative criticism of Obama's foreign policy approach is so patently ridiculous, that he's now openly mocking the wingers freaking out over his handshake with Hugo Chavez."
• TAPPED's Mori Dinauer: "I'm glad that President Obama is openly mocking the insecure man-children of the American right wing who think that shaking the hand of a local elected demagogue constitutes some sort of showing of weakness -- they should be mocked, and if they didn't possess so many megaphones, we could advance to completely ignoring them, too."
• dday: "I think mockery remains the only option for dealing with these people. We have hard evidence of torture at the highest levels of government, we have a broken economy, we have a crisis in health care and climate change. And the Republicans, still acting like the normative goal of political parties are to win the news cycle, throw up a 'Obama didn't wink the way I wanted him to wink' or 'Obama bent his knee when you shouldn't bend your knee and as a result we're all going to be killed or forced into burqas' every day. I don't know that there's another, more reasonable response than pointing and laughing."

MISS USA: Perez Vs. The Rightroots

Conservative bloggers are accusing the judges of this year's Miss USA pageant of giving the title to Miss North Carolina instead of Miss California because the latter expressed opposition to gay marriage:

• Michelle Malkin: "The pageant is a lost cause. Beauty contests are out. P.C. panderfests are in."
• Gateway Pundit: "It looks like the Far Left has even hijacked beauty pageants."
• Power Line's John Hinderaker: "We all know that if Miss California had answered [guest judge Perez] Hilton's question by saying that she believes in equal rights for all, and that means gay marriage, there would have been no controversy and, very likely, she would have won the title. [...] It isn't surprising, perhaps, that gay marriage advocates would like to stigmatize and silence their opponents. But why is it, exactly, that our media establishment has fallen in with this preference?"
• RedState's Mark Impomeni: "What happens when a judge asks a beauty pageant contestant in front of a live television audience her opinion about a political question? If you answered that the contestant risks her crown if she gives anything other than the liberal-approved answer, you would be right. [...] Why does any of this matter? Because with liberals in power and emboldened, scenes like this will be playing out with greater and greater frequency over the next four years. As the Department of Homeland Security's report on alleged 'right-wing extremism' shows, there is a movement afoot to marginalize, if not outright criminalize, mainstream conservative beliefs. Wherever conservatives see a public figure bravely standing against the liberal onslaught, they must rally. [Miss California's Carrie] Prejean, and the reckoning that is coming for her, provides just such an opportunity, and from the unlikliest of places."

Conservative bloggers are directing much of their criticism at gossip blogger Perez Hilton, the guest judge who asked Miss California about her position on gay marriage (and who later criticized her on his blog):

• Malkin: "The Miss USA pageant should be ashamed for providing Perez Hilton a platform for his intolerant bigotry and abuse of Carrie Prejean."
• NRO's Maggie Gallagher: "Perez 'You dumb b-tch' Hilton is typical of the new face of the gay-marriage movement in America. (Joining Frank 'you are all bigots' Rich among others). And I would like to nominate Miss California as the new face of the marriage movement. Much better than mine!"

On a related note, Townhall's Matt Lewis criticizes the recent National Journal poll indicating that 29% of conservative bloggers think that the GOP should support gay marriage: "Let me say that I have serious doubts about the selection process. For one thing, you could argue that Townhall.com, RedState, and National Review Online are the three most prominent conservative blogs -- yet I don't see anyone from any of those venues listed (you can find a list of the bloggers queried here). There are also several folks on the list whom I've never even heard of. [...] Does anyone doubt that if National Journal had instead queried Hugh Hewitt, Michelle Malkin, Erick Erickson, and Rich Lowry -- all equally (or more) prominent bloggers than the ones included (and, I would argue, more within the mainstream of conservative thought) -- that National Journal might have gotten a dramatically different responses?"

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Don't Be So Insecure, Guys

Marshall thinks conservatives are foolish to make a big deal about Obama's friendly handshake with Chavez:

"I've been listening to a constant stream -- mainly but not only on Fox -- of talk through the day about whether we should feel weak or ashamed or tarnished or any other number of things because President Obama had a friendly handshake with Huge Chavez of Venezuela. The whole idea seems so deeply silly to me that it's hard to know how exactly to even comment on it. But I'm struck once again by the sort of psychologically arrested mentality and extreme emotional insecurity that seems at work in the minds of many foreign policy conservatives -- or more specifically, so as not to paint with too broad a brush, those of the neo-conish flavor.

Sure, a lot of this is just political posturing -- trying to sound the story out for possible political vulnerabilities on Obama's part. Throw a bunch of mud up against the wall and see what sticks. What's striking to me though is that a lot of it seems like a very genuine, gut-level emotional response. (A related example is what Matt Yglesias pointed out a few days ago -- how many right-wingers seem to have convinced themselves that North Korea, a borderline failed state on the possible brink of economic collapse somehow has the US over a barrel.)

In the course of our normal lives, few of us have much difficulty identifying habits of defensiveness or a penchant for histrionic or petulant interactions as signs of weakness, not strength. Really powerful people don't need stunts and usually signal their power by a certain graciousness and indifference in such interactions. They have nothing to prove. But American power, respect, command of public opinion -- however you want to define it -- must be in these people's minds an extremely brittle thing. They really do seem like extremely insecure people."

LEST WE FORGET: ...And Refrain From Entering My Office For At Least Half An Hour

From Overheard in the Office:

Boss: What's wrong?
Red-faced receptionist: I just picked up a call and you could hear people having sex on the other line! I'm afraid to answer the phone now...
Boss: From now on, put those calls through to me.

Posted by Ian Faerstein at April 21, 2009 01:03 PM