October 05, 2009

10/5: The Fallout From Copenhagen

Bloggers spent the weekend discussing the political consequences of Chicago's failure to capture the 2016 Olympics in spite of Pres. Obama's lobbying. Conservative bloggers are portraying Obama's unsuccessful effort as a "PR nightmare" that damaged "Obama's and the nation's standing in the world". Some are even speculating that the incident could "mark the moment when the wheels finally came off the Obama presidency." Liberal bloggers, on the other hand, are chastising conservatives for celebrating Chicago's defeat. One lefty blogger declares: "Cheering because your COUNTRY lost an Olympic bid because it might give you a fleeting moment of partisan gain is the dictionary definition of being unpatriotic." Another writes: "[I]f President Obama's trip was a little bit stupid, the conservative response has been even dumber."

What else is happening in the blogosphere?

• Conservative bloggers (Geraghty, Lane, Lopez, Rubin) are criticizing the Obama admin. for delaying the President's meeting with the Dalai Lama "in an attempt to gain favor with China."
• Liberal bloggers (Benen, Dayen, Kleiman, Marshall, Calvo) are accusing Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) and other congressional GOPers of undermining U.S. diplomacy with their trips abroad.
• Liberal bloggers (Benen, desmoinesdem, Sudbay, Morrill) are still buzzing about last week's New York Times article detailing possible ethical violations by Sen. John Ensign (R-NV).

OBAMA: Epic Fail

Conservative bloggers are portraying Obama's failed Olympics lobbying effort as a huge mistake:

• NRO's Victor Davis Hanson: "A PR Nightmare for the Obamas."
• NRO's Peter Wehner: "[Obama] hurt his prestige a great deal today, and he failed in an environment when things look bad and he is beginning to seem overmatched on almost every front. [...] I suspect this moment will be remembered as one that adds to an increasingly negative 'narrative' of the Obama presidency. Few presidents have suffered this much loss of support in so short a period of time -- and things will probably get worse before they get better. Friday didn't help. Mr. Obama has sustained a political wound at a vulnerable moment for him."
• RedState's Dan McLaughlin: "Obama's and the nation's standing in the world can't help but be chipped away by this; the next time he goes jetting off to a summit or some other international event, people won't be so quick to assume that he has all figured out in advance how he's going to get what he wants. That aura, that mystique is a thing of value that the President is supposed to husband carefully for when the nation really needs it. [George] Bush was impotent by the end of his presidency because he'd burned that up, but he had it for the better part of five years. Obama's losing it already."
• AmSpec Blog's Jeffrey Lord: "The Obama administration put their man out there front and center at what was a distinctly non-presidential task: getting the Olympics for Chicago. And he failed. Spectacularly. Now casting this as a talking point about meeting General [Stanley] McCrystal to discuss Afghanistan won't wipe away the image created of a president rendered impotent -- this time not by a rabbit or a pair of socks, but by the International Olympic Committee. Now that's an Olympic-sized political accomplishment."
• Commentary's Jennifer Rubin: "What [Obama] needs is to discard incompetent staff and unworkable plans, govern from the center of the political spectrum, restore his image as a resolute commander in chief, and lead rather than follow. If the Olympic-bid fiasco can set him on the course to do all that, it will prove worth the temporary hit. And if not, it will mark the moment when the wheels finally came off the Obama presidency."

Glenn Reynolds: "'SMART DIPLOMACY' FAIL: Chicago first out in bid for Olympics. That's too bad. I was kinda looking forward to seeing President [Sarah] Palin speak at the opening ceremonies..."

OBAMA II: So Much For His Powers Of Persuasion...

One of the popular conservative talking points over the weekend was that Obama's failure to convince the IOC members to give Chicago the Olympics indicates that he won't be able to effectively negotiate with Iran:

• NRO's John J. Miller: "Wow, what an embarrassment for Obama. If he can't work his personal magic with the Olympians, why does he expect it to work with the Iranians?"
• NRO's Ramesh Ponnuru: "Chicago is out of contention. Obviously I had way too much confidence in the Obama administration's political skills. But I'm sure that Obama will be a lot more persuasive with the Iranians."
• RedState's Erick Erickson: "If Barack Obama cannot convince the IOC to give Chicago the Olympics, how is he ever going to be able to convince Iran to give up its nukes?"
• Power Line's John Hinderaker: "I suppose that will be the explanation when Obama can't persuade the mullahs to abandon their nukes, either."

Liberal blogger Matthew Yglesias responds: "These are lame jokes, yes, but I also think they reveal the profound misunderstanding of how international relations works that exists on the right. The competition to host the 2016 Olympics is just that, a competition. It's a friendly competition, yes, but it's still a competition. It's zero sum. If Rio wins, then Chicago and Sao Paulo and Tokyo lose. But the overall relationship between the United States and Iran is not a zero-sum competition. A world in which Iran accepts verifiable safeguards on its nuclear program in exchange for security guarantees and a relaxation of American sanctions is a world in which both the United States and Iran wind up better off. A world in which the US and Iran cooperate in Afghanistan is a world is which both the United States and Iran wind up better off. If we fight in Iran, we both wind up worse off."

OBAMA III: Way To Root Against America, Conservatives!

Liberal bloggers are blasting conservatives for celebrating Chicago's defeat:

• Balloon Juice's John Cole: "Cheering because your COUNTRY lost an Olympic bid because it might give you a fleeting moment of partisan gain is the dictionary definition of being unpatriotic."
• AMERICAblog's John Aravosis: "It is a bit sick rooting for America to lose the Olympics, and bad-mouth Chicago, simply because Obama is from there."
• Daily Kos' Jed Lewison: "[I]f President Obama's trip was a little bit stupid, the conservative response has been even dumber. Instead of biting their tongue, they decided to get out in front of the story, whooping with glee and using this setback as an opportunity to celebrate what they see as Obama's defeat."
• Mother Jones' Kevin Drum: "I hopped back over to The Corner a few minutes ago, and the Olympics are by far the biggest topic of conversation there this morning. But The Corner is a gossipy place, so that's not such a big deal. What is stunning, though, is just how openly thrilled they are that America lost its bid. All because a president they don't like decided to make a direct pitch for his adopted hometown. Ditto for the Weekly Standard, apparently. It sure doesn't take much to turn these guys against their country, does it?"
• The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen: "It's probably too much to ask for some kind of significant backlash, but I suspect if a pollster were to ask Americans which bothered them more, the president trying to bring the Olympics to the U.S. or the president's detractors cheering the Olympics not coming to the U.S., conservatives wouldn't fare especially well."
• FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver: "That the conservative intelligentsia reacted giddily to news of the Americans losing is telling. It's telling of a movement that was long ago knocked off its intellectual moorings and has lost the capacity to think about what people outside the room think about. Sometimes -- certainly on the health care debate, very probably on the bailouts question -- conservatives back into something approaching mainstream American sentiment and can cause Obama and his allies a lot of problems. But any movement which also criticizes the President for giving a speech to schoolchildren, which cheers when the United States loses its Olympic bid, is mostly just engaged in the business of throwing a bunch of Kaká at the wall and seeing what sticks. I don't know whether it's unpatriotic -- but it's pretty freakin' dumb."

The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan: "Criticizing a president is one thing -- and important. Hoping he fails -- even to the point of celebrating a national loss -- is a sign of partisanship that has become pathologically blind to any sense of perspective or patriotism."

Meanwhile, Balloon Juice's DougJ sees electoral repercussions for at least one GOP pol: "Nate Silver had Illinois as the ninth likeliest Senate seat to switch parties in his most recent rankings. I've got to think that the Republican reaction to the Olympics decision is going to change that. Mark Kirk can't be too pleased with the wingerati right now."

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Are Conservatives Helping Obama With The Left?

AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein:

"The Wall Street Journal has an article exploring whether conservative attacks on President Obama have allowed him to shore up support among liberals even as he disappoints them on a number of issues. This is something that first struck me during the [SC Rep.] Joe Wilson 'You Lie!' episode. Even though President Obama gave a health care speech to a joint session of Congress in which he opened the door to ditching the government health insurance plan, liberals were too busy snarling about Wilson to get angry about it.

This phenomenon is nothing new to politics. President Bush, for instance, still enjoyed strong support among conservatives for much of his presidency, even as he passed the largest expansion of entitlements since the Great Society and expanded the federal role in education. While there was always criticism along the margins, and a temporary uproar, it would be quickly forgotten once a liberal made some outrageous charge. It wasn't really until Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers in 2005 that we saw a widespread and sustained conservative revolt from which he never really recovered.

So as Obama enters the stage of the health care debate in which he'll have to find a way to talk liberals into accepting less, his best ally may be his critics on the right. One can see a White House pitch to liberals that more or less amounts to, a loss on health care means victory for Joe Wilson, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh."

LEST WE FORGET: US Warns Iran: Dismantle Nukes Or We Will Block You On Facebook

The Huffington Post's Andy Borowitz:

"WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) -- In its sternest rhetoric to date about the Iranian nuclear threat, the U.S. today issued an ultimatum to the Iranian government: dismantle your nuclear program at once, or risk being blocked on Facebook.

A Facebook blockade against Iran would have serious consequences, analysts said, such as preventing the Iranian government from accessing the U.S.'s profile or playing such popular online quizzes as 'What 80's Toy Are You?'

According to one State Dept. source, the U.S. has been considering blocking Iran on Facebook for some time, especially after Iran sent it a series of increasingly provocative and annoying event invitations.

'When they invited us to an event called "Medium Range Missile Test," that was really the last straw,' the source said."

Posted by Ian Faerstein at October 5, 2009 12:31 PM