12/1: We've Been Down This Road Before

Liberal bloggers are deeply disappointed that Pres. Obama has ordered about 30K additional troops to Afghanistan. The netroots have long been skeptical about U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, but the complaints grew much louder in the past 24 hours as word got out about Obama's substantial troop buildup. "This will not end well," one lefty blogger predicts. Another writes: "I have nothing but bad feelings about the addition of 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan...we've been down this road before." Another lefty blogger warns: "[G]oing down this path led by Obama is going to drive a deep division into the Democratic Party."

Andrew Sullivan -- a staunch Obama supporter and a vocal proponent of the Iraq war -- is also skeptical about Obama's plans. Sullivan writes that "Obama's middle way, I fear, is deeper and deeper into a trap, and the abandonment of a historic opportunity to get out."

Meanwhile, most conservative bloggers support Obama's decision to send more troops to Afghanistan. However, that's not stopping them from accusing Obama of "dithering", engaging in "public agonizing", and sending "conflicting messages" about Afghanistan.

What else is happening in the blogosphere?

• Conservative bloggers (Morrissey, Hillyer, Mirengoff, Malkin, McCain, Erickson) continue to criticize ex-AR Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) for granting clemency to Maurice Clemmons, the man suspected of killing four police officers in WA. However, one righty blogger is defending Huckabee.
• Conservative bloggers (Klein, Foster, Morrissey, Andrews) are buzzing about the CBO's prediction that the Senate health care reform bill "would increase premiums in the individual market," although "purchasers would get better coverage than under current law and six in 10 would see their premium payments reduced by new federal subsidies."
• Conservative bloggers (Erickson, Klein) are annoyed that the first GOP amendment to the health care bill -- which was introduced by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) -- was an amendment to remove cuts to Medicare. Meanwhile, liberal bloggers (Stein, Volsky, Benen) are accusing McCain of contradicting himself, since he proposed cutting Medicare and Medicaid as a way to pay for his health plan during his WH '08 campaign.
• Liberal bloggers (Singiser, Lux, Lewison) and conservative bloggers (Morrissey, Bandes) are still buzzing about the new Daily Kos/Research 2000 poll which found that 40% of Dem voters are either "not likely [to] vote" or "definitely will not vote" in '10.

OBAMA: I've Got A Bad Feeling About This

Liberal bloggers are disappointed that Obama has ordered about 30K additional troops to Afghanistan:

• Firedoglake's Blue Texan: "This will not end well."
• Balloon Juice's John Cole: "I have nothing but bad feelings about the addition of 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan. Watching Michael O'Hanlon on the evening news was like a punch to the gut -- we've been down this road before."
• Salon's Glenn Greenwald: [T]his pretense that Obama spent months carefully deliberating in order to devise some new and exotic thought pattern about the war seems absurd on its face. At least if his top aides are to believed, what he intends to say tonight should sound extremely familiar."
• Howie Klein: "The big multimedia sales pitch isn't until tonight but Obama has already issued the orders to escalate the war in Afghanistan by sending over at least thirty-thousand more troops (at a million dollars per soldier per year). Even if he didn't stumble arrogantly into a decision, Obama didn't make a decision any different, in substance, than [George W.] Bush's decision. It was a decision to let the Military-Industrial-(Intelligence) Complex -- yeah, the ones President [Dwight] Eisenhower warned us about -- push the country into an unwinnable, disastrous war."
• Think Progress' Matthew Yglesias: "I haven't seen anyone even really attempt to persuade me that this policy makes sense in cost-benefit terms. And I think the reaction to [House Approps Cmte Chair] David Obey's 'war tax' idea is telling -- nobody seems to really think there are national interests at stake that are critical enough to be worth paying slightly higher taxes for. But if a war's not worth paying for, how can it be worth fighting?"
• MyDD's Jerome Armstrong: "[G]oing down this path led by Obama is going to drive a deep division into the Democratic Party. I have a feeling that this is a Humpty-Dumpty into pieces sort of moment for the Democratic Party: A '10-'12 primary split within the Democratic Party over the escalation of the US occupation in Afghanistan that could make the current healthcare reform debate look like patty-cake play."

The Atlantic's Sullivan -- a staunch Obama supporter and a vocal proponent of the Iraq war -- is also skeptical about sending more troops to Afghanistan: "As Obama appears to be intensifying the lost war in Afghanistan, with the same benchmark rubric that meant next-to-nothing in the end in Iraq, he does not seem to understand that he will either have to withdraw US troops from Iraq as it slides into new chaos, or he will have to keep the troops there for ever, as the neocons always intended. Or he will have to finance and run two hot wars simultaneously. If he ramps up Afghanistan and delays Iraq withdrawal, he will lose his base. If he does the full metal neocon as he is being urged to, he should not be deluded in believing the GOP will in any way support him. They will oppose him every step of every initiative. They will call him incompetent if Afghanistan deteriorates, they will call him a terrorist-lover if he withdraws, they will call him a traitor if he does not do everything they want, and they will eventually turn on him and demand withdrawal, just as they did in the Balkans with [Bill] Clinton. Obama's middle way, I fear, is deeper and deeper into a trap, and the abandonment of a historic opportunity to get out."

Sullivan continues: "I fear Bush's wars will destroy Obama as they destroyed Bush. Because they are unwinnable; and because the US is bankrupt; and because neither Iraq nor Afghanistan will ever be normal functioning societies in our lifetimes. You want empire? Then say so and get on with it -- with far more forces, and massive cuts in domestic spending to rebuild thankless Muslim population centers thousands of miles from home for decades into the future. You do not want empire? Then leave. Those are the presidential level choices. And neither Bush nor, it seems, Obama has the strength to make them."

Meanwhile, conservative bloggers (Hinderaker, Salam) support Obama's decision to send more troops to Afghanistan, but some are complaining that Obama is "dithering", engaging in "public agonizing", and sending "conflicting messages".

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Why Don't Politicians Fear Unemployment?

The Washington Post's Ezra Klein:

"Brad DeLong wonders why good macroeconomic policies make for bad politics. That's the wrong question, I think. Insofar as Barack Obama is not operating amidst 20 percent unemployment and riots, the economic interventions have worked pretty well to preserve the president's high numbers. Barack Obama's ambient popularity can hang above 50 percent because the economy hasn't totally fallen apart. Jack unemployment up five points and Obama isn't so popular.

But just because the situation isn't as bad as it could be, doesn't mean it isn't pretty bad. Bad and unpopular, in fact. So it's easy to see why voters aren't terribly impressed by policies that they thought would make it not bad. The fact that we avoided an economic collapse the electorate couldn't really imagine doesn't mean we've settled at an equilibrium they can support.

What confuses me is why politicians aren't as afraid of unpopular conditions as unpopular votes. It seems far safer to be running for reelection in a world with 9 percent unemployment that's clearly trending downward even if you have to defend a 2009 vote for another stimulus package than to run for reelection in a world where unemployment is holding steady around 12 percent. But they don't seem to see it that way. The best explanation I can come up with is that they don't fundamentally believe another stimulus will work quickly enough or clearly enough for them to derive any benefit from it, and they further think that it will look worse to try and be perceived to fail than to not try at all."

LEST WE FORGET: Roman Bumper Stickers

McSweeney's contributor Kathleen Johnson:

• My other chariot is a Ferrari.
• Proud parent of a terrific gladiator.
• Vesuvius is for Lovers.
• Christians -- The Other White Meat.
• I Brake For Baths.
• Hang up and annex Egypt!
• Jupiter is coming. Look busy.
• Nero in LXIV.