Letters to the Editor
-
The effect of elections
Of course one of the more unfortunate effect of elections (especially when viewed from the outside) is that they make it appear that the entire electorate supports the result. Anyone viewing the US from the outside would conclude that we're a bunch of short-sighted morons who think that the only way to solve any problem is to blow it up.
In light of that, its CERTAINLY appropriate for foriegners to feel they have a stake in our elections. Don't we after all feel that we have a stake in Iranian elections?
-
Was this a smart move for Howard?
Howard is considered a savvy politician even by his most vocal opponents in Australia. But was this a smart political move on his part?
He has to know just how little support Bush and his policies have in this country, and indeed in his own country. He also knows there will be a political price to pay for these remarks. (See Kevin Rudd take him to task over at Crooks and Liars.)
So I have to wonder just what is he getting in return from the Bush administration? Are we supposed to believe his statements were not in any way coordinated by the White House?
There is very little reason at this point for him to be confident of a Republican Party resurgence in the next U.S. election, yet he is going out of his way to smear not just Obama, but the entire Democratic Party. What is he thinking?
-
and while we're at it...
It's probably worth mentioning as well that Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, and even John Edwards (via satellite) all spoke at Israel's Herzliya Conference, "seemingly competing to see who can be most strident in defense of the Jewish state" according to The Jewish Week, 1/26/07. That is to say, they were talking about the 'threat' posed by Iran, in absurdly grave terms, to a very interested foreign audience. And some of them seemed to have done well because of it--according to The Israel Factor (a panel of Israelis who rank the US candidates), Rudy Giuliani is in the lead, followed by Newt Gingrich, John McCain, and then... Hillary Clinton.
-
Hmmm
I hope Obama has Australia marked down for regime change in 2009.
-
While We Are On The Subject
When holding power in the Whitehouse and both houses of Congress what happened to the republican party planks of smaller government and no nation building? After all the grand speeches about restricting government, fiscal responsibility, and anti-adventurism while in the minority, as soon as they acquire unchecked power we are treated to massive expansion of governmental power and spending, re-setting all the records held by the "big-government-big-spending liberals". And for icing on the cake we receive an open-ended expedition to bring James Madison and Thomas Jefferson to the land of suicide car bombers, using the American Army as traffic cops. And anyone who casts a dubious eye in any way on the holy mission is branded as anti-troop, anti-American, anti-God, and an enemy emboldener.
And of course the accompanying tax cuts. Hey, life is a big freebie. Someone down the road a ways can pay the bill.
We are all hypocrites to some degree. The name of the game in life is to put forth your best effort to not make it too obnoxious and belligerent.
The modern day republican party has become so hypocritical, I have to think it's intentional.
-
Such an easy target
How big the Australian committment and presence in Afghanistan and Iraq at the moment? How many boots on the ground? How much financial aid has been promised?
How much he really cares and how willing is he to make a tangible contribution? I am pondering what he expects to get in return. In other words what is his end game?
Finally, since everyone meddles in everyone's election it is hard to get very upset about it. It is interesting to note how the last 6 years have exposed the hypocrisy of the right wing's "conservative" Republican values that are now anything but conservative or traditional Republican.
-
Captain Ed -- a lonely voice of consistent conservative values
http://captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/009138.php
February 11, 2007
Even Our Friends Should Butt Out Of Our Politics
"Am I the only conservative with misgivings regarding John Howard's proclamation about Barack Obama? ... Had he limited his criticisms to just the policies, Howard would have made a great argument for tenacity and will. However, he stepped over a line when he claimed that al-Qaeda should pray for an Obama victory. We have a long tradition of demanding outside governments stay out of our elections, even rhetorically, and that they should allow the American electorate to make our own decisions about leadership. Granted, we have not always been good neighbors about doing that ourselves, and Australian elections in particular came in for some heavy-handed CIA interference in the 1970s ... I have tremendous admiration for John Howard, and I understand the concern that drove his commentary. It's still inappropriate, regardless of the stupidity of Obama's response. I wouldn't want our allies commenting on Republican candidates, and they shouldn't comment on Democratic candidates, either."
-- Posted by Ed Morrissey at February 11, 2007 09:25 AM
-
Hypocrisy from the right?
Unimaginable!
Once again Glenn, hanging them by their own rope. Another great example of IOIYAAR.
Someone asked if this was a smart move for Howard. Kind of. From a cynical calculus point of view, he and his government are completely tied to the Bush administration. He can't possibly hope to have much influence in the White House in 2009 if a Democrat wins, so that shifts the balance from "stay out of it, so you have a good start with whoever wins" to "better hope a Republican wins"
Of course, this will be all the more comical if Howard is defeated in the Aussie elections coming up within a year.
-
It's Just Like............
...........listening to Sean Hannity rant and rave against liberal partisanship, smear tactics, and Bush hating. After hosting the Swift Boat Vets 7 times. Or listening to Ann Coulter or Michele Malkin aghast at and offended by the left wing hate machine. These neocon chickenhawks are absolute clowns. Wimps. I've never seen such a pack of dish-it-out-but-can't-take-it pussies in all my life.
-
One Example of Many
I find the Greenwald Hypocrisy Index useful in a number of ways. For those of us looking for a way to rebut the decades of vilification and lies directed at Democrats and liberals, Glenn's documentation of right-wing Republican hypocrisy is invaluable.
This evidence has been available before -- the size of the Reagan deficit measured against the tax-and-spend epithet, for example, or the occasional fundamentalist demagogue caught coming out of a cheap motel with his pants down -- but no one up to now has provided so much specific ammunition on such a wide range of public issues. Bloviators beware, henceforth you'll have to answer a few questions of your own.
Glenn's work is also a welcome morale booster. The vague sense of being lied about and put upon unfairly, the bewilderment that comes of being systematically targeted by such scumbags as Rove, Bennett and Dobson and their propaganda factories, and the unfocused anger which results from being unable to prevent the drift of political argument inexorably to the right can now be replaced by a focused counterattack. Prove that your adversaries are habitual liars, and you can gain room to make arguments for more responsible alternatives to their disastrous policies.
Yeoman work, Glenn -- the kind of research many of us don't have the time or skill to manage on our own -- but we do know how to put it to use, and we will.