tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post2282118458262414507..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: Iraq and TrustJonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-30159906955696847812010-08-19T20:04:57.060-05:002010-08-19T20:04:57.060-05:00Incognito,
Actually, your last paragraph is sort ...Incognito,<br /><br />Actually, your last paragraph is sort of my point: despite things not going "well" over the last six months (and longer, of course), US casualties have dropped another notch and Obama met -- beat, actually -- the end-of-August deadline. That certainly doesn't prove that Obama will in fact meet the next deadline, and I'm not saying that people *should* trust him; I'm simply noting that they don't, despite at least some reason they could.Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-86914322509849791062010-08-19T16:41:58.165-05:002010-08-19T16:41:58.165-05:00Speaking just for myself, the Iraq War has gone on...Speaking just for myself, the Iraq War has gone on so long, and at such great cost in both blood and treasure (for Iraqis and Americans), that's it's hard to muster up a great deal of enthusiasm, even for winding down the war.<br /><br />Having said that, I count Iraq in the same category as health care. Obama made explicit and detailed commitments during the campaign on both issues. In both cases, despite multiple opportunities to change course, he has steadily pushed forward and accomplished what he said he would.<br /><br />He's done the same in Afghanistan. (I disagreed during the campaign, and disagree now, with escalating the war in Afghanistan. But he was clear during the campaign what he wanted to do, and he's done it.)<br /><br />I would put myself in the camp of those whose respect for and trust in Obama has grown over the past 18 months. He not only can give a good speech, he knows how to manipulate the levers of power to accomplish much of what he wants to do.<br /><br />Contrast that with Jimmy Carter (an underrated president, but still one who was unable to move much of his agenda through Congress and through the federal bureaucracy), or with Bill Clinton (weakened from the beginning by Cabinet appointment controversies and rolled by the military on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell").massappealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17883213166005005577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-17668891983221638952010-08-19T15:12:37.732-05:002010-08-19T15:12:37.732-05:00The sort of trust you're talking about is earn...The sort of trust you're talking about is earned. If the year 2011 passes and all American troops have been withdrawn from Iraq, the skeptical Dems you're talking about (I'm one) will know that Obama's word in these situations can be trusted. <br /><br />Given that most of the DC establishment either lined up behind the war or believed they had to defer to the waging of it, though, and tried to cover their political reputations with (now often readily acknowledged) lame arguments, evasions, and subterfuges, I'll flip the question and toss it back at you: why would any sane person approach the government's proclamations from the presumption that they were being fully truthful?<br /><br />Lastly, the last time I checked Iraq didn't have a functioning government. While I hope they get their affairs in order (the Iraqi people, surely, have suffered enough), what I'm expecting, frankly, is that the potemkin village we call the Iraqi government will start falling apart over the next year. Who can say what Obama would do in that circumstance?Incognitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419974740123262249noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-27053169953797149502010-08-19T14:01:33.934-05:002010-08-19T14:01:33.934-05:00I wonder if one reason for a seeming lack of trust...I wonder if one reason for a seeming lack of trust might be attributed by President Obama's attempts at bipartisanship? <br /><br />A common byproduct of trying to work with many different sides is that you incorporate part of their respective arguments into your final policy. With Obama, this attempt sometimes gives the appearance that he is in support of opposite sides of an issue. I suspect that this could create trust issues among Democrats as well as the general public.Kurt Manwaringhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06490499860911273862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-32337293122305330642010-08-19T13:53:08.902-05:002010-08-19T13:53:08.902-05:00Matt,
Ah, but it's not 50K; it's 50K who ...Matt,<br /><br />Ah, but it's not 50K; it's 50K who are on their way out over the next 15 months.<br /><br />My guess is that if that does in fact happen, and casualties average safely below five US deaths/month over the next year, that most liberals will look back on Obama's Iraq policy and say he basically did well by them. I just think there's a huge amount of suspicion that the administration is going to find some excuse for leaving 50K, or close to that, troops there forever. Now, the suspicion may well turn out to be correct. I'm just saying that it's there, and that a lot of liberal dissatisfaction with BHO is based on what they're afraid he might do more than what he's actually done.Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-39214495255612602222010-08-19T13:36:07.252-05:002010-08-19T13:36:07.252-05:00For my money, it's 50K is a heck of a lot bigg...For my money, it's 50K is a heck of a lot bigger than 0. It's certainly Gitmo and torture and etc. So, in a real sense, it's accepting Iraq as part of Bush's War on Terror, and seeing very few gains in regards to changing that policy, which is frustrating because Obama has the most unilateral power he has in this arena. I don't begrudge health care (except tactically), and I'm frankly amazed that climate change is as close as it is in this economic environment (it ain't gonna happen, but it got close-ish). So, yeah, I'm not really celebrating something that probably should have happened quicker (and REALLY happened, not "happened except for the 50,000 other troops there")Matt Jarvisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-76656786002426419592010-08-19T12:23:22.618-05:002010-08-19T12:23:22.618-05:00More or less in line with what Martin said: Obama ...More or less in line with what Martin said: Obama is intensely cerebral. Many, many people distrust the intensely cerebral. He furrows his brow and works it out. People don't know that he's balancing this ideological value against these practical considerations (hell, they don't want to hear about those practical considerations - fingers in ears, LA LA LA...).Gordonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14660252332090242623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-82083121150085115652010-08-19T11:07:12.018-05:002010-08-19T11:07:12.018-05:00My position is that many liberal and/or progressiv...My position is that many liberal and/or progressives bloggers and activists distrust Obama because of his domestic politics and this spills over to foreign accomplishments. It basically boils down to what happened over healthcare. Liberals have long supported America having universal healthcare, the support goes all the way back to 1912 when Theodore Roosevelt ran as a Progressive. Substantial efforts for universal healthcare started in the Truman administration. Also for many liberals universal healthcare meant one thing, single-payer. When Obama began his attempts at universal healthcare, single-payer was never really discussed and the public option, the compromise, was sacrificed so the vested interests would not due a Harry and Louise style opposition. To many liberals and progressives, this was too much to bear. HCR meant single-payer or at least the public option. This is when they began distrusting Obama on practically everything.<br /><br /> I also think that the expectations about Obama influence disappointment in liberals and progressives heavily. Bush II was viewed as the culmination of thirty years of conservative policy, which liberals view as absolute failure, and the result was the worse economic crisis since the Great Depression. They knew that 2008 was going to be a Democratic year and many of us believed that now was our moment in the sun, a second New Deal and Great Society. The results were not exactly what we wanted or expected. Conservative opposition has been constant and consistent and thanks to procedural quirks, fairly effective. The perceived reluctance of Obama to fight for liberal goals, exasperates this. <br /><br /> Basically, the liberals that mistrust Obama do so because they believe that liberals are missing their moment in the sun because of him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-81964515628433575282010-08-19T11:01:57.647-05:002010-08-19T11:01:57.647-05:00I wrote you a while back about the "creeping ...I wrote you a while back about the "creeping Naderism" that I've seen on the Left in recent weeks. This post seems to address the same problem. <br /><br />I will say that I'm about as pro-Obama as the situation permits. I do trust him, and I have faith in the incredibly patient "long game" that Obama likes to operate on. However, I will say that ... I mean, I believe Obama is doing a good job and has done what he's done for good reasons, but the "long game" concept is not one that ordinarily permits the expression of a lot of enthusiasm. Obama's first two years have been marked by a lack of definition somehow.... if you think of it, it's not like there have been any sharp dividing lines that help us define "early Obama" from "later Obama" or anything like that. Obama governs in such a way that it's sometimes difficult to know what he's really thinking. I guess what I'm saying is, after the November elections, Obama will probably be required to reposition himself a bit, and that will afford a little bit of purchase on what he did/didn't do in the first two years and give us a better perspective on it.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18440356770947146690noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-54732187897628681172010-08-19T10:06:20.720-05:002010-08-19T10:06:20.720-05:00We wouldn't call the current situation, re: Gi...We wouldn't call the current situation, re: Gitmo a "defeat" for Obama. More like a "surrender" or "continuation of the status quo for the sake of political expediency".<br /><br />Please expand on why this is not the case. And to spell out a simple ground rule, let's just say that "Well.. the NIMBY'ing of the Legislative Branch!" is not a valid excuse.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com