wait, now it's the Dems that are hawks?

[gh]

a columnist (with left leanings, to be sure) muses on how the hawk/dove roles seem to have switched parties

http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-06-24/e ... money-army

[Conor Dary]

"But, of course, back when these were Bush's wars, the Republicans couldn't say enough good things about them. One of the things they used to say was "Support our troops," which meant "Support our military policies whatever they are."

Republicans are against anything Obama does.

Sadly, I am not sure Obama really understands that.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/0 ... ver-obama/

[jeremyp]

I think the majority of both parties want us out of there, but it is up to the current Prez to do it responsibly. But sending in 33,000 troops and then removing them a year later didn't seem responsible, it seemed like: "I'll play to both sides of the field."

[Pego]

I think the majority of both parties want us out of there, but it is up to the current Prez to do it responsibly. But sending in 33,000 troops and then removing them a year later didn't seem responsible, it seemed like: "I'll play to both sides of the field."

Unfortunately, he has "played to both sides of the field" on quite a few issues. I am one of those greatly disappointed. This is not what I expected of him 30 months ago.

[jazzcyclist]

I think the majority of both parties want us out of there, but it is up to the current Prez to do it responsibly. But sending in 33,000 troops and then removing them a year later didn't seem responsible, it seemed like: "I'll play to both sides of the field."

Unfortunately, he has "played to both sides of the field" on quite a few issues. I am one of those greatly disappointed. This is not what I expected of him 30 months ago.

I feel the same way, Pego. Obama gives triangulating a bad name. He also puts far too much faith in the power reasonable persuasion. You can't always get people to do what you want by changing their minds. Sometimes you have to twist their arms to get them to do what you want. Here's what Obama said about the Iraq war when he was running for president:

I don't want to just end the war, but I want to end the mindset that got us into war in the first place. That's the kind of leadership that I think we need from the next president of the United States. That's what I intend to provide.

http://votersforpeace.us/perspectives/zeese020508.html

Foreign policy was my #1 priority when I cast my vote in 2008, and of all the candidates for president, I think Ron Paul might be the only one who would change the direction of American foreign policy if he were elected.

[bruce3404]

I saw Steve Earle last night and he made a very good point that wars are always about someone's money and that someone wants somebody else to go to the front and fight their battles for them. We seem to continue making the same mistakes we made in Vietnam which are to ram democracy and our way of thinking down everyone's throats. I'd have to go back to the Korean War to find a war that seems to have had some justification and didn't involve our country being attacked.

[shivfan]

Historically, hasn't that always been the case? Woodrow Wilson took the US into WWI, FDR into WWII, Truman into Korea, and the JFK-LBJ partnership into Vietnam....

My understanding is that until the Bushes came along, Republicans tended to be more isolationalist.

[Cooter Brown]

We really need an automatic flat war tax of 5% on everything and everyone to pay for existing wars. It'd stay in effect from the first day of war to the last.

[jazzcyclist]

We really need an automatic flat war tax of 5% on everything and everyone to pay for existing wars. It'd stay in effect from the first day of war to the last.

That would be a great constitutional amendment. I think it would have prevented the Iraq War from happening.

[tandfman]

Unfortunately, he has "played to both sides of the field" on quite a few issues. I am one of those greatly disappointed. This is not what I expected of him 30 months ago.

I'm a little disappointed, too. But seeing the Republican Party so driven by the Tea Party's agenda, and reading what many of the prospective Republican candidates are saying, absolutely scares the shit out of me.

[Conor Dary]

Historically, hasn't that always been the case?... FDR into WWII...

Say what? We were provoked into WWII I believe. Or is this another silly 'FDR let PH happen' comment.

[kuha]

Unfortunately, he has "played to both sides of the field" on quite a few issues. I am one of those greatly disappointed. This is not what I expected of him 30 months ago.

I'm a little disappointed, too. But seeing the Republican Party so driven by the Tea Party's agenda, and reading what many of the prospective Republican candidates are saying, absolutely scares the shit out of me.

Everyone's a little (or more) disappointed--but mostly by the overall climate of hysterical irrationality. Has any president, ever, had to face a more impossible, absolutely reflexive, and ideologically inflexible opposition than Obama? It would be comical if it wasn't so deadly serious and destructive.

[tandfman]

Remember too that the financial meltdown happened on W's watch. Both domestically and internationally, Obama faced really difficult situations not of his making.

[kuha]

Remember too that the financial meltdown happened on W's watch. Both domestically and internationally, Obama faced really difficult situations not of his making.

Absolutely. For many of us, this was never in any question and has never been forgotten.

[bruce3404]

Has any president, ever, had to face a more impossible, absolutely reflexive, and ideologically inflexible opposition than Obama? It would be comical if it wasn't so deadly serious and destructive.

Clinton did, though perhaps not to the degree than Obama is; at least people didn't hate Clinton for the color of his skin. A recent writer to my local paper quoted a song that should be the GOP's theme song. From the movie, Horsefeathers, as sung by Groucho:

I don't know what they have to say,
It makes no difference anyway,
Whatever it is, I'm against it.
No matter what it is or who commenced it,
I'm against it.

Your proposition may be good,
But let's have one thing understood,
Whatever it is, I'm against it.
And even when you've changed it or condensed it,
I'm against it.