Dubai Bye Bye
That's quite a little rumble that the Dubai deal has set off inside the Republican Party. I suspect that a lot of pressure is now being brought upon the Emirs to fold and pull out before Bush is handed the humiliating defeat of a veto-proof rejection coming from the Hill.
In my new L.A. Weekly piece I report on some of the foreshocks of this Republican ratttling that I sensed two weeks ago at David Horowtiz' Restoration Weekend. Some of the smarter GOPsters have a bad case of the shakes. The paying guests at this retreat for "movement conservatives" were only hungry for Red Meat re-affirmation of their deeply held ideological beliefs. Some of the Republican elected officials present at the confab -- those people who actually have to stand in elections-- had a more hesitant view. Here's what the call they call the 'nut grafs.'
Listening carefully to the handful of serious pols present — those more interested in securing the current conservative majority than in mindlessly pandering to the paying guests — I heard a radically different message seeping out. A sense of fear and loathing seems to be creeping in among those Republicans who prefer to think in cool, strategic terms rather than in purely ideological ones. Maybe even a sense of foreboding that among the many lesser accomplishments of the Bush administration — creating the morass in Iraq, the racking up of record deficits, the mucking about in corruption scandals — we will soon be able to add one more Mission Accomplished: the definitive scuttling of the 1994 Gingrich Revolution. The overturning of Republican rule, and maybe as soon as this November.
During several weekend panels, sandwiched in between the cheerleading speechifying, a number of former and current Republican election officials — the sort of people who actually have to worry about the way people vote — there was some very public hand-wringing over the immediate future of the party.
Please take a moment to read the entire piece.
March 9th, 2006 at 8:38 am
The worst thing this crowd in the white house has done to me is the way it messes with my head. Like this: So Rove knows the Dubai deal is dead, but how to turn that snafu into a plus for this November? Well, what if we get GW to keep mindlessly pushing in favor of it showing his resoluteness and all, while giving the GOPer’s running this fall a safe issue to show how they are their own person and not always in lockstep with the dismally unpopular leader. See what I mean? Its all this screwy spinning…
March 9th, 2006 at 10:18 am
The thing that I JUST still cannot understand is how the Democrats haven’t taken advantage of perhaps their biggest opportunity in the last 40 years.
I just don’t get it. Are they afraid of a backlash? Are they Or is the Democratic party going through an identity crisis? Are they afraid the GOP will slam in their faces just how many of them voted for the Patriot Act and the War?
The most vocal Democrats in Congress hold wildly differing views on a range of subjects – you’ve got moralist wags like HRC and Lieberman competing with old school liberals like Kennedy. Is it just that they can’t all figure out a basic platform on which to stand?
Kinder is dead on – Reagan was shiny and happy, and that worked for 8 years. Clinton, was huggy and happy, and HE was good for two terms.
Maybe what we need here is a ray of sunshine candidate (Mr. Obama, could you please step forward?) who can say, “Yeah, we’ve got some issues, let’s get to work.”
Why can’t the left get it’s shit together in the face of a right that’s on borrowed time?
March 9th, 2006 at 10:39 am
I think you said it in part already, Big Daddy, why they can’t. At this point they mainly have competing messages, none of which are all that convincing.
It may be that the Democrats having power again is what’s needed, both to calm the country down and to force them to get their act together.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:12 pm
I used to compare the Dems to the white basketball team that tours with the Harlem Globetrotters. The Globetrotters have to have an opposition to be able to put on a good show and the Greenwich Topsiders (or whatever they’re called) make a good living providing the appearance of an opposing team. Then someone (perhaps it was Marc) used this analogy in an article somewhere, so I had to drop it.
Here’s a new one. If we want to be charitable, we’ll assume the Dems are using a Muhammad Ali strategy-letting themselves function as a punching bag until the Repugs finally wear themselves out by beating on them. Then they’ll whip out the knockout punch.
I don’t believe the Ali hypothesis, though. I think the Dems are more like a fighter who got his ass kicked the first time, fought the same opponent again and laid down after the first punch, and now faces the third bout. This time he just got up and ran out of the room as soon as the bell rang, even though his opponent showed up drunk and blue from autoerotic asphxiation.
The pathetic death convulsions the Democratic Party is going through ought to finally kill off the “lesser of two evils” argument. Why would anyone on the left support or even vote for the Dems? They’re not only against most of what we stand for, but they’re a bunch of frigging losers. Time to build a left party and stop wasting our time and money on the DP.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:38 pm
Snorri -
Let us know when you’ve got the new party built, and if it’s not too much work, please make sure it’s perfect.
Democrats have always been more intramurallyfractious than Republicans. This isn’t necessarily a sign of weakness. What’s changed is that we’re now the party of moderation; our philosophy is no longer ascendant and our job is to stem the tide as the roles gradually reverse themselves. We are not positioned forGingrich-like charge (not . I believe this role has some honor and don’t scoff at it so readily.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:45 pm
Inadvertanty posted that mishmash above, before editing. Please forgive. Typical Democratic incompetence. Will be rectified by the next election cycle.
What I’m saying simply is that I’m still voting for the Washington Generals, that the meek will be strong in the not-too-distant future, that rope-a-dope isn’t such a bad strategy, especially for the party of moderation — certain things can’t forced. As Paul from Mpls said — if the Dems slip into power, that could firm up the flab quite quicky — we may even see that contrary to everyone’s favorite meme, they have a few ideas.
March 9th, 2006 at 1:35 pm
Wello due to changes in my living arrangements and my health status (not good) I’ve been largely absent from these discussions. I really have seen little to comment on but I thought I’d tweak Marc’s Dem bashing.
Walk on water indeed!
It was Sam uel Johnson who first proclaimed that the prospect of a hanging concentrates the mind and that is what the GOP now faces.The sbject panic they have shown in the Congress lets us know that the last issue they had – Security – is now gone and, despite the MSM’s continuing meme that Dems don’t get it the fact is that they do and the GOP knows it. Evidence? See Harold Ford’s TV Ads in Tenn.
I think those righties have every reason to be alarmed. And, no Marc, the Dems contrtolling congress won’t usher in the era of good feelin gs II but I think having Conyers chairing Judiciary and Waxman at Govt Operations or Rangel at Ways and Means makes a difference. And Nancy Pelosi isn’t perfect but compared to Dennis Hastart?
What has to be looed into is the sheer incompetence of the Adm thinking this deal could fly. I think it is the logical outcome of our fetish with a particular type of “Globalisation”. The world may be flat but it is not yet safe from nationalism. These days it is the right thatraise the banner of the Internationale. Security trumps all – except business. And to watch Republicans run away from their contributors is a stirring sight!
March 10th, 2006 at 7:06 am
The Emporer Has No Clothes and he is finally proving it once and for all. I posted today about my trip through the Red States and all the still unrepaired hurricaine damage, the impossibility of getting home owners insurance thus killing the RE market, and the feeling that government has broken down on EVERY level. Addressing your column: these issues are also Democratic issues in that their “solutions” are all more incompetent government bureaucracies with the accompanying tax increases. We actually have a crises in all government: federal, state, and local. The solution from the Democrats is socialism, and if you’ve flown lately a reaction to the horrors of the so-called service might be to turn the whole sorry mess over to the government that can’t possibly do worse.
March 9th, 2006 at 3:21 pm
“And it’s not just some bad apples. It’s the scandal that keeps on giving. Congress does two things well: overreacting and doing nothing. In terms of Cunningham and Abramoff, we’re doing both. Congress has not passed a law taking away pensions from convicted members. Our own leadership has blocked this!â€
Congress monitoring their own corruption is like telling an alcoholic to become a bartender.
I must say, learning that the Dubai deal has gone “south,†is one of the most satisfying recent events. Let’s give U.S. propaganda three cheers!
Bush pounded us with messages of hate,
Terror, terror, is our fate
Bush made a deal to give six ports to Dubai
He quickly found out it wouldn’t fly
Bush and his friends should be very proud
Their propaganda has worked, how profound!
March 9th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
This is totally off topic, but since I’m generally one of the first to bash ChristopherHitchens V2.2 on these pixels, I’ll call attention to one of the most sensible, forward-looking columns he’s written on foreign policy in recent memory.
http://www.slate.com/id/2137560/
Essentially, he suggests that Bush pull a “Nixon goes to China” with Iran. It could never happen, because Bush is too stupid, but it’s clearly one of the best ideas for dealing with Iran anyone’s put forward. The reason it’s possible as well as strategically necessary at this point is, ironically, our invasion of Iraq that has in essence set the stage for an Iraq/Iran Shiite muslim alliance that will effectively control the Gulf. It would not only shift the terrain of relations with Iran from confrontation to engagement, it would increase the chances of stabilizing the situation in Iraq – if that’s possible. Bush inadvertantly created a coincidence of interest between Iran and the U.S. by toppling Saddam. He’d be smart to try to pull something out of that fire. Hitchens is the first commentator I’ve seen so far who’s proposed an approach that’s truly visionary and strategic – as opposed to knee-jerk and rhetorical – and far more likely to undermine the most conservative of the mullahs over the not-too-long term than pursuing the kind of brilliant policy that’s worked so well with Cuba lo these many decades. We can afford to have blown it with Cuba, but not a potentially nuclear armed Iran. Putting forward an ultimatum to Israel that links military aid to ending the occupation at the same time could shift the dynamic of U.S. policy in the Middle East and strengthen our hand against al Qaeda and the like.
As a counterpoint, if you want to read something truly moronic on the same subject, click over to Roger Simon for a link to his great friend Michael Ledeen’s lunatic ravings. Unfortunately, the people in this administration are more at the Simon/Ledeen level of reactive, blowhard idiocy than an apparently chastened Hitchens in the wake of a three year war in Iraq with no end to the chaos in sight.
March 9th, 2006 at 4:24 pm
“Why would anyone on the left support or even vote for the Dems? They’re not only against most of what we stand for, but they’re a bunch of frigging losers.”
I have to say that I’ve heard so much insane crap come from the anti-Democrat version of the “left” over the years, that I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s a good thing we oppose most of what they stand for. As for “frigging losers” the far left has given us a lesson in losing that’s unprecedented for any ideological faction in American political history.
March 9th, 2006 at 4:31 pm
“What’s changed is that we’re now the party of moderation; our philosophy is no longer ascendant and our job is to stem the tide as the roles gradually reverse themselves. ”
Hear hear.
March 10th, 2006 at 8:36 am
There was a piece on Leher last night about search dogs and two Maine Game Wardens searching the rubble. They had to leave because neither FEMA or LA would cover their motel rooms while they worked there. Others left to. This is the kind stonewalling bureaucratic barriers we have. No wonder they can’t deliver a trailer to anywhere the displaced can live.
March 10th, 2006 at 9:16 am
Evets writes:
>Inadvertanty posted that mishmash above, >before editing. Please forgive. Typical >Democratic incompetence. Will be rectified by >the next election cycle.
Hey, at least you struck back. They’ll probably kick you out of the DP for that.
>rope-a-dope isn’t such a bad strategy, >especially for the party of moderation —
>certain things can’t forced.
If the DP is still rope-a-doping right now, when will they come out and fight? Their opponents are led by someone who combines extremism with incompetence-what are you wating for? The GOP is stuck for three more years with a leader who *openly* ridicules some of the key principles of our form of government-separation of powers, separation of church and state, the first, fourth, fifth, and fourteenth amendments, the constitutional primacy of foreign treaties (like the convention on torture). The DP’s strategy thus far has been to go along with it all (confirm Roberts, support the war, vote for the Patriot Act). This is really not surprising since, as other posters here point out, the DP runs on the same corporate funding as the Repugs and thus represents the same interests.
March 9th, 2006 at 6:48 pm
“Finally she broke in to ask shyly, in faultless English, “Would it be possible for the Americans to invade just for a few days, get rid of the mullahs and the weapons, and then leave?”
Reg,
Apprehensive—do you hear the deafening sounds of those war drums?
Having a deja vu of Iraq WMD’S—who says history doesn’t repeat itself?
Rice was beating her set of bongos really loud today—Iran’s policies are 180 degrees different from where we want the Middle East to go, blah, blah, blah, etc…
It is impossible for us to allow a country to successfully exist without being under the thumb of our economic system.
If our country was a person, we would be diagnosed with a disorder called megalomania, but since we are a country and not a person the condition is simply know as Empire building.
United States is gearing up for an attack on Iran, Bush will never mention oil as a reason for going to war. As in the case of Iraq, weapons of mass destruction (WMD) will be cited as the principal justification for an American assault. “We will not tolerate the construction of a nuclear weapon [by Iran],” is the way President Bush put it in a much-quoted 2003 statement. But just as the failure to discover illicit weapons in Iraq undermined the administration’s use of WMD as the paramount reason for its invasion, so its claim that an attack on Iran will be justified because of its alleged nuclear potential.
Iran occupies a strategic location on the north side of the Persian Gulf, it is in a position to threaten oil fields in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates, which together possess more than half of the world’s known oil reserves. Iran also sits adjacent to the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which, daily, 40% of the world’s oil exports pass. In addition, Iran is becoming a major supplier of oil and natural gas to China, India, and Japan, thereby giving Tehran additional clout in world affairs. It is these geopolitical dimensions of energy, as much as Iran’s potential to export significant quantities of oil to the United States that ultimately determines our government’s military strategy.
Iran’s nuclear facilities are scattered throughout the entire country. To launch an aerial attack, you would need many more fighter jets than were used in Iraq. How many civilians would be annihilated by missiles that don’t always have that pin-point accuracy to reach just the right target, and what further insurgencies will an attack like that incite. In addition, if these nuclear facilities were attacked, military strategists say that steps would need to be taken in order to prevent large-scale nuclear contamination from the resulting damage done to the reactors.
March 9th, 2006 at 7:35 pm
Big Daddy Says:
“The thing that I JUST still cannot understand is how the Democrats haven’t taken advantage of perhaps their biggest opportunity in the last 40 years.”
I will repeat what I have said here before: The Democratic Party as an institution (as opposed to its rank and file) would rather LOSE election after election than take positions that would challenge the corporate money it depends upon, no difference with the Republicans on that score. So no surprise they don’t rise to the challenge; they don’t really want to. You can’t turn a donkey into a swan.
March 9th, 2006 at 8:05 pm
What do you get when you breed a donkey with an elephant? Hilary Clinton–a jackass that should “forget” about running for president.
March 9th, 2006 at 8:19 pm
Eleanore,
There are two interesting things about that Hitchens piece (aside from the remnants of neo-con fantasies). First is that a prominent pro-warrior/neocon ally acknowledges that military action would either be ineffective (airstrikes) or impossible and/or counterproductive (invasion with, of course, what troops?). The second is that he breaks through the two versions of “strategic” thinking I’ve seen to date – i.e. the varieties of belligerence and threat (hollow as that may be) or traditional multilateral negotiations (which are fine, but tend to just ratify status quos). The “Nixon in China” approach is a different roll of the dice and, while a pipe-dream given this crackpot administration, is the only one that’s bold enough to potentially shift the terrain.
March 9th, 2006 at 8:57 pm
For what it’s worth, Michael Ledeen who’s one of the most aggressive neocon “regime change” advocates against Iran doesn’t think a military strike can be pulled off either. He apparently thinks the Iran regime will fall in short order if we just funnel enough money to the opposition. I’m glad he’s not promoting a full-tilt invasion at this point, but I think he’s engaged in some truly simple-minded wishful thinking. He’s operating in an air-tight cocoon and presumably thinks Iraq is going so well, it will have a domino effect. Obviously there’s something of a domino effect as regards Iran and Iraq, but so far as I can tell, the dominoes are falling in the opposite direction as the pro-Iran Shiites consolidate power.
March 9th, 2006 at 9:34 pm
The “Nixon in China†approach is a different roll of the dice and, while a pipe-dream given this crackpot administration, is the only one that’s bold enough to potentially shift the terrain.
Reg,
Do we need another Disneyland in Tehran?
March 9th, 2006 at 10:11 pm
Better than Mullahland.
Although the tepid response to EuroDisney makes this a questionable project.
Frankly, when folks are on the path to getting nukes, anything that promotes relative integration and interdependence is preferable to competing zealotries and increased isolation.
But don’t worry about it. Bush is far too chickenshit and mired in his own dogmatics to pull anything interesting off.
July 12th, 2006 at 7:47 pm
Go Ringtone…
Download the ringtone of the popular song: Go …
July 25th, 2006 at 3:17 pm
Eddie800 pokervbj
September 24th, 2006 at 7:02 am
dubai…
Interesting post. I came across this blog by accident, but it was a good accident. I have now bookmarked your blog for future use. Best wishes. Dubai Prevailing Wind Website Team…..
January 18th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Online Casino…
coerce physiology favors,Thiensville Freya prorates:Online Casino http://www.1onlinecasino.org/# …
March 30th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
oil fields…
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read….
May 3rd, 2007 at 8:08 am
Dubai United Arab Emirates Hotel…
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read….
June 29th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
simon security system…
Hi. Very nice blog. I\’ve been reading your other entries all day long..lol….