An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
The Bow: Enough Already
Eric Zimmermann of The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room reports that the National Republican Senatorial Commitee (NRSC) is using “the bow” to juice fundraising.
Perhaps Senate Dems should stop trying to explain this away and, instead, respond in kind … times two.
27 Responses to “The Bow: Enough Already”
I agree, 'enough already', but how can the Dems be called to 'respond in kind' with something that preceded this, when they did make a big deal about that already at the time (Michael Moore put it in a feature film for crying out loud!) In that sense, the current brohaha is a response to the prior.
As readers may know, I'm not a Republican. But the response to “the bow” seems pretty overwrought.
I see that some moderate Republicans agree about that. But other moderate Republicans are willing to make any old tired excuse that comes immediately mind.
I dunno, CStanley, how long the “but the other guys did it first” schtick is gonna hold up.
Speaking for myself only, the ODS is a bit more irritating than the BDS was — probably because there's a cumulative effect.
No, Polimom, you misunderstand me. I'm not suggesting that the right should make a big deal over this because the left did so toward Bush. I'm pointing out that Pete's recommendation for the Dems to now go back and bring up Bush's actions makes no sense (because it's already been done) and that he in fact is making the “they do it, so should we” reasoning to perpetuate all of this (though of course he may be making that comment facetiously and not actually recommending it.)
When this happened. The left hyperventilated over it.
Alls fair in love and war and the left has declared war on the right. See us poor Publicans were off fighting a war on terrorists and we didnt realize that the real terrorirst were us. We were the bad guys. We were the pond scum that all Americans were coming to hate because we did what we thought was right. We actually thought that those terrists over in the middle east were actually bad guys. We were wrong. They should be just left alone.
The only problem I have is why is Obama escalating the war in Afghanistan to kill terrists who he thinks are bad guys. Thats confusin to me. But then us GOP'ers are just Hitler loving, gun toting, War mongering rich people who got our money off the sweat of Illegal aliens. So we should be lined up and shot.
Ah. Sorry CStanley — I misunderstood.
:<
AS far as this point by CStanley…….I'm not suggesting that the right should make a big deal over this because the left did so toward Bush.
Right the democrats and their 3 trillion dollar deficit in only a few months deserve our mutual respect, admiration and undivided loyalyty.
HOW DARE you challenge the chosen one. Its unpatriotic to speak out against that which you disagree with. Dont we know that? Oh your right. We should not challenge or question Mr. Obama or the democrats. Thats unpatriotic.
So that makes us….Hitler loving, gun toting, War Mongering, UNPATRIOTIC rich folk who got our money off the sweat of Illegal Immigrants.
“See us poor Publicans were off fighting a war on terrorists”
I do not thing the terrorists or IEDs that killed our brave troops asked first what political party our heroes belonged to…
Right the democrats and their 3 trillion dollar deficit in only a few months deserve our mutual respect, admiration and undivided loyalyty.
This comment doesn't follow logically from mine, Braindead. If I point out that certain types of criticism are juvenile and ineffective, that does not in any way imply that we shouldn't be critical of the important things.
Right D.E. Thats why I said. We were all wrong. We never should have gone off and fought the terrorists because there was nothing policital in it to be gainned.
The real war was at home with the democrats who embarked on the most savage BDS campaign since……since….well since the GOP embarked upon the CDS campaign a few years earlier which was in response to the RDS campaign, which was in response to the CDS campaign which was in response to the NDS which was in response to ….fingers getting tired here.
Point is. There is nothing political in the march down fascism lane. Its all pure hatred anymore. Not political.
Its all pure hatred anymore.
Accompanied perhaps by just a touch of irrationality.
**ahem**
OK, ignoring 'The Bow' itself, I have yet to see one criticism of Obama that has NOT been completely defended by the Left, and the majority of the 'moderate' board, even his decisions to maintain a lot of Bush-era programs that were attacked unmercifully by the same people now defending Obama.
See: rendition, states secrets privilege, motions that the government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying, deficit spending, increased troop levels, warrantless eavesdropping, targeted bombing attacks with civilian casualties, executive privilege, politicization of the Justice Department, and on and on.
So, excuse me while I call those people out and say 'bullshit'. You are as reflexively defensive of anything Obama as you criticized the Right being of Bush, and are just so myopic you refuse to see it or acknowledge it.
That is an excellent point, AR, although I'd say that the moderate left sites seem more guilty of this than the far left. Some lefty blogs are being intellectually honest in criticizing Obama on those issues, while the center left is mainly quiet about it.
AR: See: rendition, states secrets privilege, motions that the government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying, deficit spending, increased troop levels, warrantless eavesdropping, targeted bombing attacks with civilian casualties, executive privilege, politicization of the Justice Department, and on and on.
OK, AR, maybe I'll lose my liberal cred here but I don't think so. These things are all deplorable and I WILL judge the current administration by how they deal with these issues. There has been movement in the right direction already (closing of Gitmo, abandoning the fight against California's right to amend their own Constitution), but I hope and EXPECT Obama to roll back these other atrocities too. As for missile attacks, there's no winning on that issue. When we have “actionable intelligence” we can do something or do nothing. Apparently Obama will be criticized either way.
I predict, though, that the same people who are wailing about “the bow” will absolutely fume when he takes anti-petroleum pro-renewables policies. In fact I see this already.
GD – we will see with the rest of the left, but I actually do expect you would stand your ground. You have shown yourself to be an independent thinking, and you come at things more from your own person ethics than from Democratic talking points only. Not that we still don't disagree on a lot of things, mind you.
BTW – the “motions that the government is completely immune from litigation for illegal spying” is actually a bit of a red herring. The Bush administration never took that position – it is a new one just put forth by the Obama administration in defense of, of all things, the Patriot Act.
Oh, the irony!
CS – you are correct. The far-left has started being vocal about feeling betrayed.
I predict, though, that the same people who are wailing about “the bow” will absolutely fume when he takes anti-petroleum pro-renewables policies. In fact I see this already.
GD: Conservatives who want pro-petroleum policies are looking for domestic drilling, which would not be popular with the Saudis- so there's no internal inconsistency in opposing the a@@ kissing and having a realistic view toward use of petroleum until alternative technologies are available for mass consumption.
This didn't start with President Bush kissing the Saudi King anymore than it started with a “bow” to the Saudi King.
But for the party that was supposed to be more adult, isn't finger pointing “they did it first” a little immature?
To steal a line, “We didn't start the fire.”
Austin Roth–
It's easy to defend Obama because he's only been president for ten weeks. It took George W Bush five years to be considered a complete failure.
I don't expect you to follow every random thought I post here. But last week I commented here that what Obama is doing is risky, but it's too soon to tell if it will succeed or fail.
It's true I complained more about Republicans than Democrats in that comment, but I recognized the possibility of failure. And I suggested that Republicans ought to be taking serious steps now to anticipate any possible failure.
Instead, “the bow”.
It seems to me that the–wow, what to call it?–controversy over “the bow”, like the controversies over teleprompters and a crummy gift to Gordon Brown are pretty ridiculous. Not just ridiculous, but kind of dumb. Vacant. Unserious.
If Obama fails–and I think it's more likely he'll muddle through–what alternative will there be?
Am I really supposed to support the party of Glenn Beck?
Robert Gibbs is an idiot. I think any reasonable person can see that Obama did bow. But he also shook hands. For Gibbs to explain it away how he did is asinine and I agree with the Republicans in the video when they ask, “Do they [the White House] think we're dumb?” But that's about the only thing I agree with them on concerning this issue.
While it's understandable that they will use this incident to try to gain support (just as the Dems would if the roles were reversed) they are blowing it out of proportion. When the mid-terms come people will judge the Republicans on their actions (or non-actions). To the extent that the Republicans are choosing to focus on this issue (and being against Obama in general) rather than solve problems which actually effect people's lives, they will continue to lose.
Back to Gibbs… he should have said something similar to, “In the West it is a tradition to meet with a handshake. In the Middle East a bow shows respect.”
I think my very first comment on this when it happened was that I wasn't particularly very happy with Obama (or Bush when he did it) but it is a small issue. If Obama feels that a bow is important to establishing good relations, then so be it. Bush felt that kissing Abdullah on the lips (on more than one occasion) and holding hands was important to maintaining relations.
The only people who really care about this at this point are the anti-Obama folks. Since the Republicans are keeping this alive they are only hurting themselves. They won't gain any new support and may very well lose support from people who have had enough of their antics.
I don't think we should respond in kind (although I can understand the impulse), because that just perpetuates the silliness. Republicans/right-wingers/conservatives are making huge big deals about these non-issues because, basically, they have nothing else to make issues about. They have no ideas, no alternatives to what they criticize (at least ones that are not insane). The Republican Party has nothing right now. Nothing, nada, zip, zilch. Their skulls are empty. There's no there there. The Party of No.
AR, good observation about Obama not being criticized by many of his supporters. I don't like everything he is doing, but some of Bush's policies are OK. Specifically I have always supported troops in Afghanistan and one of the reasons (which I was vocal about here on TMV when Obama was running for prez) that I like Obama was his commitment to increase troop levels in Afghanistan. I have also commented while Obama was running that many people, including many of Obama's own supporters, would be surprised at what Obama did in office because they weren't fully listening to him. I also predicted that Obama and Congress would be at odds with each other over their expectations, but that (so far) doesn't seem to be the case, though in time it will probably be so. I think right now it's a Democratic honeymoon where the executive and legislative branches are now married. At the moment there is bliss.
I admit that I haven't been very vocal about opposing Obama's actions to continue some of Bush's policies but he's been on office for a little over two months. I would find it irresponsible of Obama if he went in and said, “From this day forward anything Bush did will be reversed.” Even if he agreed that all of Bush's policies should be reversed. My sense about Obama is that he wants to review the policies before making final decisions. I am willing to wait a few months and see how things settle down with Obama. There is a huge plate of issues that Obama needs to tackle.
But according to the Republicans, if I criticize the president about his policies then I'm a traitor who should be shot…. oh wait. That's what they said about people who criticized Bush. I guess it doesn't apply to Obama and it's fine to criticize him. Glad to know I have the green light on that.
CStanley, “In that sense, the current brohaha is a response to the prior.”
I wouldn't characterize what the Republicans are doing as “tit for tat”. I see at as politics as usual, a game which both the Dems and Reps (elected officials and media personalities) understand. The Republicans are trying to score points (as the Dems did). And perhaps the Republicans did score some points the first day or two of this. But since then it's just downhill for them (over this issue) because most Americans just don't care.
Essentially if “your guy” makes a mistake, or even does something which can be construed to be a mistake then that action is fair game for the other side to use. Unfortunately the Republicans take these things too far these days.
GS – well, all your thoughts are random, so I have no choice ion that matter.
As for the contention 'it is too soon', that only shows you are one those who I am calling out and saying 'bullshit'.
It is not that Obama hasn't had time to reverse those courses of action I listed, it is that he and his administration are embracing them, perpetuating them, and EXANDING on them, as I pointed out.
On of the top level posters here, Kathy kattenburg, just commented (and to her credit critisized) this: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/world/asia/11…
There is also this: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-…
And this: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/03/us/politics/0…
And this: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/us/10torture….
And so on.
So, defend him all you want. Just quit trying to pretend it is for any other reason than he is NOT a Republican.
And I basically said in my initial post 'never mind the “bow” stuff, lets look at serious matters'. But the truth is you and those like you WANT the focus to be on the bow, so you don't have to talk about the truth of the path Obama is taking.
CS – Conservatives who want pro-petroleum policies are looking for domestic drilling, which would not be popular with the Saudis
What an irony that “convervatives” don't want to conserve any domestic oil for our kids. The Saudis couldn't care less. Our oil is a drop in the ocean in terms of global reserves. No one has suggested we can even reduce gasoline prices significantly-if at all-with our paltry dribble into the stream.
So first, it's incredibly selfish. If you think of all the oil America has ever had-including that which is difficult and expensive to develop-as a six pack, we've consumed 4 beers (2/3) and opened the fifth can. So-called conservatives are in a huge hurry to finish it all before our kids are even old enough to share the last can (which will cost a fortune as it's in shale and tar pits and deep depleted wells). Future generations will need oil to make plastics and thousands of other petroleum products. But you want to use it up right now rather than make a full court press for alternatives.
Second, it won't be onstream for a decade, so not a realistic solution to develop now while we're “waiting” for alternatives.
Third, it won't affect supply one bit. It's a trivial amount. We'll still gobble up all the oil OPEC will produce, even with the “new” US output.
Fourth, the oil companies have never agreed to, and do not now, devote American oil to American consumers. It goes right to the cheapest place to ship it and to the highest bidder. No agreement, no deal.
Fifth, oil companies fight endlessly not to cover the cost of spills, masking the true cost of developing it. I'd say, no more lawsuits and an iron clad binding agreement that ALL costs of environmental damage, even from storms or earthquake caused breaks and leaks are automatically paid at once. Starting with the 30 year old unpaid damage from Exxon Valdez.
Sixth. No more subsidies. Oil companies are rich and hugely profitable. We're broke. No more federal or state help with exploiting our dwindling reserves. How about a depletion allowance instead?
Austin Roth–
Thanks for letting me know the truth. But you really should stop using profanity.
“Its all pure hatred anymore.”
Accompanied perhaps by just a touch of irrationality.
**ahem**
Really. Perhaps you should get out more often Polimom.