Me: Frank Lynch

Home
(Current commentary)

These are my mundane daily ramblings.
For something less spontaneous, I maintain The Samuel Johnson Sound Bite Page (over 1,800 Johnson quotes).

Email:
frank
dot
lynch2
at
verizon
dot
net

Obama the tough guy. Earlier this week I expressed a fear that Obama might eventually need to resort to "politics as usual" and might not be so hot at it. This morning some of the good folks at McClatchy look into the issue, albeit in the arena of foreign affairs, and find some of Obama's own words telling.

I'm not saying this makes him an inferior alternative to Clinton, I really think they're pretty equal overall.
Link | | | 11:56 AM | Home
 

If torture is outlawed, then only outlaws will torture. And seeing as how Bush is intent on twisting the common meaning of words (such as "there are no plans to invade Iraq on my desk"), we shouldn't be surprised that he wants to maintain semantic deniability and claim that we don't torture.

That's why he's vetoing a bill which would outlaw torture. Of course, the bill is more specific than the word "torture," because lawmakers know what a weasel Bush is when it comes to words and laws. Rather, the law specifically bans the CIA from using about a dozen specific "aggressive interrogation techniques," by limiting the CIA to the same restrictions placed on the Army during interrogations.

I think back to Mukasey's testimony to the Senate, where he suggested that all that would have to be done to outlaw waterboarding would be for the Senate to pass a bill doing so; anyone who forgot the President's veto power was naive, and in fact the CIA still wants the technique in their toolbox:

In a statement to The Washington Post, [CIA Director Michael] Hayden said the Army manual guidelines were intended for "a different population of detainees, a different group of interrogators, and for different intelligence needs" than those of the nation's chief spy agency. The CIA has not specified all the tactics it wants to keep using but says it no longer uses waterboarding. Administration officials have not ruled out using the tactic again.

So, uh, have the terrorists won yet?
Link | | | 11:15 AM | Home
 

What does a mean Barack Obama look like? I happen to like Barack Obama, I really do, he seems like an affable man. And I think he has the experience to make the right foreign policy decisions, contrary to Clinton's fear mongering. I have no doubt that he'll make the right decisions in the middle of the night.

My concern isn't that he won't recognize an emergency and behave accordingly, my concern is that he won't recognize threats of a more minor nature. I don't see his early Iraq positions as so central to his image as much as his insistence that we can overcome "politics as usual."

The way I read his positioning, it's not just a bet that he'll go in working to change the political atmosphere, but that the atmosphere itself will be open to change. It's not just a bet on Obama, it's a bet on what kind of Democrats and Republicans will be elected to Congress in 2008. Obama's message could still be pearls upon swine.

In the same way that I wanted Bush to have decision standards in place to recognize that plans in Iraq weren't bearing fruition and they needed to change to Plan B, I hope Obama has a decision structure in mind where he would recognize that the Republicans are stonewalling and not interested in overcoming partisanship. And what he'd do when that point comes.

This is where I think Clinton is superior to Obama: I think Clinton would recognize an impossible resistence to change sooner than Obama would. And when it comes time to deal with a bunch of die-hard partisans in the GOP, I want someone who knows how to play hard ball. It's not experience, in my view, which is the issue: I want that Teddy Roosevelt "speak softly, carry a big stick" thing.

We know Obama has the first part down, and I think Clinton has the second part down. How adept are each of them outside their comfort zones? I want Clinton to be able to reach across the aisle, but I somehow think that a hypothetical (here, from me...) inability on her part to reach across the aisle isn't as dangerous as an Obama who is too resolute in sticking flowers down the barrels of the guardsmen's rifles.

I'd feel a lot better if I knew Obama could get really, really steely-eyed. There could well come a point where hope isn't a plan. And I want confidence that Obama knows when to take the gloves off. Is that too much to ask?

That was something I liked about Dodd: not just his policies and thinking, but that he was willing to get up there and slow down the entire Senate for a cause he knew was just, even though Harry Reid thought otherwise.

End of the day, I know I wouldn't vote for McCain over either Clinton or Obama, but I want to know what we're in for, is all.
Link | | | 9:49 PM | Home
 

And with a wave of his wand, did Maliki declare "Mission Accomplished." Reconciliation has been achieved. I wonder what noun they'll come up with once reconciliation has been achieved.
Link | | | 9:45 AM | Home
 

Back to top.