Those Beltway types sure miss them some George Bush.
First it was David Broder:
The more President Obama examines our options in Afghanistan, the less he likes the choices he sees. But, as the old saying goes, to govern is to choose — and he has stretched the internal debate to the breaking point.
It is evident from the length of this deliberative process and from the flood of leaks that have emerged from Kabul and Washington that the perfect course of action does not exist. Given that reality, the urgent necessity is to make a decision — whether or not it is right.
Now, Mark Shields:
We have a president of real intellectual horse power who is cool, detached and analytical and if anything you can watch the emotional side of him emerge in this whole process. … There’s an emotional aspect, the comforter in chief as well as the commander in chief. Both roles. And I think it makes me nostalgic for those days when we had a manly man in the White House who could say, “Let’s kick some tail and ask questions afterwards” you know? That’s what we really need instead of any reflection.
They, of course, don’t have to pay the price for a wrong decision. They can just criticize it, assuming they can recognize it, without ever remembering that they were clamoring for George Bush-style act first, think later.
It’s not their kids that will be dying for a corrupt regime.
But, alas, I must say that while I truly believe Obama should put as much thought as he wants into his Afghanistan decision, he is fated to please both Broder and Shields. Most likely he will ultimately decide to go for “victory”, or maybe just “success” in Afghanistan. Still, where there’s indecision, there’s hope.
BIG CORRECTION: From Thinkprogress (where I got the Shields info originally)
Yesterday, ThinkProgress reported that syndicated columnist Mark Shields said this weekend on Inside Washington, referring to Obama’s Afghanistan war decision, that he is “nostalgic” for the days when the U.S. “had a manly man in the White House who could say, ‘Let’s kick some tail and ask questions afterwards.’” Shields contacted ThinkProgress this morning and kindly informed us that his comments were intended to be sarcastic. We regret our error in misinterpreting his comments and for questioning his motives. Shields told us that his comments were meant to disparage those who consistently argue that more war will solve America’s problems and that his statement was directed at co-panelist and right-wing neoconservative Charles Krauthammer, who, according to Shields, was displeased with the remark. With a deeper appreciation for his wit, we extend our sincere apologies to Mr. Shields.
Alas, the Broder quote is all too accurate.
Post a Comment