49 Comments

1. whiskey:

I agree with all but #5. The press is so in the tank for Teleprompter Jesus that they will be covering for him even after they are dead. Which will come soon enough for them.

They will NEVER turn on their Messiah, the guy all these Post-Christian morons worship as a living God. Please. They actually pray to him.

My own $0.02 is that we will also lose NYC, and perhaps another one, until Obama is removed and we have a military rule until new elections can be held.

All those nukes, that North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, and everyone else, will have guarantees it, as does the dynamics — whoever can attack the US with the most dead Americans gets the most Jihad money and men and power.

As for the fall, it depends on good governance and systems, not men comprised of angelic natures. Men are always subject to awful impulses, it is social systems beyond and above laws and legalisms, that prevent them from being acted upon.

Obama’s hold hands and sing Kumbayah bit will of course be idiotic. The result of it is likely, no Black or Hispanic office holder after his monumental disaster. We are looking at min 6 million US dead with a nuked NYC. More in a follow-on attack in Boston or Chicago or Dallas. [They are all, btw, amazingly beautiful cities every bit as precious as Rome or London or Paris.]

I will also add that Israel will be wiped out by Iran, in a surprise attack from Lebanon, with nuclear missiles, and Obama will be happy with the result. It will be a foretaste of the disaster to meet us. Israel is too desperate to simply live another day longer than to face foresquare the desire of Iran to exterminate all of them.

Nov 5, 2008 - 4:35 pm 2. DougS:

Den Beste has always been one of the bright bulbs in the blogosphere. I miss USS Clueless.

I read and re-read his essay this morning because he caught much of what I was thinking last night, to wit:

Obama won because so many people projected their wishes and desires onto him; instead of seeing him as the empty suit that he really is, they saw in him only what they wanted to see. That’s why he got support from so many illogical quarters. They didn’t vote for Obama; they voted for their own hopes projected onto his blank screen.

But what that means is that *no matter what he does* in the way of actually governing, he will disappoint a substantial number of people who supported him. Whether it’s the left, or the weirdly infatuated right (i.e., Christopher Buckley) or the center, someone will be let down. And because expectations have been whipped up so high, that fall will be hard. We all know that politicians will break your heart at some point, but expectations for a Messiah are, by nature, very different.

Look at the stock market today. Buyer’s remorse has set in already.

Obama gets two years. He’ll screw something up, and if the Republicans can get their act together (a big ‘if,’ admittedly), they’ll have an opening for a countercharge, like they did in 1994.

Nov 5, 2008 - 4:54 pm 3. Joshua:

For President Obama, a lot will depend on how long he can keep the bloom on his rose.

No doubt a good chunk of Obama’s support yesterday (maybe even a big enough chunk to have been decisive on its own) came from “retrospective voters”, i.e. folks who don’t necessarily have the time or inclination to do much homework on the candidates, so their voting decision-making process boils down to: “Am I personally, or is the country, generally better off now than it was when the incumbent president took office? If so, I’ll vote for him and anyone from his party. If not, I’ll vote for the opposition.” In this case, that meant punishing McCain, not for his own shortcomings, and not even for the sins of the Bush administration per se, but merely for the economy going bad on Bush’s watch.

As unfair as this may have been to McCain in this election though, the thing about retrospective voting is that it doesn’t discriminate by party – and is pretty much impervious to any attempt to blame the opposition party. If things get worse for America under an Obama administration between now and 2010, it doesn’t really matter whose fault it is; retrospective voters will make congressional Dems pay for it on account of it happening on a Dem president’s watch, just as they made the GOP pay in 2006 for Katrina and other setbacks that occurred with Bush in the White House. And if things don’t turn around by 2012, Obama himself will be vulnerable for the same reason.

Nov 5, 2008 - 5:41 pm 4. Patriot Front:

Wretchard, how about a prediction from you on Iraq?

Nov 5, 2008 - 5:46 pm 5. JMH:

I think I agree with Whiskey that the MSM won’t turn on Obama. (I have a twinge of doubt, since they showed some signs of “getting tough” at the very end, no doubt after they calculated it was too late to matter. But it’s just a twinge and a small one at that). I think they will follow the trail that MSNBC blazed, deciding that the best way to deal with their shrinking profits and credibility is to preach to the choir. They’ll attempt to make money by entertaining and validating the looney left, abandoning any pretense at objectivity. Frankly, from a business POV, that’s probably all that makes sense for them anyway – I doubt they could survivie financially long enough to rebuild the credibility to reach beyond the Choir. Ultimately it’s a losing proposition though (c.f. Air America). I kind of doubt even Soros or Pelosi/Obama/Reid will prop them up (in another couple of years, when a few million voters realize the MSM sold them an Pig in a Poke with Obama, I doubt they’ll have enough influence left to be worth it).

Regardless, that bolt is shot. The Left used it to get Obama in office, and won’t be able to use it again for a generation. They may decide a Ministry of Propaganda is necessary to replace it, I’m not sure.

DougS is absolutely correct when he says voters “…didn’t vote for Obama; they voted for their own hopes projected onto his blank screen.” He’ll be a trainwreck. Unfortunately, we’re passengers on the train, so we won’t have the best view of the spectacle.

Nov 5, 2008 - 5:58 pm 6. ricpic:

If Israel doesn’t launch against Iran before Obama is inaugurated it can be assured Iran will launch after he is inaugurated in the full knowledge that Obama will do nothing other than some clucking after a nuclear strike on Israel.
Therefore Israel will launch, and soon.

Nov 5, 2008 - 6:06 pm 7. wretchard:

Wretchard, how about a prediction from you on Iraq?

Iraq was never a battlefield in isolation. Its strategic purpose was to send a signal to the energy and religious powers in the Middle East. Al-Qaeda’s defeat was consequent to the demonstration of American will and capability as demonstrated in Iraq. Iraq’s greatest value was as a signal to Sunni extremists. Its second greatest value was as an alternative Shi’a polity to the theocracy in Iran. Iraq would be West Germany to Iran’s East Germany.

The financial crisis and Obama’s Presidency has fundamentally changed the situation in at least two respects. First, the collapsing oil prices will mean that both Saudi Arabia and Iran may face growing unrest, which they will export. An Obama administration will mean a smaller military, a propensity to abandon Iraq in whatever condition it may be found or at least to flee at the slightest storm. Taken together they suggest America will be challenged very soon in the Middle East with an administration that will dis-invest in defense and which is reluctant to fight.

My prediction then is a crisis in mid to late 2009 in both the Middle East and Afghanistan, and possibly in Latin America too, as Chavez loses its ability to buy domestic peace. Obama will have no design margin to meet these crises given a declining economy and his campaign promises to dismantle the military.

That’s the baseline scenario. Then there’s the worst case scenario where a now impoverished Russia makes a grab in the former Eastern Europe or the Black Sea. But here the crystal ball gets hazy. About the only thing that is fairly certain is that one or several crises, both of an economic and geopolitical nature will hit the world in 2009. And there will be precious little in the way of resources and perhaps even less in the way of will, to respond.

I should add that many of the same problems would have faced John McCain. A McCain victory would have led to a Via Dolorosa. But people expected less of McCain: only that he would not betray his country. Obama promised much, much more and in the end may deliver far, far less.

Nov 5, 2008 - 6:17 pm 8. Tom:

I too am a fan of den Beste and regret that his health was partly the cause of his stilling his keyboard at USS Clueless. His periodic musing on matters other than anime are welcome.

I wonder about the media as it hates to be crossed. It turned on Clinton for a variety of reasons (triangulation, Monica, don’t ask don’t tell). It was behind Bush after 911 and up to and through the commencement of operations in Iraq but then turned when they felt duped. Then they struck with a vengence.

I offer another view looking at the media in the context of its role in a culture of celebrity, manufactured or otherwise. This has been a Hollywood phenomena where the media builds up personalities, minor celebrities and even talented individuals early in the process. Then, due to a personal indiscretion, changing of tastes or sheer bordem, the media turns on those they had previously elevated and begins to tear them down. From starlets to musicians to athletes, many go through the cycle as it draws eyeballs which means dollars. But it is also part of the media culture which has spread from the celebrity media to the so-called mainstream media (witness the OJ trial and all that followed). Until recently, the build up part of the process has not really been a Beltway practice though the tear down process has been part of the political culture for decades.

With Obama I see more of a Hollywood situation as he was certainly built up in the typical media celebrity manner. Thus, I think he is vulnerable to the tear down part of that process. I would add this to den Beste’s list of potential reasons the media could eventually turn on Obama though I can’t guess what the trigger might be.

Sadly, while I am proud that the country has elected its first person of color to the highest office in the land, I worry that his potential failure could undo that progress and be more decisive in the long run.

Tom

Nov 5, 2008 - 6:24 pm 9. NahnCee:

I asked den Beste one time if he thought Bush would get around to nuking Iran and as I remember, he replied “dunno”.

In this latest post, he must think we won’t nuke Iran, if he *does* think that Iran will nuke Israel.

Will we be pissed off or merely sad when that happens.

Nov 5, 2008 - 6:27 pm 10. wretchard:

There comes a point when you realize that some people can’t be saved from themselves. You see this in the lassitude and lack of will that is sometimes exhibited by those suffering from depression. You try to interest them in something, but they say ‘no, I wanted just this way‘ and they sit around waiting for the perfect moment.

There was a guy I knew who wouldn’t exercise because it was too hard. Wouldn’t stop smoking. Thought cutting back on drinking (36 bottles of beer and a bottle of gin) was demanding too much of a sacrifice. Sometimes these guys are a walking plea. “I’m suffering. Make it right. Fix my life.” And their friends try and one by one they give up.

There is some place inside certain individuals that nobody can reach except themselves. Maybe it’s that way with groups of people too. Somebody sent me an email link to article describing how Americans are being kissed in Europe because they elected Obama. “We’re so glad you’re not racist any more.” I personally overheard two groups of people, one in an office building another on the street, saying, “we’re so glad they let Obama win and didn’t kill him.” People will be what they will be. To some extent freedom consists of the ability to pursue a separate survival. You may want to jump off a cliff, but count me out. There’s no sense being wrong just because you want company.

Nov 5, 2008 - 6:36 pm 11. whiskey:

In this I agree completely Wretchard. I am a free man. I bow to no one, and don’t care if someone thinks me a “racist” for criticizing their jumped up televangelist God, or if they fall all over me thinking I’m great.

It doesn’t matter — family and friends do. In the end, we will all be dead anyway, and it won’t matter in the least. Most of us will be long forgotten.

Nov 5, 2008 - 6:59 pm 12. programmer:

Everyone is counting President-elect Obama down and out already. First, the guy has survived several challenging situations in his life. He has risen to the top in what everyone tells me is the toughest political arena in America. He is a quick study. He has picked tough, hard nosed advisers. Russia and others may be in for a surprise. I certainly hope so.

Nov 5, 2008 - 7:15 pm 13. dla:

Joshua wrote

No doubt a good chunk of Obama’s support yesterday (maybe even a big enough chunk to have been decisive on its own) came from “retrospective voters”, i.e. folks who don’t necessarily have the time or inclination to do much homework on the candidates,

I think you’ve nailed it. This was clearly not a cerebral election. When the hysteria of the “hope” and “change” crowd dies down, Obama is going to have to deliver. To do that, Obama’s going to need a sharp team and Obama’s going to have to prove himself a great manager & leader. Can he do it? Don’t know – we’ll see.

Nov 5, 2008 - 7:34 pm 14. Barnabus:

wait a minute…first you can’t just throw out there, “nuclear war between Israel and Iran” and leave it at that. I think it would be just a little more complicated than that and in fact the ramifications would be huge and shake the globe. Second, the likelihood of this happening next year is low. The Iranians most likely don’t have any nuclear weapons now and would wait to build a stockpile before launching any attack; they are not going to risk national suicide unless they feel certain of wiping out the zionist infestation (or whatever term Ahmadinejad is using these days).

Nov 5, 2008 - 7:36 pm 15. jim in virginia:

There seems to be a widespread opinion that an Iran- Israel nuclear conflict would destroy Israel. No one knows how many nukes Israel has but I’d wager it is quite a few more than Iran and North Korea, combined. Remember the Israeli strike on the Syrian facility in September 2007? The IDF has good technology. The Iranians are using Russian stuff. Iran may destroy Tel Aviv; that will be a terrible loss. But Israel can easily destroy Iranian civilization.
Cordesman said that geographically Teheran is a “perfect nuclear killing field.”
I hope we don’t find out.

Nov 5, 2008 - 7:40 pm 16. dla:

By the way, I don’t think Iran will nuke Israel, but I’m not sure Israel will refrain from attacking Iran. Much hinges on the political unrest in Iran – Mr.INeedANewJob is facing the heat for a falling economy.

I do agree that we will lose in Afghanistan – it is pretty clear to me Obama can’t find it on a map. He doesn’t understand the subtleties of the logistics and I question whether he will hire anyone who does.

Nov 5, 2008 - 7:42 pm 17. shropshirelad:

I have to agree with what Programmer says above. Now that he has been elected to the office by a comfortable margin, we should wish President-elect Obama well—both as a matter of good will and of mutual self-interest. Many lives may depend on his success.

In the spirit of hatchet-burying, then, I think we might also offer a few words of encouragement to him, and to all other men of mild, messianic mien, facing similar challenges in uncertain times.

Although the words I have chosen were originally conceived by a junior member of the present Administration, I hope they will not be seen by Belmont Club readers as being in bad taste, or taken amiss.

I hope they will be seen as sincere, as universal, as axioms–proverbs even—7 Highly Effective Habits for organizing your very own transition from Hell on Earth to Heaven on Earth for angels of every political stripe.

[They have been edited (slightly) for content and for length.]

The Burden

Take up this pointless burden–
In patience to abide,
To veil the threat of terror
And check the show of pride;
By open speech and simple,
An hundred times made plain
To seek another’s profit,
And work another’s gain.

Take up the ugly burden–
The savage wars of peace–
Fill full the mouth of Famine
And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest
The end for others sought,
Watch sloth and heathen Folly
Bring all your hopes to nought.

Take up the foolish burden–
No tawdry rule of kings,
But toil of serf and sweeper–
The tale of common things.
The ports ye shall not enter,
The roads ye shall not tread,
Go mark them with your living,
And mark them with your dead.

Take up the lonely burden–
And reap the old reward:
The blame of those ye better,
The hate of those ye guard–
The cry of hosts ye humour
(Ah, slowly!) toward the light:–
“Why brought he us from bondage,
Our loved Egyptian night?”

Take up this bitter burden–
Ye dare not stoop to less–
Nor call too loud on Freedom
To cloke your weariness;
By all ye cry or whisper,
By all ye leave or do,
The silent, sullen peoples
Shall weigh your gods and you.

Take up that ancient burden–
Have done with childish days–
The lightly proferred laurel,
The easy, ungrudged praise.
Comes now, to search your manhood
Through all the thankless years
Cold, edged with dear-bought wisdom,
The judgment of your peers!

Nov 5, 2008 - 9:19 pm 18. Mike Sylwester:

wretchard (7):
“the collapsing oil prices will mean that both Saudi Arabia and Iran may face growing unrest, which they will export.”
———-

Much, perhaps most, of the unrest will be directed at these countries’ own establishments. The religious fanatics have lost much of their own certainty and most of their influence on the young generation.

The youth aspire to leave those countries not in order to export revolution but rather in order to study or work abroad. Ironically, in the coming years the biggest such destination might be Iraq, which is ripe for a construction and modernization boom.

Those Moslem youth who manage to emigrate to Europe will be corrupted thorougly. Perhaps the Europeans’ greatest skill is undermining devout religious belief. In the long run, Europe will cripple Islam as effectively as it crippled Christianity and Communism.

After the Iranian revolution, young women were forced to dress and act modestly and interaction between the sexes was controlled tightly. One unintended consequence was that conservative Iranian families became willing to allow their daughters to attend college, an experience that no longer threatened the daughters’ chastity.

This development has enabled the growth of an intellectual middle class. College-educated men and college-educated women are marrying in unprecedented numbers. Such families can increasingly resist intellectually primitive bullying from mullahs and busybody neighborhood fanatics.

The societies in Saudi Arabia and Iran have changed drastically in the past decade.

Nov 5, 2008 - 9:29 pm 19. Demosophist:

There is some place inside certain individuals that nobody can reach except themselves.

I quit smoking in 1986, after a hypnosis session. The funny thing was, I was never “under” during the session. I know this because I kept a recording. But at a certain point I felt as though there was this place inside me where I’d been completely isolated, and this isolation had been driving me to smoke even though I knew it would eventually kill me. And suddenly, there in that psychologists office, I felt as though the door to that isolation had opened and someone was in there with me. It was an odd feeling, and it’s the only time I’ve ever had it… but the urge to smoke just left and never returned.

It isn’t that you give up on people, it’s that the way to reach them isn’t what you think. Their “receptivity” has to change. But once that happens, anything is possible.

Nov 5, 2008 - 9:37 pm 20. wretchard:

we should wish President-elect Obama well—both as a matter of good will and of mutual self-interest

I have difficulty with the idea of “good will” because it can be withdrawn at any time. Some people never feel good will and it can’t be compelled. At any rate, nobody knows how long good will lasts. One day the press the declares “the honeymoon is over”. Instead of that, there’s a more definite concept. What is required is obedience to the law and lawful institutions; which ought to mean no leaking of classified information; no sabotage from within; no consorting with declared enemies. If people have disagreements with BHO, there’s a time and place for that — internally and on the outside, in the political and ideational arena.

Staying within the rules demands a far higher standard than simply granting someone a pass or period of sympathy for a limited period. But to remain within limits when you no longer feel, or have never felt any sympathy is far harder. It may be objected that “the other side” doesn’t play by those rules; that they leak all the time, make stuff up, wreck things from within. And that might be true; but that’s neither here nor there. The way one should behave is to remain inside the rules. That should go for everyone, but there’s the rub.

Nov 5, 2008 - 9:40 pm 21. Bruce:

I don’t think Israel has the will to nuke Iran pre-emptively with a non-surgical, mass-casualty strike that will kill millions of civilians. They are certainly going to get no support from BHO. Iran’s best move is nuclear blackmail. I think the highest risk places to be are going to be not New York or DC, but Singapore, Brussels, or some similar place that will deliver the message nicely, but avoid a messy response from BHO. He’ll vote “present.”

On the subject of Iraq, I’ve come the conclusion that having BHO declare victory in Iraq–with him taking the credit, of course–is a *good* thing, regardless of his motivations. Once he takes ownership for victory, future failure becomes his as well. It’s the only route I can see where he has a stake in success.

Nov 5, 2008 - 9:47 pm 22. EvilDave:

Israel vs Iran
I doubt Obama would do anything but condemn Israel if Iran nukes them. Conversely, if Israel retaliates (not preempts), Israel will be seen as the bad guys.
Iran could expect a sternly worded letter for killing all those Jews (and their Caterpillar bulldozers of death). A strong “tut tut”-ing is Iran’s punishment.

See Europe (and the Left) wants a second Holocaust. If someone kills millions of Jews, Europe can point to them ans say “See it wasn’t our fault. Jews ask for it. No one can live with this Jewish problem.” All the Europeans guilt for the Holocaust would be washed away.
I am always stunned, by the level of open antisemitism I see in London.

Obama is a creature of the Left and the anti-semitism often found in the black community. He would be thrilled to see Israel wiped out. After all, according to his world view, they deserve it for winning all those wars in the 60s/70s. Look at Jesse Jackson’s remarks.

Nov 5, 2008 - 10:42 pm 23. NahnCee:

Programmer -I must disagree. I don’t think B.Hussein has risen to the top. I think the election was bought for him and he has been installed pawn-like. I think the Chicago machine and his terrorist pals pulled strings for him, I think ACORN registered dead people and stuffed ballot boxes for him, and I think someone or lots of someones overseas sent him hundreds of millions of dollars so that he could outspend his way to election victory.

I’m not sure that he wrote his own books, I know damned well he’s been a lousy Senator, and he’s also a failure as a community organizer.

He *is* a tippy top first rate liar in that first he says he doesn’t know about his illegal African aunt in Boston, and then his staff admits that yes, they have been monitoring her and her status for years. He didn’t know about Wright. He didn’t know about Ayers. He didn’t know about the credit card scam to amass donations (which he had indicated initially he would use public funds).

The man is NOT a first-rate anything except a sock puppet. He will be a failure. Guaranteed. The question is what awful things will he be instructed to do to America by his hidden masters before he is reined in, either by being ignored/impeached a la Nixon or impeached/ignored a la Clinton.

I know, I know — LGF says “country first” and give the man a chance. I just feel like he’s taking us for such suckers that I can’t let my guard down.

And I *hate* the thought of Michelle and her groaty wardrobe being held up as a fashion example for the next four years. Ick.

Nov 5, 2008 - 10:52 pm 24. Fletcher Christian:

Bruce, I almost hope that you’re right about Ahminanutjob making such threats, and that he makes them against Britain or France. In such a case, we might do America’s dirty work for it.
After all, we didn’t roll over and play dead, even when our territory had already been invaded. Let’s hop that when it happens, whoever is in charge has the guts Thatcher had.

Nov 6, 2008 - 1:16 am 25. njcommuter:

1) We have elected a con man.
2) We will realize this when he hits his first crisis, or
after three years of indecision.
3) Even after we realize it, he will still be conning us.
4) Whether in Isreal (which is working furiously on anti-missile technology) or elsewhere, the Obama-Reid-Pelosi administration will probably sentence upwards of half a million people to death by failing to contain the tyrants and the warlords. It won’t come all at once, but it will come.

Oh, and blind, unthinking hatred is the key to one of the doors to barbarism. There are other doors including hedonism and apathy.

Nov 6, 2008 - 1:34 am 26. someone:

You know, the more I’ve thought about this, the less it is Obama that is bothering me. More and more, I am coming to realize it is the feeling of entitlement amongst a large portion of his supporters. There’s a deep rot.

I had a very disturbing conversation with a friend’s friend tonight. She voted for Obama because she liked the way he was going to help the poor and middle class through wealth redistribution. “How else will they improve themselves?” Then she went on to say how she was blue collar, works hard and all the time, and can’t buy a house.

Mind you, this is from someone who can’t be bothered to finish a degree, won’t take a chance changing employers, smokes pot habitually, and goes from abusive relationship to abusive relationship.

She has one item right, her taxes should be lower. Everyone’s should be within reason and in my opinion. To think that I should have hire taxes because of her life decisions exposes a level of immaturity that I find unbelievable, or maybe, a thinking that is so foreign that I can’t understand it.

The poor is a tuff nut and I want to see their station improve. I don’t see regressive taxing at the top levels as a way to achieve that though. True education reform would be a start. Obama is against vouchers of course, or any real reform there. Another step, at least for inner city blacks is to ignore Michelle’s advice to ‘avoid middle classness.’ Looking down on success as alien is another step. (maybe Obama might help there)

Anyways, I don’t think that 4 years of bad Obama leadership will solve this rot. I only see it making it worse and we’ll face Obama v2, v3, v4 until we’re broken.

Nov 6, 2008 - 1:43 am 27. Gaffe Prices:

I disagree, The Press bought first class passage on this Titanic Administration, and they might fight over the life jackets, but they are going down with this ship. And the life jackets, as we know now, won’t save them.

Nov 6, 2008 - 4:03 am 28. Wadeusaf:

Hummmm, If Iran and Israel have a tussel w nukes, the winner will be able to move into Afghanistan (after the radioactive cloud blows into the FSU and China as well as KSA and Syria), so we only lose Afghanistan if Israel loses to Iran.
I don’t like the logic behind his predictions, they lack a connective and rational flow.

Nov 6, 2008 - 5:06 am 29. bvw:

Shingu this is not.

Nov 6, 2008 - 5:54 am 30. Andrew X:

I am wondering if one thing we will see is a renewed isolationism on the part of the GOP. I was telling an Obamatron colleague the othre day that we won in Iraq, I believe we did the right thing in Iraq, BUT…. “I get it”. We (as a country) simply are NOT up to the kind of fight Iraq represented. We just BARELY prevailed over our most dangerous enemy in that fight, our own cultural, media, and academic elites, and their travellers and politicians. Just BARELY. Obama is in office largely because of the “blood” the right spilled in fighting that enemy.

So we don’t have “it”. We used to but we don’t. And any country out there that is betting their survival on the idea that we do and can wage another such fight on their behalf, or a worse one, is deluding themselves.

And while the GOP will always stand behind the military per se, I do wonder if it ever comes to sacrificing lives, to preserve socialist Europe for example, from a situation that may come about BECAUSE Obama is where he is, well, thanks but no thanks.

I’ll start the ball rolling. I still love Sarah Palin, but one thing that really rattled me was her idea that Georgia and Ukraine should join NATO. This, as has been noted elsewhere, can be described in two words: in – sane.

NATO needs to be given the compassionate European treatment and euthanized. It is possibly doing more harm than good right now, and IF they wind up in a pickle because of the (in)actions of the very Messiah they love so much and can “finally” respect us for electing, then I doubt a military establishment they hold largely in contempt will have much passion for defending people who think self-defense is “immoral”. (Apparently, their own defense is one of those odious jobs to bring in others to do.)

So, I wonder if the GOP vis-a-vis Iraq “got the message”. It WAS a mistake… to at least not realize how many Americans would passionately WANT to see the US lose, and do everything in their considerable cultural power to make it happen, and came very close to succeeding. That mistake cannot be repeated. And for those counting on us to possilby repeat it for them if necessary?

What are you, nuts?

Nov 6, 2008 - 6:13 am 31. Pseudo-Polymath » Blog Archive » Thursday Highlights:

[...] Anticipating 2012 more predictions here. [...]

Nov 6, 2008 - 7:16 am 32. Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e39v4:

[...] Anticipating 2012 more predictions here. [...]

Nov 6, 2008 - 7:17 am 33. Ashcat:

An experience I had this morning, during a visit to a coffee shop on the way to work, was apropos to this discussion. Although liberals and conservatives both like caffeine, why is it that the modern-day coffee shops are invariably dens of progressive liberal sentiment? As I was sitting and reading, I took note of a young female who was conversing with an employee. This female was quite clearly—both from the content of her discussion as well as her pierced grunge appearance—an employee of the same establishment who was choosing to spend her morning off from work at her place of employment fraternizing with the employees and customers. I’ve witnessed similar lonely-soul workers more than a few times in coffee shops previously—do they have nothing better to do with their time?

In any event, a 60-ish year-old woman customer with reading glasses hanging on her nose greeted the nonworking employee, and said, “I hope I don’t look like Sarah Palin in these glasses”. The pierced one followed with, “Oh God no, not at all. The other day I [made fun of] my mom by telling her she looked like Sarah Palin”. The level of hate and disdain in the comments was remarkable. Those comments also revealed a complete certainty about the ugliness/skankiness of Sarah Palin that left me with the strong sense that their reality was inverted—I think this is a good example of what I believe Richard described above as “strangely perverted”. Such lefties profess complete tolerance for others, but are more than ready to destroy someone based on their appearance. Even though they were females and therefore probably not the best judge of attractiveness to the opposite sex, they were apparently certain in their assessment that she is unattractive. Someone, I forget who, made the point that it was Hitler’s sense of certainty that his worldview was correct that permitted him to slaughter millions of people.

The apparent sense of moral superiority, as well as the eagerness to destroy one’s already-defeated political opponents, on the part of some of these people leaves me with a sense of unease.

Nov 6, 2008 - 10:39 am 34. twolaneflash:

Son, SGT FastLaneFlash, reports blacks swaggering Wednesday on post, strutting over the Obama election. Son asked some blacks in his unit, for whom he volutarily leads “fat boy PT”, why they were so happy over voting the military a 25% reduction, since they were probably going to be the first to be given involuntary separation. Those of us who have seen military reductions know that when personnel get cut, the ones to go can’t pass their PT test, are overweight, have been hiding behind a desk for 12-15 years. The tip of the spear is mostly white. Many blacks in the military, who gravitated to the desk, will be disproportionately effected by Obama’s gutting of America’s armed forces. Be careful what you ask for. Just sayin’.

Nov 6, 2008 - 11:41 am 35. NahnCee:

Good.

Shunning.

Nov 6, 2008 - 1:46 pm 36. slade:

The apparent sense of moral superiority, as well as the eagerness to destroy one’s already-defeated political opponents, on the part of some of these people leaves me with a sense of unease. – Ashcat

The post-prandial trashing of Governor Palin by Steve Schmidt et al is a disgrace.

Nov 6, 2008 - 6:17 pm 37. JVD:

I am with #30. In fact, McCain’s quick and belligerent response to Georgia was a bit unnerving, and I rather wonder if THAT is what broke his momentum. Realistically, we cannot and should not care whether South Ossetia is a break away province, and extending war guarantees to the Russian border is indeed nuts.

With respect to Israel, I recall reading a thriller a couple of decades ago in which Israel had bombs planted not just in Tehran and Baghdad, but in Mecca, London, and Chicago (or comparable cities). The message was, “if we go, you go.”

A pragmatic Israeli government might find this idea appealing.

Nov 6, 2008 - 6:55 pm 38. bvw:

JVD, on McCain’s response re Russkie Georgia take-down. The most troubling thing to me was that it was talk. As Tuco said in TG-TB-TU “When you have to shoot…Shoot! Don’t talk.”

Nov 6, 2008 - 7:41 pm 39. bogie wheel:

My good friend of 20+ years voted Obama. The last thing she said to me during a phone call Sunday night before the election was, “I think he’s a fundamentally honest man.” I laughed. Because needless to say, I’m a strong skeptic on this one.

I called her Wednesday night to talk about the election. She was happyhappyhappy … quite carried away on this cloud of so-called “national transformation” or whatever you want to term it. She said she’d stayed up till 3AM on election night and had cried when Obama was declared the winner. The last time my emotions were even remotely that intense for a presidential election was in 1992. I was happyhappyhappy myself when my guy, Bill Clinton, won. Young and stupid is my excuse there.

The thing is, my friend is highly intelligent, well-read, and (I thought) old enough to know better about going all teenager about a politician. And yet she too has been sucked up in the massteria. As near as I can put my finger on it, I think in her case it’s a combination of what Shelby Steele writes about in the LAT today, and Ben Shapiro’s essay “Americans Embrace Childish Unity.”

About 30 minutes into our conversation last night, in the midst of trying to explain why I don’t trust Mr. Obama, I mentioned the issue of the online fundraising and potential illegal campaign contributions. She was not aware of this story. I got about 5 seconds into a recap of what the story was, when across the other end of the phone came a roar:

“YOU’RE TRYING TO DROWN OUT MY HAPPINESS!!! AND I’M – NOT – GOING – TO – LET – YOU!!!”

This, mind you, coming from a person who has always displayed exceptional intellectual curiosity and has never, in the 20+ years I have known her, refused to watch or read or listen just because it might challenge her views and make her uncomfortable. In the old days (i.e. before this election), she would have let me say my piece and told me all the reasons she disagreed with me. In other words, a healthy debate (SOP for us). Last night, suddenly, for the first time ever — she reacts with angry shouting and completely shuts down the debate.

That a person like my friend can be reduced to an irrational, tantrum-throwing tyke who doesn’t want her happiness balloon burst, signals to me just how widespread and possibly deep the hopey-changey delusion is, and how precarious our situation is. I expect irrationality from a good portion of the voters, but these are usually the same people from election to election. This time around, it looks like a whole lot of normally sound-thinking people got caught up in the theatrics, and they were the ones who provided Obama with his margin of victory.

When or if they come to their senses … that’s the question, ain’t it?

Nov 6, 2008 - 11:06 pm 40. wretchard:

“I think he’s a fundamentally honest man.” I laughed. Because needless to say, I’m a strong skeptic on this one.

If you leave aside the question of whether or not BHO is a conman — an issue which will be decided empirically by events and not worth discussing here; simply consider conmen in general. I think it’s generally true that conmen are more successful among good and decent people then they are with low-lifers. In fact, when two conmen find themselves in a room they almost instantly aware of each other when nobody else notices them. A real conman must pitch high; appeal to the best in humanity. To self-sacrifice, duty, rights of man, motherhood and apple pie. That’s why religion and charities are such good fronts for swindlers. Someone once wrote that patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels and that’s why. No better place to hide than on the pulpit or behind the bunting.

But to return to the low lifers. Many of them have met conmen before, because they have a greater familiarity with unsavory characters. The line of patter is familiar; they’ve heard all the big promises before. They know, for example, how utterly sincere the mass murderer who has suddenly found Jesus in the stir can sound. And so they are innoculated against the type.

That doesn’t mean that low-lifers can’t make mistakes. Sometimes they are so cynical they pass up the real deal. But the “creepy” feeling that people sometimes get warning them off isn’t pure subjectivism; it is really your consciousness putting together signals and interpreting them as a danger signal. So if we do turn out to be right about BHO, it won’t be because we’re better than those who believed in him but rather because we were worse.

Nov 6, 2008 - 11:25 pm 41. slade:

So if we do turn out to be right about BHO, it won’t be because we’re better than those who believed in him but rather because we were worse. Wretchard

Well that’s honest.

boghie wheel – it’s called the triumph of hope over experience.

Like second marriages.

Nov 7, 2008 - 4:04 am 42. bvw:

wretchard, Den Beste can tell you the role of the “low life” in Shingu.

Nov 7, 2008 - 5:22 am 43. Roderick Reilly:

How can Iran have a nuclear exchange with Israel if it has no nukes?

It has a nuclear weapons program, but — to date — no bombs. Now, if they could buy some black market bombs — if such actually exist or might be available — then they would have to have an effective delivery system.

Pakistan isn’t going to give Iran any interim nukes, and N. Korea doesn’t have any to sell, either. I have no idea if anybody knows if N. Korea has any actual bombs other than that cruder-than-Trinity semi fiasco “test” they did a couple of years ago.

Every rogue country that choses to build its own nukes has to reinvent most of the wheel to make it happen, and then they have to manufacture operational bombs, which is not a rapid, high-production assembly line process, especially if you’re new at it.

Iran has a mediocre Air Force, and while its ancient F-4’s may be able to deliver a nuke (if said nukes aren’t too heavy for the Phantom), it will be intercepted and shot down, along with its escort planes, before it reaches Israel. Missiles, you say? Do they have one that can carry what is likely to be a fairly large, heavy bomb anytime in the near future? I remember when the media showed us that pencil-thin N. Korean missile that was dubbed a nuke delivery system. It looked to me like it could handle a few hundred pounds at best, and I had to shake my head at the ignorance.

Will they have multiple bombs with which to overwhelm little Isreal before it can strike back? Probably not for a long time. A single nuke would not destroy Israel, although it would be catastrophic. Nukes are not the Shiva-like world-ending weapons people paint them to be. Israel would definitely be able to strike back at Iran even after an Iranian first strike. Israel has an arsenal ranging from scores to hundreds of nukes in various sizes, and the means to deliver all of them. They only need to deliver 5 to 10 to end the whole affair in their favor, even if Tel Aviv is gone.

A terrorist nuclear strike on a major U.S. city will not kill 6 million people — not even close. It will be devastating, of course, and tens of thousands are likely to die immediately, with thousands more to follow. A large portion of Manhattan — or other burrough — would be pulverized and the rest (which would still be most of it) made uninhabitable. Catastrophe and tragedy enough, but not the huge wound that some posters here prophesy.

Nov 7, 2008 - 2:12 pm 44. Roderick Reilly:

“”"”"”"The other day I [made fun of] my mom by telling her she looked like Sarah Palin”. “”"”"”"”

Tina Fey looks remarkably like Sarah Palin, a fact that had been noted as far back as last year, and was exactly the reason why she played her in skits. Do these women consider Tina Fey “unatracive?”

Nov 7, 2008 - 2:22 pm 45. bvw:

Iran has no nuke bombs? Are you willing to bet a weird decay mode meta-stable radionuclide on that?

Nov 7, 2008 - 3:40 pm 46. john lynch:

Predictions are almost always wrong, and long term predictions are the most likely to be wrong. I don’t know what is going to happen. I doubt anyone predicted that W’s first term would include the worst terrorist attack in history and an invasion of another country. So let’s stop kidding ourselves that we know what’s going to happen.

Den Beste was usually wrong in his predictions back in the days of USS Clueless. That’s not a hit on him, since everyone else was, too. I’m a huge fan of his, but there are some things no one can do.

What I can say is that something important will happen, it will be drastic, no one will see it coming, and we will be utterly unprepared. Vague enough for you?

Stuff we should be prepared for, since it’s “unthinkable.”

1. A major conventional war with Russia and China. At the same time.

2. A war with Iran. With nukes, blockades, and invasions.

3. A nuclear attack on the United States by a nonstate actor.

4. A war with some state that we don’t take seriously as an enemy. Perhaps Venezuela. Even if we don’t take them seriously, that doesn’t mean they are smart enough to see that. Remember, Iraq suddenly attacked Kuwait out of nowhere in 1991.

5. A nuclear war between two other countries. Maybe Pakistan and India, or maybe Pakistan and Afghanistan. Why not? Stranger things have happened.

Whatever happens is going to hit us from a blind spot, so thinking way, way outside of the box is the best way to protect ourselves. That’s why I think the US armed forces should be prepared for a large conventional war. Counterinsurgency is important, but you don’t lose a counterinsurgency campaign in a week. You have time to learn. In a conventional war, you can lose very quickly and the consequences are far more dire. So, we need a bigger army that can fight the worst possible war we can think of. And we need a reliable nuclear deterrent. We’ve been letting it decay for almost 20 years now.

Just because a scenario is really bad or really stupid doesn’t mean it can’t happen. Germany decided to take on the whole world, and Japan went to war with a country with 10 times the industrial output. China is actually much better placed than Japan was in 1941. Al Qeada, with no country at all, attacked us. Always prepare for the worst.

Nov 7, 2008 - 4:07 pm 47. Ashcat:

@ 46–John Lynch
None of those 5 unthinkables you contemplate would be unmanageable for a United States of America that was committed to its own survival. The real problem, from my perspective, doesn’t need to be predicted because it’s already happening, but we are too blind to see: we have so overvalued the idea of being non-discriminatory, that we are unable to see real danger when we are confronted with it. We can contemplate no alternative to the idea that all people and all cultures are the same; that they differ only because of the particulars of their unique histories of oppression and abuse by stronger nations/cultures/individuals. Accompanying and supporting such nonsense is the Zero-Sum Illusion: if one individual/nation gets ahead, it could have occurred only at the expense of someone else.

We are, collectively, being tied in logical knots by these two issues. Why is it that we have the most compassionate but deadly military in the history of the world, yet would be loathe to use it to its anywhere near its full capacity against foes in your 1-5 scenarios? Because we have almost completely trapped ourselves in the above logical cages. Domestically and internationally, unless we can break free, we are cooked.

Nov 7, 2008 - 5:56 pm 48. Rob Murphy:

46. John Lynch
“China is actually much better placed than Japan was in 1941.”

Crap. China’s Achilles Heel, like Japan’s is oil.

They don’t have enough to wage a major war as long as we hold the sea lanes.

They do have enough to invade Taiwan.

Nov 8, 2008 - 5:33 am 49. Ms. Know:

Glad someone realizes we’re going to lose the war, both of them at that. You can’t shake hands with terrorist, even if the left-wing illuminati have and think they can worldwide.

Nov 15, 2008 - 9:29 am

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.