Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

May 1, 2009

WHAT MAKES DEMAGOGUERY 'BENEFICIAL'.... We talked yesterday about the ridiculous new attack video from House Republicans, trying to scare the bejesus out of out Americans with an ad connecting President Obama, torture, Gitmo, 9/11, terrorism, Hugo Chavez, and scary music. The GOP's use of scare tactics is hardly new, but this seemed more desperate and panicky than usual.

As for the politics of all of this, it seems like an odd choice. The economy is clearly the number one issue on the minds of voters, and whenever the administration takes up an issue that seems unrelated to the economy, Republican lawmakers tend to have a fit. So why launch a new campaign on national security issues?

I found the Republican defense of the scurrilous video pretty interesting.

"We're quite happy to be talking about national security," said a House GOP leadership aide, who requested anonymity to speak freely about internal strategy.

"It's an issue that traditionally plays well for us," said the aide.

"From a political perspective, it will be beneficial over the long run."

I feel like I've been seeing this a lot in recent weeks. Republicans keep saying that the administration's national security policies are reckless, and defend the baseless attacks on the notion that they'll be "beneficial" for the GOP "over the long run."

Peter Wehner, Bush aide turned media personality, recently had an item that was similar to the House Republicans' ad, effectively predicting terrorism as a result of the president's policies.

[Obama] has taken a series of steps that, particularly as it relates to our intelligence agencies and their capacity to protect Americans from mass death, he, and his countrymen, may well come to regret.... The whirligig of time brings in his revenges.

Jon Chait responded to this, arguing, "Is there any way to read this other than as a prediction that terrorists will attack the U.S. again, and conservatives will blame Obama's anti-torture policies, causing the public to turn on him? Wehner has the requisite disclaimer that he hopes and prays this doesn't happen, but the rest of the post sure makes it sound like Wehner is waiting for terrorists to vindicate him."

And the same is true of the new ad from Boehner & Co. I'm not suggesting Republicans and their media allies want to see a terrorist attack on the United States. I'm suggesting that these voices believe an attack is possible, and they seem a little too anxious to lay the groundwork now so they can exploit a tragedy for partisan gain later.

"From a political perspective, it will be beneficial over the long run." What does that mean, if it doesn't relate to blaming the president for some unknown future catastrophe?

Steve Benen 11:15 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (37)
 
Comments

How ironic! When the Iraq war turned out to be a debacle, Republicans tried to blame it on those of us who had warned against the invasion from the beginning, claiming that we had "wanted the U.S. to fail," and that by failing to "support the troops" and by undermining morale by publicizing inconvenient bad news we were undermining the war effort.

Well, Wehner is right about the "whirligig of time bring[ing] in his revenges. If, God forbid, a terrorist attack does happen, the hard core conservatives can expect a chorus of "You wanted this to happen," quite possibly followed by investigations into whether they had an active hand in it. After all, prior to 9/11, the most devastating terrorist attack in U.S. history was perpetrated by McVeigh.

Posted by: T-Rex on May 1, 2009 at 11:22 AM | PERMALINK

these demonic chicken littles just love america with all their hearts, obviously...

Posted by: neill on May 1, 2009 at 11:28 AM | PERMALINK

Eventually it will be revealed it was Obama that offered Eve fruit from the עֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע, Etz haDaat tov V'ra.

Posted by: steve duncan on May 1, 2009 at 11:30 AM | PERMALINK

The beauty of their plan is that, for a certainty, sooner or later there will be a terrorist attack in the U.S. again.

If that random event happens on Obama's watch, then it will be his fault. If that random event happens in a future Republican administration, then it will also be Obama's fault, for "weakening" our defenses in the interim.

It's a foolproof argument. It is not proof, fortunately, against non-fools, nor against an American public that may not be inclined to be fooled again.

Posted by: nicteis on May 1, 2009 at 11:30 AM | PERMALINK

They failed at national security and managed to make us look impotent and immoral along the way.

You can't whitewash a mountain of crap and resell it.

Over a decade of hollow, strategically weak security and economic policy ideas from these clowns, and when it came time to lead they sh*t the national bed. I can't even comprehend how they take themselves seriously in their own meetings.

Posted by: Condor on May 1, 2009 at 11:31 AM | PERMALINK

"I'm not suggesting Republicans and their media allies want to see a terrorist attack on the United States." - Steve Bennen

I'll suggest it then. Given the non-stop, completely over-the-top incendiary rhetoric that has been coming from these hyper-partisan hacks, I believe they want nothing more than the complete destruction of the Obama Presidency and Democratic party. If that means a crushing depression or a terrorist attack on US soil, so be it. They are just itching to say "We were right!"

Posted by: GiggsisGod on May 1, 2009 at 11:34 AM | PERMALINK

I'm not suggesting Republicans and their media allies want to see a terrorist attack on the United States.

Allow me to suggest it, then: Republicans and their media allies want to see a terrorist attack on the United States.

Posted by: Stefan on May 1, 2009 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINK

Killing thousands of Muslems needlessly in IRAQ = higher risk of future attacks on Americans

Torturing innocents, violating international law, brutally and ceaselessly using cruel punishment, kidnapping and extraordinary rendition, etc = higher risk of future attack on Americans


Restoration of the rule of law and American values = beginning to reduce that risk and restore American credibility


Those responsible for the war and for torture must be held accountable for the next attack, if it occurs for they have created the conditions for it to develop, and now are doing what they always do...attempting to shift the blame to the "ignorant and scary democrats". The administration MUST NOT let them get away with this. It is their usual BS; party and profit first, everything else is last.

Posted by: In What Respect, Charlie? on May 1, 2009 at 11:36 AM | PERMALINK

Chuckleheads in black hoods with axes...

Barack needs to give a national speech demolishing torture. The Dems need to float a bill of some sort declaring it against the law. If the republicans want to drag out their chuckleheads to argue the converse, so much the better.

Not only is it a debate we can win, it is a debate that demands winning...


Posted by: koreyel on May 1, 2009 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK

"The whirligig of time brings in his revenges."

What the hell does that even mean? I'm at a loss.

Posted by: raff on May 1, 2009 at 11:38 AM | PERMALINK

yeah, what you guys said.

steve is far too polite when it comes to these monsters.

Posted by: karen marie on May 1, 2009 at 11:43 AM | PERMALINK

Wehner:"The whirligig of time brings in his revenges."

raff: What the hell does that even mean? I'm at a loss.

What goes around comes around. Time to pay the piper. Karma. For Republicans, it's a bitch.

Posted by: Danp on May 1, 2009 at 11:43 AM | PERMALINK

"Thus the whirligig of time brings in his revenges"

~Twelfth Night V,i

Posted by: steve duncan on May 1, 2009 at 11:45 AM | PERMALINK

It's a good thing only 21% of Americans believe this Repugnant Muck.

Posted by: mJohnston on May 1, 2009 at 11:48 AM | PERMALINK

Ok, I get the Shakespeare reference, but is Wehner assuming the role of Malvolio?: ""I'll be reveng'd on the whole pack of you."

Sounds like Wehner is rooting for a terrorist attack on American soil so he can say "I told you so!".

Posted by: raff on May 1, 2009 at 11:49 AM | PERMALINK

So the GOP really has just become ambulance chasers? Waiting around for the next attack...of course it is beyond the pale ("How dare you" I believe Ari F shrieked at Chris Matthews) to point out how the Bushies allowed an attack on their watch but I can't imagine the GOP doing anything but piling in the case of an attack. For that matter does anyone think the GOP would have done anything other than that to Gore if 9/11 had happened on his watch? These guys literally can't imagine "patriotism" that isn't just party fealty.

Posted by: Cioran Sellars on May 1, 2009 at 12:01 PM | PERMALINK

these people are praying for another attack.

Posted by: merl on May 1, 2009 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

Obama] has taken a series of steps that, particularly as it relates to our intelligence agencies and their capacity to protect Americans from mass death, he, and his countrymen, may well come to regret.... The whirligig of time brings in his revenges.

Sounds a lot like the comment that they raised 'holy hell' about during the campaign, something about chickens coming homes to roost. Different words, same sentiment. Can't have it both ways. Since they demonized the one who said those words, should we start demonizing the ones who use "The whirligig of time brings in his revenges"? To be consistent, I think so.

Posted by: del on May 1, 2009 at 12:04 PM | PERMALINK

Ambulance chasers? Yes, and they all appear to be trying to work out of "Whiplash Willies" tiny office.

Posted by: berttheclock on May 1, 2009 at 12:08 PM | PERMALINK

I'm not suggesting Republicans and their media allies want to see a terrorist attack on the United States.

They'd like nothing better. Eight years of an Obama presidency with no terror attacks on American soil would only hasten the eventual and permanent death the Republican Party as we know it, and they're scared shitless. They've lost the culture war, their credibility on all things economic is in the toilet, but they still somehow think they're the national security party. They're completely delusional of course, but what else is new? A terror attack killing thousands of Americans is their fondest dream. They're just not going to say so out loud. They weren't above exploiting 9/11 victims in a revolting and cynical attempt to demonize liberalism and consolidate their political power. What makes anyone think they wouldn't be glad to have that opportunity again?

Posted by: Screamin' Demon on May 1, 2009 at 12:18 PM | PERMALINK

Remember McCain said he knew how to find Osama? Think maybe he's going to use that knowledge to go find him and beg for an attack on US soil?

(Since I didn't believe his first assertion I'm not really worried. But if I did I would be...)

Posted by: DavidNOE on May 1, 2009 at 12:25 PM | PERMALINK

they're really wetting their pants over Chavez? Puhlease.

Posted by: g on May 1, 2009 at 12:32 PM | PERMALINK

If there was an attack tomorrow, only the republicans would go as low as to blame Obama. That would not play out very well with most.

Depending on the attach, they will be screaming borders, torture, nuke them, and on and on. There is no way liberals will not get blamed.

It would be really sweet if Obama could get Bin Laden, that would certainly establish some real National Security credit.

Posted by: ScottW on May 1, 2009 at 12:33 PM | PERMALINK

When a Republican was in the White House, sure, there was a chance that a super secret threat fueled their strange rhetoric. However, now that Republicans are out of power and out of the deep dark know, they sound looney and deeply pessimistic.

To get themselves out of the wilderness, the GOP needs to craft policy. Not talking points, not rebranding, not party purity, but practical policy that a majority of Americans can support. Oh, and this policy shouldn't have anything to do with gays, pregnant women, or other easy-to-marginalize minority groups. Scapegoating, my dears, is reprehensible.

Posted by: clevergirl on May 1, 2009 at 12:36 PM | PERMALINK

Sounds like Wehner is rooting for a terrorist attack on American soil so he can say "I told you so!".


Posted by: raff on May 1, 2009 at 11:49 AM | PERMALINK
________________________

(slappy puts forefinger to side of nose and points other forefinger at raff, the once-common symbol for "yeah, you got it")

Look, even ol' footinmouth himself, Joe Biden, predicted the next president will have to deal with a terrorist attack on American soil during the '08 elections. It's one of many reasons why Obama is trying to reinforce the good will our nation once enjoyed from most of the rest of the world, so that they may stand beside us and assit us when that happens again. It's certainly a better use of Obama's time than trying to negotiate goodwill with the GOP.

I have such contempt for the current leadership of the GOP, I wouldn't even stop at "hoping for a terrorist attack." It wouldn't surprise me one whit to learn there's a series of nutjobs out there all with various plans of commiting acts of terrorism that will look like an attack from the Middle East in general, al Queda or Iran in particular, so that the drum for war might beat once more and right leaning mods who have been increasingly attracted to the Democratic agenda might run back to the party of Daddy, where we'll get our rations of duct tape, ribbon magnets, tiny flags and a generous helping of STFU.

But of course, if they plot terrorist attacks the same way they plot election campaigns, expect a lot of emergency rooms to be filled with a lot of Republicans who done blowededed their foots clean off.

Posted by: slappy magoo on May 1, 2009 at 12:40 PM | PERMALINK

I will say it, too. They want an attack, preferably in Chicago or San Francisco. They want an attack big enough to make a statement, but small enough not to personally affect them or their families. I don't think they want the results of an attack (deaths), but they seem willing to take that as collateral damage.

I have to hope that Americans are smarter than that now and will see the shilling for what it really is.

Posted by: asiangrrlMN on May 1, 2009 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

There is no Republican message per se. They use fear as a tactic to distract so that you won't notice that their pals are ripping you off -- billions to Blackwater, Haliburton and other friends of Dick. There is no other approach, thought, strategy..
1. Keep Americans stupid
2. Keep Americans afraid
3. Keep Americans angry
4. Keep Americans in debt

Thats it

Posted by: Elie on May 1, 2009 at 12:51 PM | PERMALINK

I was thinking that it will take another shellacking in 2010 midterms to wake up the GOP for the need to change its tune, but given their reaction to Specter on top of stuff like this, I doubt it. No, the terror, race, gender, and greed arguments that they've trucked in for a generation plus will never die. Fortunately, the party will.

If these chucklegheads get something approximating the dreaded next 9/11 it won't play out for their political gain. Bush tried to use the big terror attacks of his post-9/11 admin (Spain, England, Indonesia, Turkey) to rationalize more war and more domestic security. It didn't help him in the long run and we can't go back to a pre-9/11 world where a hard-right aggressive war approach to the problem has not yet been tried. We did it, hated it, won't do it again, and certainly won't re-elect the nuts who did it the first time.

Either some opportunists pick up the shell of the Republicans post-2010, or 2012, or a new party grows in its place. Meanwhile the Titanic's deckhands will keep hailing each new iceberg as a sign that their ship is on the right course.

Posted by: angler on May 1, 2009 at 1:01 PM | PERMALINK

"They want an attack big enough to make a statement, but small enough not to personally affect them or their families. I don't think they want the results of an attack (deaths), but they seem willing to take that as collateral damage."

- asiangrrlMN

I completely agree with that and I probably should have elaborated more in my earlier post. I don't think they WANT innocent people to die, but they do want something in the way of an attack to happen just so they can blame Obama and liberals.

Destroying the President is all they care about and some of the more extreme and disgusting (seems to be the majority of them these days) are probably willing to accept some "collateral damage" in order to do this. It makes my stomach ill thinking that, but as I said earlier, they have given me no reason to believe otherwise. Hell, Hannity has been on this for a while now. He says daily on his radio show that "we are going to get attacked again and it will be entirely Obama's fault." I can't imagine the venom he will be spewing if there were to be an actual attack.

Posted by: GiggsisGod on May 1, 2009 at 1:27 PM | PERMALINK

The beauty of their plan is that, for a certainty, sooner or later there will be a terrorist attack in the U.S. again.

And even if it is proven to be a domestic attack by right-wing Americans, you'll still have the Crazy Laurie Mylroies of the world insisting that it was "really" Islamic terrorists, and nothing will ever convince them otherwise. It's like trying to convince someone that they weren't actually kidnapped and probed by space aliens.

Posted by: Mnemosyne on May 1, 2009 at 1:36 PM | PERMALINK

Cheney and Bibi are probably cooking up something between them. It wouldn't surprise me.

Posted by: CDW on May 1, 2009 at 1:51 PM | PERMALINK

"Peter Wehner, Bush aide turned media personality, recently had an item that was similar to the House Republicans' ad, effectively predicting terrorism as a result of the president's policies."

yeah, i know i sound paranoid. but why does this make me feel they've got something planned?

Posted by: just bill on May 1, 2009 at 3:15 PM | PERMALINK

WHAT MAKES DEMAGOGUERY 'BENEFICIAL'.... We talked yesterday about the ridiculous new attack video from House Republicans, trying to scare the bejesus out of out Americans with an ad connecting President Obama, torture, Gitmo, 9/11, terrorism, Hugo Chavez, and scary music. The GOP's use of scare tactics is hardly new, but this seemed more desperate and panicky than usual.
========================

That's this video?

Scaring us with horrifying photographic proof!11! that the President dares to sit down with the hated and feared Congressional Hispanic Caucus?

How is that more desperate than usual? It strikes me as just more of the same. Republicans, that's just how they roll these days.

Posted by: please correct the error on May 1, 2009 at 3:59 PM | PERMALINK

Well, the GOP strategists surely know what's best in the long run. Look where they've led their party (and our country) so far. Its like watching a horde of lemmings rushing over a cliff, and then observing the party survivors arranging a bus trip back to the top to repeat the exercise. Talk about a long run.

Posted by: strangetimes on May 1, 2009 at 4:09 PM | PERMALINK

"I'm not suggesting Republicans and their media allies want to see a terrorist attack on the United States"

I'm not suggesting it either; I'm bluntly saying it. And furthermore, they want to do it. And want deaths, preferably of civil servants - just ask Robert Sanderson. We're talking about people who consider anyone with auterus to be sub-human and are currently talking about secession 24/7 - to imply they _don't_ want to destroy America requires well-nigh Grand-Master levels of Pollyannaism

Posted by: phalamir on May 1, 2009 at 4:39 PM | PERMALINK

WTF?!
The "whirligig of time?!"

Please, can the GOP do or say anything, without appearing to be total morons? It's embarrassing that they are our opponents in the political world. This is getting more and more like Mike Tyson boxing in the Special Olympics.

Posted by: labradog on May 1, 2009 at 5:04 PM | PERMALINK

Ditto all of the above (does that make me a dittohead?), and then some:
It's been clear for a long time (I think if was first and best explained by David Neiwert at Orcinus) that if you want to know what the Rethugs are doing or planning to do themselves, see what they're accusing Democrats and liberals of.
It goes beyond projection. It's a deliberate attempt to muddy the political waters, to get the low-info voter (and a good portion of the ones paying attention, too) to say, at worst, "they're all doing it," and at best, "no, the Dem's and the libs are the ones doing that, not our side."
Historically, this has ranged from pretty to extremely successful. "Voter fraud"? "Fannie, Freddie, Barney Frank, and George Soros caused the current recession/depression?" "Your tax dollars are bailing out the losers who bought more house than they could afford?"
And of course the biggest and most effective lie of them all, the "liberal media."
Let's hope that the 30% or so of the populace (and voters) who finally realized the Rethugs had been lying about everything for the last 8 years, continue to realize that they're continuing to lie.
Memories can get fungible right quick in the presence of (G-d forbid) a catastrophe.

Posted by: smartalek on May 1, 2009 at 5:07 PM | PERMALINK




 

 
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM

Advertise in College Guide






Search Now:
In Association with Amazon.com


Place Your Link Here

---Paid Advertisements---

Payday Loans

Personal Loans

Addiction Treatment

Phone Cards

Less Debt = Financial Freedom

Addiction Treatment Programs

Credit Cards & Debt Consolidation

Bad Credit Loans

Vacation Rentals