John Brennan takes himself out of consideration, and everyone’s favorite blowhard does a victory lap:
Score one for the “morons.” See also Greenwald, a true champion here, who took up the struggle in the face of STFUism.
The real comedy starts in the comments:
Gee. I wonder if anyone insisted that Obama was pro-torture? Oh, yeah- BIG TENT DEMOCRAT DID, which is what started this whole thing off (and the moron has been baiting me for weeks, but I have ignored him for now):
Obama Transition Team “Clarifies” Position On Torture: He May Be For It
You see the proposal is to have greater oversight over the torture. Change we can believe in!
So, Big Tent Democrat- does Obama support torture or not? Which is it, big guy? I am so confused.
Personally, I am going to stick to my policy of criticizing Obama for things he actually does, rather than asserting nasty bullshit about him (such as, for example, he supports torture but just wants greater oversight) without any evidence. It just seems to make sense.
*** Update ***
Detente. And, as a gesture of good will, I will note that any blogospheric pressure to get Brennan to withdraw is a good thing (and I have to wonder how important the liasion from Open Left to the Obama campaign was in this development), and BTD and others do deserve credit for that. The evidence-free assertions that Obama supports torture are beyond the pale, though. Bush and Cheney deserve that label, not Obama.
Additionally, this may grant us all at least a day’s worth of temporary reprieve from breathless assertions from James Kirchik and others that Obama has thrown the netroots under the bus.
TenguPhule
It never ends.
Atanarjuat
Mr. Cole, I start to wonder at your ongoing animosity against BTD. Does Armando owe you money or something?
Or did he leave you hanging on your last date together?
Inquiring minds want to know.
-Country First.
TenguPhule
Interpreted for accuracy.
slaney black
To be fair, Mrs. Sullivan was also crying about this non-stop. (And good thing too, BTW).
Armando
Hey John:
I apologize for taking the shot at you. I am going to take it out. this stuff matters more than our pissing contest.
I hope we can move on to concentrating on bigger, better and more important things.
Like the fact that Dan Dierdorf absolutely suck as an announcer.
You write good and interesting stuff here and while I am sure we will continue to disagree on tactics and issues, I for one will try to keep it on a higher level.
Again, you are right. My shot was petty. I’ll take it out now.
Big Tent Democrat
Svensker
Well, I for one am glad that he’s out. If Glenn and the "liberal blogs" screaming had something to do with it, then good on the screamers.
CT
Was that really Armando up there? Wow, I haven’t been this choked up since Rocky’s big speech at the end of Rocky IV.
El Cid
It might not always give us a good idea of what to actually do, but you can’t blame us all for being fearful as all get out that yet another group of Democrats will shoot themselves in the foot or cave-in to Republican idiocy. No one’s really relaxed enough yet to think it’s reasonable to step back and just see what Obama & co. develop.
Comrade Jake
There is, so far as I can tell, absolutely no good reason to pay any mind to anything BTD posts. He is a wanker of the highest order, and TalkLeft is a complete fucking joke.
Comrade Napoleon
@CT:
RMFAO
Just Some Fuckhead
I swear between Teez having anabolic steroid fits in every thread and these ratfucking rightwing trolls pretending to be funny and/or wise, teh threads are practically unbearable these days. WTF happened to Martin?
Comrade Jake
The only thing worth discussing here, in my view, is Brennan’s possible reasons for withdrawing from consideration. Read the letter.
Perhaps I missed something, but I don’t have the sense that his potential appointment was being discussed/criticized anywhere besides the left-wing blogs. I never caught a whiff of this in the MSM.
It really does seem strange to me that Brennan would withdraw on the basis that he doesn’t want such criticism to become a distraction. I suspect something else is going on here. Greenwald and Co. simply aren’t that influential.
Armando
Comrade Jake:
Sorry to intrude one more time, but I think you are definitely right. I think Feingold sent a warning shot on this around a week ago.
But I do think the bloggers, Greenwald and Sullivan in particular, had some effect.
I’ll leave Balloon Juice in peace now. Promise.
Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only
The Grand Panjandrum
@CT:
FTW!
Jesus I’m usually pretty good and remembering to not taking a swig of my beer while reading comments here at BJ. Well, I forgot and now I have quite a mess here on my desk.
Just Some Fuckhead
Oh lord, and now BTD is a commenter. Someone make the pain stop.
John Cole
@slaney black: I have no problem with people trying to shape policy and trying to get their preferred appointments through. Hell, I linked to half the Greenwald posts BTD is talking about in the past two weeks, and I did not freak out when people voiced their displeasure with Larry Summers. There is, however, a profound difference between that and asserting, on the basis of some jockeying being done by unnamed sources in the WSJ, claiming that Obama supports torture. That is an ugly charge- the Bush administration has earned the label as torture advocates. Obama has not.
If I had to guess, the original WSJ post was Brennan or one of his advocates trying to push him to the forefront for the position and trying to shape policy. Today, with his resignation, I would wager it is Brennan seeing the writing on the wall and bowing out before he is rejected. How much credit should the blogs get- if you take Brennan’s word, a good bit. Good for them. I wonder how much the attache from Open Left who is now doing progressive outreach had an impact.
@Armando: And I will tone down my rhetoric as well.
Comrade Jake
I just spent a few minutes reading the comments over at TalkLeft. The people left over there do not appear to be particularly bright.
Vincent
I don’t really care if Brennan’s trying to save face with his somewhat self-serving withdrawal letter. I’m just glad he withdrew.
I normally don’t give a damn who Obama appoints to anything. Everybody that’s selected appear smart and competent and that’s refreshing. But when it comes to choosing the head of the CIA, avoiding the appearance of the spooks getting a pass should be a paramount consideration IMO.
srv
Uh, Mr. Brennan, it was a preventive war, and it was torture.
Glad you won’t be around if can’t call it for what it was.
srv
@CT: Is there a youtube of that Rocky IV speech?
rob
John-
You might want to watch the Rachel Maddow Show tonight, so you can see (your girlfriend) Jane Hamsher of the Left, discussing this issue.
Tymannosourus
I only started visiting this site and paying heavier attention to poli-blogs in general a few months ago… does someone with a minute care to fill me in on the feud between BTD and Cole?
John Cole
@Tymannosourus: We both have big mouths and rub each other the wrong way. That really is most of it.
John Cole
@rob: She has been everywhere lately.
Comrade Jake
@Tymannosourus:
BTD was the epitome of annoying during the primaries, fostering all sorts of PUMA nonsense, what have you, over at TalkLeft. It really was insufferable. From time to time Cole would point out the obvious/unintentional comedy.
gwangung
Thouugh it probably DOES work better when they can say "X still embraces ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ as shown by this statement earlier this year" or "Y has no clue, as show by her statement on the economy six weeks ago."
Comrade Stuck
Yes, but, Obama has sat down with George Bush and received advice. And I bet they talked about Intelligence stuff and all. He must now appear before the Supreme Netroot Tribunal (for penalty and maybe some good ole’ time liberal religion). It’s the only way to be sure.
Comrade Jake
I like Hamsher, but FireDogLake really did go off the deep end around the time of the whole Plame incident. It was pretty unreadable for awhile.
srv
@John Cole:
my2q-whatever might interpret that as a slap in the face.
Mar
You don’t have to keep repeating yourself man. I, personally, agree with you here, and I agreed with you when you first said that BTD was wrongly attributing policies towards Obama based upon highly attenuated circumstances. But even I’m sick and tired of you asserting and reasserting your position. There comes a time when saying, "I’m right! I’m right! You’re wrong!" becomes annoying.
John Cole
My only problem with FDL is the site design.
Ugh
OT – I saw Doug Feith in DC today, was I remiss in not walking over to him and spitting in his face?
Elvis Elvisberg
A classy move by Armando.
Tymannosourus
@John Cole:
Roger,
just remember the words of Costanza:
"A George divided against himself cannot stand."
The Moar You Know
@Armando: (jaw hits floor)
Dude, seeing your behavior over the years (and having been the recipient of it on more than one occasion) I gotta say; I didn’t think you had it in you to actually apologize and act like a decent human being.
I must reconsider my stance on all things Armando. I tip my hat to you, good sir.
J.D. Rhoades
When do we all join hands and start singing Kum Ba Ya?
The Moar You Know
@Ugh: No. You were remiss in not going over, knocking him down, stepping on his balls, and then asking directions to the nearest Starbucks, then waiting for the cops show up so you could explain, no, this wasn’t assault, that you were just making sure Mr. Feith gave you an accurate answer as you suspected he was a liar.
Comrade Jake
One day, if we’re lucky. I think we can also expect the whining to intensify on other fronts. "If only we’d complained more loudly, perhaps HRC wouldn’t be Sec State!!!" Yikes.
The Grand Panjandrum
Word. If it weren’t for TBogg I would have ditched the entire site.
Kudos to BTD for manning up and doing the right thing.
The Grand Panjandrum
Uh oh … MSNBC just confirmed Gates staying at DOD. Let the shrieking begin …
HyperIon
I advise pointing at him and yelling loudly "you suck".
thus avoiding assault charges but still getting a chance to vent publicly.
Or you could yell: "Look, there goes the stupidest fucking guy in the world."
demimondian
@The Moar You Know: It was merely enhanced interrogation, after all. The president has stated that it’s perfectly legal with known terrorists.
**Update** — however, that will only last until 20 January 2008, when we’re going to have someone civilized in the Oval Office.
srv
First time I rented a car in DC, Al Haig and a Republican Senator, whose name escapes me, literally ran in front of me trying to catch a limo.
Now, I have a soft spot for Al, given he really did keep a drunken Nixon in the box for all of us, and at the time I thought he might have been Deep Throat.
So I did a few orbits around the block, but nobody better popped up.
Dave
As the guy on Daily Kos who suggested that Armando was a hypocritical corporate lawyer shill for Fortune 500 companies – and who was immediately threatened by his Highness for "outing" him – I find the continuing irrelevancy of Armando to be a source of unending pleasure.
Which is a latte-drinking, arugula-eating, bicycle-riding pansies way of saying the guy is a dick and deserves every criticism he gets.
D-Chance.
Kumbaya, my spaghetti monster, kumbaya.
Kumbaya, my spaghetti monster, kumbaya.
Kumbaya, my spaghetti monster, kumbaya.
Oh, spaghetti monster, kumbaya…
Xanthippas
Kirchick:
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
Oh man, Kirchick and BTD embarassed on the same day. What did I do to please God that he should reward me so?
smintheus
@ Comrade Jake
Brennan would have to be confirmed. Bloggers made clear we wouldn’t roll over without a fight. Obama doesn’t need a fight.
slaney black: There were a lot of more us complaining about Brennan and the softly-softly on torture advocates than just Greenwald and Sullivan. Two people alone don’t constitute a "firestorm".
gwangung
Would suspect a lot contacted their Congress critters, as well.
I don’t see this as a problem, know what I’m saying?
Comrade Jake
@smintheus:
I’m sorry, but this seems to be mostly piles of nonsense or an overinflated sense of self-importance. Take your pick.
Ostensibly these same bloggers made it clear they wouldn’t roll over without a fight when it came to Obama’s vote on FISA. What happened there? Oh yeah, that’s right, they rolled over. Give me a break.
Comrade Stuck
Not to the matrons of the Supreme Netroot’s Internecine Tribunal ( S.N.I.T.).
Shorter Lefty Blogosphere
We’re kind of a big deal.
Shorter Righty Blogosphere
Hey, who ate all the frackin cheetos?
Atanarjuat
Radical left bloggers should continue to pull the Great Redistributionist as far left as they can manage. I completely welcome this ongoing trend, with Brennan being the first of many ideological sacrificial lambs to appease the DKos and BJ crowd.
Keep chanting louder, comrades! It’s working!
-Country First.
Steve The Other Plumber
Meh
Comrade Stuck
@Comrade Stuck:
Patrons not matrons. Sorry Ladies.
demimondian
@ATedNugent: Dude, you’re not funny. Or clever. Or, even, relevant.
demimondian
@Comrade Stuck: I liked the original better. It had a certain bluenose je ne sais quoi…
Comrade Jake
Atanarjuat guaranteed a McCain victory. He didn’t suggest it was possible, the idiot guaranteed it. He’s a complete joke.
Tymannosourus
@Comrade Jake:
Even Joey Porter can get his guarantees right.
smintheus
@Comrade Jake:
You do remember how many months that battle consumed? Reid’s office released info in mid December that implied the deal was done, the sellout complete, and the vote would be held early the next week. And yet we fought them to a standstill for something like 8 months before the Dems pulled their trump card, the we-can’t-recess-for-summer-without-fixing-it game. It was a loss in the end, though there were minor concessions along the way. But we made it a pyrrhic victory for the Democratic sellouts. It didn’t help Obama any, either, as I recall. I bet they remember the battle well.
I don’t recall bloggers rolling over in that fight.
Overinflated sense of self-importance? Sounds like an 18th century Tory description of the American rabble getting above their station.
Comrade Stuck
@Atanarjuat:
That’s OK! Atarunut has been redistributed to the
Gulagor reeducation camp. Your train leaves in an hour Comrade A. You will be escorted by three swarthy men in black suits driving a square black car. Don’t forget your toothbrush.
Krista
Okay, so we just saw a mature, graceful and classy exchange between Armando and John Cole.
/checks the blog for burst pods and Donald Sutherland
Nicole
Having seen the movie three times in the theater, as I recall, Stallone’s final speech goes something like this:
"Dring his fht, I’ve sheen a rotta chngn, in sche way schou fel abit me, n in sche way Schi feel bout shou. Un hre, schere wur to gys killin cheech ojer, but Schi gus schat’s bedda schan twen millun. Schi gush whut Schim tryin sschay, ish schat ef Schi cn schanj, and you can schanj, evabud can schange!"
Comrade Stuck
So the Netroots is a revolution to overthrow our elected overlords. And here I thought it was a bunch of nerds with Cheeto stained pinkies. Although, I much prefer Pringle’s in my bloggerific rabble rousing those Tory swine.
Comrade Jake
@smintheus:
How was it a pyrrhic victory? What price did those Dems eventually pay? As for Obama, he paid no price for his FISA vote. None whatsoever. That’s the only point that matters here.
Look, I’m all for people protesting potential cabinet picks they don’t like. I think Team Obama might even care what the netroots has to say from time to time. But I’m not so naive as to think they hold some kind of trump card, or that wild protestations will effect real changes in policy. Or that Obama will ask himself "Will this piss off the netroots? I don’t want to pick a fight with those people!"
No, on average, such protests are going to mostly constitute noise.
Fencedude
Also, there’s a difference between having a legitimate concern about a pick, and voicing it, and acting like a whiny little baby.
Comrade Jake
I know I’m beating a dead horse here, but it’s sort of difficult to reconcile the netroots recent claims of power with Joe fucking Lieberman getting off scot-free.
Kilo
And this statement is meaningless, so I guess that makes you even.
Were Clinton and Gore "pro-torture" ? Did this have any bearing on people being sent to Egypt specifically to be tortured to death ? No, then WTF is your point ?
Comrade Stuck
@Kilo:
Cole is cooking up some elitist grub, or something, so I will answer. OBAMA IS NOT THE PRESIDENT YET. Next stupid question.
Phoebe
I’m probably naive here, but I do think torture is in a different class than the FISA issue. That whole mess seemed to be done for reasons – at least allegedly – of pragmatism/tactics. Which you can disagree with, but at least it prevented future warrantless wiretaps. Hiring Brennan would have been nightmarish, because that guy was – at the least – pro-rendition. That alone is just a deal killer, or should be. I hope it was.
I’m all for a National Conversation on Torture, even though I’m apalled it should be necessary, but if it is for Americans, then fine, let’s do it. But I don’t want Obama’s policy or approach to be "inclusive" or "big tent" or "respectful of both sides" or anything like that at all.
Kilo
@Comrade Stuck:
The other thing that Obama is not is someone proposing to cease renditions and secret detention facilities.
It’s interesting that we’ve somehow decided that Bush is not only pro-torture, but that this is somehow exceptional.
Nobody knows what Bush’s position on this was pre-9/11, but his opponent in the 2000 election is on the record about renditions to torture enthusiast regimes being illegal as saying "screw em, they have no rights".
Bush can claim 9/11 changed everything. Gore cannot.
Whatever you presume about Obama, you weren’t doing it with the knowledge that if Gore was the president now, he would have been running the current "pro-torture" presidency. You just weren’t, and you’re a liar if you claim you were.
So what value does your prediction about Obama have, other than a third term of participating in willful ignorance, intellectual dishonesty and self-deception in service to the president ?
Chasm
I think the left is getting/taking the blame for this, and it’s only part of the story. Read Scot Horton:
So maybe it wasn’t so much the blogs, as much as the letters from 200 leading psychologists. But that sounds kinda bad – elite psychologists pressuring the president-elect about his CIA Director. Much better: use ambiguously worded letters to BLAME it on the liberal blogs. That way, blogs feel like they got a bone and won’t be so disappointed next time, Obama gets to remain above the fray and the Chattering Class gets to cluck at the wussiness of the left wing that would let a little torture get in the way of a good man.
Comrade Stuck
@Kilo:
@Kilo:
Where to begin Kilo. I guess with I don’t recall making any predictions whatsoever about what Obama will do. I leave that to progressive prescient wizards like yourself. My point was that he isn’t president yet. And, that he has stated clearly and in no uncertain terms, that America will not torture under his watch. As rendition is nothing more than outsourcing torture, I don’t think it’s a stretch to include that in his policy declaration on the subject.
And Obama is not responsible for what happened under Clinton or Gore or any other president. He will be, or should be judged only on his own presidency, which for the zillionth time, HAS NOT STARTED YET.
But you go on Kilo and clutch them pearls tight while foretelling the future. I mean somebody has to do it, and you seem pretty good at it.
CT
Hopefully this link to one of the finest pieces of American oratory ever recorded will work:
CT
Yikes, apparently not, and I can’t even edit it. One more try then I’ll give up (anyway, its on the google-search using "rocky IV speech")
burnspbesq
OK, Leftblogistan has claimed its token scalp.
Now, to be serious for just a second, is it too much to ask that Leftblogistan put forward an alternative possibility for DCI, who has as much practical experience as Brennan and no similar baggage?
Yeah, you’re right, it is too much to ask. Leftblogistan has no interest in actually being part of the process of governing. Leftblogistan is not into being accountable. Leftblogistan is into being holier-than-thou.
Kilo
@Comrade Stuck:
Then wouldn’t you presume I wasn’t referring to you ? What with this being the 2nd post I’ve written about that and you actually figuring this out in the first one. No ?
You mean, like those people who are objecting to precisely that. Right. Great work.
As opposed to saying what ? That it would torture ? Why don’t you try rephrasing that to say "when Obama repeats what Bush has said about the US not torturing people…."
He will be if he continues it instead of ending it, which he’s expressed no policy on.
Surely you must have had a suspicion that I mentioned that program, for the kidnapping, secret detention and torture of terrorism subjects which has had bipartisan support under both democrat and republican administrations, for a reason.
Kilo
Well, okay, while I’m on a roll then….
NSA spies on Americans under Obama. What, with it having done this under both parties’ recent presidents, these programs being operational the day Obama takes office and nobody suggesting they stop, just like the other thing we’re talking about.
Department of Agriculture. Same. Until he suggests he’ll close it, lets call it a "crystal ball prediction" that it won’t.
Comrade Stuck
@Kilo:
Now your just babbling nonsense.
So Obama is Bush. But neither is Hillary. So, do you think she’d be easier to trust?
And the rest of your scratchings don’t make a lick of sense.
Comrade grumpy realist
Huh, sorta reminds me of Pakistan saying its own ISI is going to only stick to chasing after the baddies and keep its grubby little fingers off politics within Pakistan (which it has been doing in a HUGE way up until now….), no, trust us, truly.
Anyhoo, don’t hold your breath. Going to take some time before we can de-weasel ourselves.
Comrade Stuck
@Kilo:
Sounds to me like an Acute Cheeto Deficiency.
Kilo
"Sounds to me like an Acute Cheeto Deficiency."
Really ? They used to call it avoiding the subject back in my day.
Anything else you wanted to avoid having any disagreement with me on, or are we done now ?
smintheus
@ Comrade Jake:
Uhh, do you know what a "pyrrhic victory" is? It’s not about "paying a price" as such. It’s about losing significant levels of support in the process of victory.
Dems spent months trying to justify the unjustifiable. They didn’t enjoy being bombarded with complaints from constituents. There was no constituency for passing their bill, the anger was all in the opposite direction. That’s why they kept pulling back from trying to ram it through, trying to find another way to mollify opponents. That’s pyrrhic. Obama too felt embarrassed enough that he had to explain his reversal.
The point’s pretty simple. If leftists want to prevent something from happening, they’ve got to make sure the DC establishment realizes it’ll be easier to give way than to fight a bruising battle. Won’t always work, but doing nothing never works.
Comrade Stuck
@Kilo:
LOL. I thought I had the worst grammar at Balloon Juice, but tonight at least, that isn’t true. What little I understood from your thoughts, I have nothing else to avoid having any disagreement with you on. Please come back. The End:)
Kilo
Just a "yes" would have sufficed.
liberal
@Atanarjuat:
We’re trying to pull Hank Paulson to left?
liberal
"to left" ==> "to the left"
bellatrys
This is just part of his regular shtick – the passive-aggressive civility dissimulation. He’ll make up for it in front-end-loader buckets full, don’t worry. That’s what made everyone crazy dealing with him at DK – the apparent MPD with a rational cool mind, a frothing-at-the-mouth attack-all-comers mind, and an abject groveling mind all taking turns running the keyboard. There’s no way to deal with someone who oscillates like this, except to killfile them.
(I’ve read a book arguing that this was the root of the Bounty mutiny, too – not that Bligh was extraordinarily harsh for a Napoleonic era captain, but that he was erratic, swinging unpredictably between mild and furious, so that his officers could never know how to deal with him. It makes a certain amount of sense imo.)
Comrade Jake
@smintheus:
Yes, I am firmly aware of what a pyrrhic victory means. What I was asking for is some, any, evidence that the Dems suffered in the process of achieving their victory that would cause them to think twice the next time. From what you’ve posted I gather that there isn’t any, and that’s fine.
Screamin' Demon
When you lose support in the process of winning, you are paying a price. Merriam-Webster defines "Pyrrhic" as "achieved at excessive cost."
Hmmm…cost. Price. Aren’t those words synonymous?
taylormattd
@Dave:
Well hello Dave. Love seeing kossacks comment here.
Ecks
@Comrade Jake: Did he?
ImJohnGalt
@Armando:
Seriously, I’d welcome Armando as a commenter here, just so he would actually have to read and respond to some dissenting opinions that couldn’t be deleted.
smintheus
@ Screamin’ Demon: "as such" A pyrrhic victory is one in which you lose some of your base supporters, specifically, not just one that you pay any kind of price for.
@ Comrade Jake: I did offer an explanation. You just don’t seem willing to accept that an 8 month battle, with Dems divided in both House and Senate and cowering from the complaints they were receiving from grassroots supporters, amounts to "evidence of Dems suffering in the process".
I think it’s the kind of unpleasant battle that sticks in one’s mind because the Dems aren’t used to having to fight off their own typically quiescent base. You don’t.
karen marie
being ignorant of who james kirchick is and wondering why i should care, i googled him and pulled up an "editorial" he wrote in 2007 that started out like this:
that was published by the wall street journal.
the lunatics are running the asylum. have been for a while now.
my recommendation — ignore james kirchick and tnr. if we’re lucky, he and it will dry up and blow away. in the meantime, your head will explode less.