Rope a dope the whackaloon

|
(14)
Susan Rice
Portland Press-Herald

Susan Rice, the current US ambassador to the United Nations will be the next national security advisor. She replaces the resigning Tom Donilon. Unlike the position she was up for before, to replace Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, Rice is an appointee not subject to confirmation hearings or a vote. The job is hers.

Which must cause some politics junkies a bit of a head scratch--why would Obama appoint a woman synonymous with the excruciating embarrassment and failure in Benghazi? Why would this supposedly canny Chicago smashmouth pol give his critics even more ammunition to lob at him with this controversial choice--why, it's as if a gaggle of Fox News producers made this decision as optimal for rousing their perpetually enraged base--as politics go, surely a colossal fuck up of epic proportions.

Except that it's the exact opposite. 

Above and beyond the fact that Ms. Rice is capable, her involvement in the Benghazi blame game back and forth between the CIA and State was approximately zero. But that her exoneration isn't the issue here, the issue is, why hand your rabid opposition another cudgel to club you with? The answer is obvious unless you are presently not just knee deep in the hermentically-sealed from reality hothouse that is Republican entertainment media--anything that drives the red-eyed whackaloons of the GOP's unhinged base ever dottier is a win for Obama. Which is why the Rice pick was in fact a no-brainer.

Every time a relatively disinterested third party gets their 30th Breitbart.com spam of the day on Facebook from the "family nutjob" or has to sit through an earful at coffeeshop, gym, laundromat, school, water cooler from one of these "Energizer Bunny Birchers", they think "gotta keep these crazies from power". If your choice is between innocuous and psychotic, which do you pick? 

I suspect that Obama knows this as well as anyone else does, especially political analysts in Indiana, Missouri, Delaware, North Dakota, Colorado and Nevada who saw certain Republican gains in senate races go down the drain because they nominated a Frother. Keeping the Tea Party rhetoric at full tilt boogie is absolutely in the Democratic Party's best interests and by throwing out a lightning rod to attract more of it, they win big.

And not to put too fine a point on it, but the last female named Rice that became NSA presided over the worst security lapse in American history and was punished by promotion to Secretary of State--by a Republican president and Congress. You can't write a better talking point than that one.

Reactionaries react and don't think which is why they're termed as such. And violent reactions to seemingly nothing sare the shit out of the supposed "middle". Obama gets the win on this one. 

Comments

The only question I have is, why would a president who has bent over backwards to kiss GOP butt, care what the Repugs think now that he's on his way out the door? Could it be that he has finally developed a spine?

Posted by Guest on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 11:04 am

on national security issues as we've seen today with the NSA records request to Verizon. Domestic surveillance is way up under Obama and drone strikes have VASTLY increased under his administration too. He's more humanitarian-inclined as we saw with the US push for Security Council authorization for intervention in Libya but on most other issues he's close to Bush's position. There's no longer any daylight between Republican and Democratic positions on issues of foreign policy really, because the authors and guardians of that policy all work in the same think tanks, attend the same conferences and lecture at the same schools together. Alternative voices are ignored or pushed to the margins.

The principles in charge are just the titular heads of vast bureaucracies dedicated to spying on Americans. Obama has made no changes to those agencies at all - if anything he's reinforced that behavior.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 11:12 am

Lucretia's greasy ends and the perfidious and berserk take over. Lucretia has really been working on her image (ala matlock) of late.

Posted by lillipublicans on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 11:26 am

because they are representing the same nation, constitution and people. And given that the latter really do not change except glacially, why would you expect your presidents to flip-flop?

If you want that, move to Italy.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 11:42 am

You're sounding like quite the progressive there, Lucretia.

(Note to self: Must have my ears checked.)

Posted by Guest on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 11:29 am

I was against it when Bush did it and I'm against it when Obama's doing it.

One major reason I'm against it is that this vast amount of data dilutes the focus of the agencies responsible for guarding America's security. Vacuuming up and analyzing tens of millions of transmissions a day is not getting anyone anywhere. Targeted intel gathering should be the focus - but that's much harder than simply sucking in every telephone calls made within the US and subjecting it to the algorithms of the NSA.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 3:43 pm

is demonstrated over and over again in government, Susan Rice being but the most recent example.

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 11:13 am
Posted by JohnnyW on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 11:33 am

Thanks. I mean, it's not like you don't have the time, come on.

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 11:46 am

you made the claim, back it up.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 11:51 am

I was referring to Johnny.

Posted by Chromefields on Jun. 06, 2013 @ 12:05 pm

This guy is based in LA? Can't find a prog in SF that can write as per the pary line?

Posted by Rob Anderson on Jun. 07, 2013 @ 10:02 am

this rag. That's why so there are so many "guest articles" and "guest editorials".

Posted by Guest on Jun. 07, 2013 @ 10:41 am

Wholesale Galaxy Leggings,Cheap Galaxy Printed Leggings,Fast Shipping Worldwide.You Can Buy Various High Quality Wholesale Galaxy Leggings Products from China.
galaxy leggings
Wholesale galaxy leggings
cheap galaxy leggings

Posted by galaxy leggings on Dec. 17, 2013 @ 12:55 am

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.