GOP's Latest Variation on Nullification

"But now, Dems have already agreed not to change the rules once, and the filibustering continues, even though Republicans admitted when the last deal was reached that they were wrong to block Obama from staffing the government. And now, the GOP position is not grounded in an objection to Obama’s nominees or to the function of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals; it’s grounded in the argument that Obama should not have the power to fill these vacancies on the court at all. As Jonathan Chait argues, Republicans may not have even thought through the full implications of the position they’ve adopted. But Dems have, and taking it to its logical conclusion, they believe Republicans have presented them with a simple choice: Either they change the rules, or they accept those limits on Obama’s power. And that really leaves only one option." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/11/19/harry-reid-is-set-to-go-nuclear/

Newt's Appeal?

So the latest explanation I've heard for Newt's appeal amongst the republican base is via Kevin Drum - basically they all still think Obama's a drooling imbecil who can't string together a coherent sentence without a telepromter. Its all just affirmative action that got him to harvard, the law review, senate and the presidency. Beside the absurdity of that opinion after 3 years of his presidency in which he's demonstrated clear oratorical skill and policy expertise, it brings to my mind another question. If Obama can become president due solely to "affirmative action", how is it that our entire public and private power structure is not filled with, even dominated by, a bunch of black and brown men and women? Surely if affirmative action could raise the likes of Obama to the presidency, then the senate and housewould be overflowing with affirmative action picks. Yet somehow congress remains 84% white and 82% male . Wierd. And of course we've had a grand total of 1 black president in our nation's history.

I wonder how the republicans screaming about affirmative action would explain this. I can only imagine many think (if they were to think about it) that all black and brown people are so damn lazy and stupid that Obama is still the best of the bunch, with just enough brain power to read a teleprompter. And now they all think Newt, with his towering intellect, is going to prove just how much of an empty suit Obama really is. Well, all I can say is, good luck with that. Newt can get some good applause lines out at republican debates and right-wing events, but I doubt abolishing child labor laws will play quite so well with the rest of the country.

what to do in afghanistan?

So I heard an interview with that Hoh guy from the State Dept about why he resigned his post and left afghanistan. In short, I found his arguments persuasive. There were 2 core points I took away.

1) The "enemy" in Afghanistan is totally independent and organic. This may seem like common, mainstream knowledge but he took it to an extreme level or granularity. According to Hoh, troops will enter a peaceful, non-combat zone, like a new valley in the mountains. There may be no good reason to even go to the valley from a strategic sense. Its just another piece of land that someone decided we should "hold". And all of a sudden locals spring up to fight American forces simple because they are on their local tribal land and the Taliban or some related group may decide to pay locals to support this. So in this scenario of local tribal militias at every turn, there's basically no way for a small, though highly sophisticated, occupying force to "win". There's no central command to surrender or to kill. And there's no effective, domestic central government to enter and take control if we do clear a region of active insurgents temporarily. We can't win in this environment.

2) The second and really more important factor is our very purpose in fighting this war has evaporated. We went to kill, capture and disrupt Al Qaeda operatives and their camps. We did that and Al Qaeda's people have dispersed or been killed. Ho argues that we don't have to worry about them returning to create new training camps for 2 reasons. First they have many countries to operate in, so spending billions of dollars and hundreds of lives in afghanistan is a waste. Secondly, AL Qaeda has evolved to a completely dispersed organization with small cells of a few people communicating and coordinating over the internet. They've learned this is the only way to survive now and they won't go back to big training camps with large groups of people. We are once again fighting the last war while our enemies have moved on to new tactics on a new battlefield.

In general this analysis fits in with what other sources I find valuable have said and with historical analogs of the situation. So now Obama has to have the courage to be the one who "loses" the war that Bush started and the top general in charge still says he can win. And he has to do this while the country is in a vast recession with record unemployment levels. That a tough job for anyone and I sympathize with him. But in the end I think he has to end the war and accept the political repercussions.