TWS: “George Herbert Walker Obama.” …Says it all, really.

This Weekly Standard article is all the more brutal for its lack of overt viciousness: but then, with a title like “George Herbert Walker Obama” it doesn’t have to be.  I had the dickens of a time separating out a representational piece of Andrew Ferguson’s awesome, politely relentless comparison of the last days of the 2012 election with the last days of the 1992 one, but here goes:

The president, it was said, had no agenda.

Again our campaign leapt into action. Frantic phone calls were placed to federal agencies and cabinet departments: Who’s got an agenda? From the Department of Health and Human Services came a “health care reform”—something having to do with tax credits. The Education Department sent over scraps from an “education reform” that the president hadn’t been able to move through Congress; something with tax credits. And child care—a big issue in ’92—where the hell can we find a child-care policy? Somebody dug one up at Labor, where it had been buried a year earlier. A child-care tax credit.

The agenda was strung together and packaged in a booklet with glossy blue covers. The president could hold it up at rallies, with a look that said: No agenda, eh? What do you call this, smart guy? Chopped liver? The word renewal was testing very well with focus groups—better than reform, even—so our booklet got called Agenda for American Renewal. Millions of copies were mailed to voters. Perhaps you still have yours?

It gets better from there, but you need to read the whole thing.  There are a lot of comparisons to be made between George HW Bush and Barack H Obama, in fact; and some day I might write about them, once I think that I can successfully do so without having the combined wrath of the partisan blogosphere fall down upon my head*.  Until then… 10 days until Election Day.

Moe Lane

*It is not cowardice to refuse to put your hand in a working buzzsaw.

Barack Herbert Walker Obama?

That’s not a compliment, by the way.

Michael Totten reminds us that if Qaddafi wins in Libya after all, it’s not without precedent.  Specifically, the precedent of Saddam Hussein, post-Gulf War I.  Back then we were all “wouldn’t it be great if the dictator fell?”, too- and back then we pretty much sat around and did nothing printable while the dictator went around smashing the opposition back down into the ground*.  Which is what is happening now in Libya, apparently: the rebellion is reportedly collapsing in slow motion. It would seem that while pious words and firm rhetoric is of course all very useful and wonderful and everything, they’re not particularly effective at piercing tank armor and/or providing artillery support… which is something that the people fighting Qaddafi need rather more of right now.  You want to see what happens when we’re not the world’s policeman?  Here you go.

And if that doesn’t bother you on its own hook – after all, worrying about dead foreigners is so… neoconservative, isn’t it? – consider this: both Qaddafi and his regime have only ever responded to the stick.  After 2003, both were deathly afraid of what America and the West would do to them; I suspect that after this is all over neither will much care.  Which is… bad.

Continue reading Barack Herbert Walker Obama?