« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Can we get a coherent Georgian narrative here from the Democrats?

Thanks a bunch.

I’m still tracking down the transcript for this excerpt from the Corner:

Obama backer and former UN Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, appearing on CNN: “John [Roberts], with all due respect, I would dispute what you just said. Senator McCain and Senator Obama have roughly the same positions. it’s the Bush administration that was behind the curve. “

…but I have to admit, it certainly sounds like Holbrooke isn’t talking to, say, Susan Rice (via Hot Air):

Given that it’s starting to look like we’ve just paused for a bit on the Georgian-Russian crisis, not gotten past it – I think that it’d be nice if the various surrogates for Barack Obama got together and at least hashed out an internally self-consistent narrative of what opinion that they think that the American people want him to have on this issue.

You know, before another 72 hours have passed.

Moe Lane

COMMENTS

  • spainishirish

    Obama accidentally uttered what he thought when he drew a moral equivalence between Russia and Georgia. While I have been very disgusted with the Bush Administration’s response, at least it didn’t veer into moral relativism. The only coherent voice has been from John McCain, and perhaps that has reminded a few people on the fence that this is perhaps the best reason to vote against The One.

  • John_Louisiana

    The Demigods and some Republicrats use that word too loosely.

    Moe, as much as you would like to keep hounding on this as a relevant issue for McCain, the public ALREADY thinks he’s good on the issue.

    This isn’t a crisis, it hasn’t harmed the markets, and it isn’t going to do so.

    So, let’s move onto drilling and the economy which should be our real focus.

    This is where we can help McCain.

  • streetwise

    then, but, maybe, uh, ummm, well, OTOH,… and I thought the polls had up up in Georgia”

  • Octavian

    Barack Hussein Obama is clearly out of his league when it comes to machiavellian geopolitical matters. Obama is most likely to surrender US positions around the world to hostile adveraries. Obama is truly the reincarnation of Neville Chamberlain.

  • Moe_Lane

    The right answer was “Gee, Moe, I’m sorry that I wasted everyone’s time by posting bad information!” Really, people should know by now that I’m a petty tyrant when it comes to the comments section here.

    Ciao.

  • aaronbg

    n/t

  • aardpig

    …what you think it means. It was thanks to Neville Chamberlain that Britain was able to rearm before the outbreak of war. He knew that war with Germany was pretty much inevitable; he did all he could to stall it, giving Britain a chance to prepare; and when time ran out, he duly declared war.

    Chamberlain had many faults, but to claim that he didn’t see the writing on the wall is simply to ignore or misunderstand history.

  • HerbC

    1) Our reputation with former USSR states is on the line here. This can play an impact with our
    missile defense plans and installations if we don’t effectively counter Russia’s aggression.

    2) The UN has already been shown to be useless. This may bring the same result to NATO due to
    their lack of action back in April to start the
    process for both the Ukraine and Georgia.

    3) This conflict has the possibility of spilling over into the Ukraine and other countries which have a significant population of “Russian” citizens.

  • blooch

    Time Magazine said this of him in August, 1940:

    “Symbol first of appeasement and then of easygoing armament, the onetime Prime Minister has for weeks been under great popular pressure to get out.”

    Cedit for the crucial rearmament goes to Lord Beaverbrook, who kickstarted the stalled production of Spitfires just in time for the Battle of Britain. No way they would have defeated the Luftwaffe with Hurricanes alone.

    Of Beaverbrook, Time also said:

    “The official announcement said that ‘for the time being Lord Beaverbrook will continue to be Minister of Aircraft Production,’ intimating clearly that other Cabinet changes would follow. Most Britons hoped that this meant that Lord Beaverbrook was being eased into ailing Neville Chamberlain’s vaguely defined position as Lord President of the Council.”

    In the same article, H. G. Wells says it best about Chamberlain, and I think you would agree with him:

    “Let us not recriminate. It is just because I believe that you are honorable and patriotic men that I implore you to have the magnanimity to acknowledge the error of your ways to make this sacrifice to our national duty and withdraw into positions where you can do no further harm.”

    The whole thing’s a good read.

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,764336-1,00.html

  • nybuyer

    Obama’s “Not Ready For That 3AM Phone Call”

    and she saids all this with a straight face….

  • LibRick

    reduced to “appeasement.” Good on you for adding historical clarity.

    What I got from Octavian’s post was his grave concern that Obama has, on many occasions, posited the naive notion that just talking to the worlds bad actors will mitigate any threat. Even you, as one who seems knowledgeable on history, should agree that diplomacy is just one element to sound foreign policy and without a comprehensive approach, we travel a dangerous road.

    So far, Obama has not articulated the other elements needed to effectively lead on the international front. In that, maybe Octavian’s comparison to Neville Chamberlain is not far off base. There is still much debated about the path Britain took in that time.

  • Octavian

    No, Librick, what I meant to imply is that Barack Hussein Obama doesn’t have the cajones to confront any thug on the world stage who happens to be a national leader. By contrast, I’ll pick John McCain any day of the week and twice on Sunday to deal with a thug like Vladimir Putin.

  • gamecock

    could get them for Hillary’s Testicle lock box.