Friday, March 5, 2010

The Road to President Palin Is Paved In Chickenshit

Snicker while you can, but this is how we get President Palin:

[T]he Washington Post reports today that Obama’s advisers are caving to the pressure and “are nearing a recommendation” that KSM “be prosecuted in a military tribunal” instead of civilian court. However, the move does not appear to be based on any legal reasoning, but merely a political quid pro quo ...
Read the rest if you wish, but it writes itself: the Obama administration takes a mildy principled stand, some far right loons squawk, and the administration races other Democrats to the surrender flag.

If this is standing up for America's constitutional ideals -- doing so infrequently and timidly, and backing down immediately when anyone, no matter how unhinged, peeps in opposition -- voters would be hard-pressed to care about the choice between it and the alternative that forthrightly eschews pausing over constitutional ideals when they're in the slightest tension with brutalizing the hour's current enemy.

Cowardice fails. It fails as politics, it fails as a principle; it directly subverts and degrades all the principles it touches. Cowardice enables, emboldens, foments, and perpetuates the crudest, least, and worst in politics and in human beings.

From this cowardice and the others of its sickening ilk, we will have President Palin, or the same thing by a different name, or -- quite possibly -- a grotesque mimic that exaggerates, deepens, and accelerates everything low and vicious about a President Palin. It can happen here, and it draws nearer along a road paved in chickenshit.

There's more on this from Glennzilla -- including this note stating that this surrender is not yet fact, but getting close:
I obviously don't know whether this will in fact happen, but because these signals have come both from Eric Holder on the record and what are clearly coordinated, authorized anonymous White House "leaks," it seems quite likely.
Quite likely indeed. What would the basis of doubt be? It's as though Greenwald is reading my mind -- or that I'm reading his:
For years, Democrats have failed to grasp the fact that they are perceived as "weak" not because of any specific policies, but because they are perceived -- rightly -- to believe in nothing (or at least nothing that they claim to believe). It is hard to imagine any act that could more strongly bolster that perception than to watch Barack Obama -- yet again -- scamper away from his own claimed principles all because the GOP is saying some mean things about him.
Being weak is a well-proven way to be perceived as weak. Likewise, a very effective way way to achieve a perception of strength is to show strength. Weakness and cowardice are of a piece.


larryniven said...

"For years, Democrats have failed to grasp the fact that they are perceived as 'weak' not because of any specific policies, but because they are perceived -- rightly -- to believe in nothing"

Ouch. "Don't worry, Donnie, they're nihilists - nothing to be afraid of." The Dude does not approve.

(captcha: gormine. That is too lovely not to be a real word.)

Dale said...

Ouch. You came all this way to say good things about the post's wording only to cite the guy I quoted. Surely you're not saying Glenn Greenwald is a better, more eloquent, more informed writer than I am?!?!? Surely?!?!

If you're not, I am.

I feel like a bit of a tool google-sharing nearly every post he writes, and commenting on so many of them here (without adding much, generally), but he consistently nails it.

In this case, in my own wretched defense, I will say the stuff I wrote in the pre-Glenzilla paragraphs were come by honestly, not "borrowed" from Glennzilla -- I saw his post after most of mine had been written. You'll be kind not to think too deeply about whether that same defense covers all posts where my stuff overlaps with his.

Sigh. We are doomed.