tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post8483528108493940635..comments2023-12-17T19:35:07.459-08:00Comments on Bouphonia: Our Common FuturePhilahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15849261651028725772noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-37326967349564720122009-04-18T17:40:00.000-07:002009-04-18T17:40:00.000-07:00Nah, you didn't fail, I was just feeling fighty ;-...<I>Nah, you didn't fail, I was just feeling fighty ;- )</I><BR><BR>Well, In that case, I take it all back. Everything you've said here is wrong, and you and Obama are <I>both</I> worse than Hitler!Philahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15849261651028725772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-42848273076603998352009-04-18T16:16:00.000-07:002009-04-18T16:16:00.000-07:00-but clearly failed-
Nah, you didn't fail, I was ...-<I>but clearly failed</I>-<br /><br />Nah, you didn't fail, I was just feeling fighty ;- )peacayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03997731249622552311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-19325713546824576132009-04-18T08:57:00.000-07:002009-04-18T08:57:00.000-07:00The action itself is the item that carries the gre...<I>The action itself is the item that carries the greatest significance, no?</I><BR><BR>I hope so. And I tried -- but clearly failed -- to acknowledge that. <br /><br />On the other hand, my worry, obviously, is that the banality of the interpretation could undercut the radicality of the event...kind of like hitting some sort of moral snooze alarm. I hope I'm underestimating him and us...it's very possible that I am.Philahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15849261651028725772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-58321751071089422992009-04-18T00:33:00.000-07:002009-04-18T00:33:00.000-07:00--it's the constant political reassurance that we'...--<I>it's the constant political reassurance that we're so goddamn great and moral and unique that makes Americans think we can do anything we want.</I>--<br /><br />I understand what you're saying about the atmosphere that you've had to live through and how easy circumstances (say, the language of one announcement) may lead a person to be skeptical, but for instance, such a <A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDuBpEYKCSA" REL="nofollow">well considered response</A> as Obama gave at a press conference at NATO recently on the subject of American exceptionalism is jaw droppingly radical (as are many of the cooperative policies being pursued in foreign affairs) by contrast to at least the recent past.<br /><br />I guess that's all I'm saying: the minutiae may appear to be token stodge from the handbook of cynical rhetoric, but there is, to my mind, a larger fabric being knit here. You've the right of course to microscope and blowtorch every play and it may turn out that Obama has a jelly spine with respect to the torture brief, but personally speaking, I find it hard to judge the guy harshly on his choice of language in a cover statement when it is accompanied by the full release of such a devastating and contentious set of documents. The action itself is the item that carries the greatest significance, no?peacayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03997731249622552311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-39565058528109283062009-04-17T22:15:00.000-07:002009-04-17T22:15:00.000-07:00How is it subtle? He's just agreed to the release ...<I>How is it subtle? He's just agreed to the release of his predecessor's torture manual in effect.</I><BR><BR>Sorry, I was thinking about the statement, not the release of the memos themselves. Looking back, I see that I misread you.<br /><br /><I>He wants the country as a whole to move on. OK, maybe he could have said that congress can decide themselves as to the future conduct but it's implied (you may disagree, but as I say, from my distant vantage point, that's how I understood it as soon as I read BO's statement), as is his desire to not having it either seen or perceived as being directed by the executive. This is a very shrewd line he's walking.</I><BR><BR>It may well be. And this is basically what I was intimating when I talked about the strategic tradeoffs, and the possibility of the release of the docs being more important in the long run than how he did or didn't frame it. <br /><br />If you get that implication re: future conduct, that's interesting. I don't quite see it, but your take on things may indeed be more objective, given the mindnumbing media/chatter I'm exposed to day in and day out, and the plain fact that I'm stuck living here. We'll see, I guess...and of course, I'd prefer to be wrong. <br /><br /><I>So I say be observant and vigilant but also accept that there is a fairly good track record so far of acting in good faith, even if the elaboration isn't always so obvious at the outset.</I><BR><BR>Fair enough. I do try to, by and large. On the tar sands issue, for instance, I felt that environmentalists were getting upset over Obama's comments in Canada for no good reason. <br /><br />But this particular formulation is something I've seen used too many times, in too many sickening situations; it's not really possible not to react (or overreact, as the case may be). As I see it, it's the constant political reassurance that we're so goddamn great and moral and unique that makes Americans think we can do anything we want. Obama may be saying this with good intentions, but it's not what we need to hear and I don't believe it's essential to a good outcome, to say the very least.<br /><br />I wrote this post late at night, in an extremely bad mood, and I can see that whatever balance I started out with is pretty much lost by the end, for better or worse. I suppose it's best to view it as a visceral personal reaction, rather than as any kind of prediction about what effects the release of the memos will have, or what Obama's legacy will be, or anything like that. <br /><br />Honestly, it's hard to communicate just how disheartening and infuriating a phrase like "disturbing disunity" is, after having survived the last eight years. If you want to take this as evidence of how badly those years traumatized or unbalanced me, you'd be well within your rights, and probably correct. Chances are, it'll take a while for the reflexive rage to subside. <br /><br />At any rate, we certainly agree on the outcome we'd like to see.Philahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15849261651028725772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-32752745190505735722009-04-17T20:34:00.000-07:002009-04-17T20:34:00.000-07:00--if so, it's an extraordinarily subtle invitation...--<I>if so, it's an extraordinarily subtle invitation, especially for this country at this time. And if that is his goal, I'm afraid the more superficial meaning is the one that the opposition will seize on when fighting him...probably with some success.</I>--<br /><br />How is it subtle? He's just agreed to the release of his predecessor's torture manual in effect. He's saying let's move on and let's not prosecute anyone who acted in good faith according to the legal provisions they were given. (Ambinder notes that implies that those who acted in bad faith are still at risk). The release is hardly subtle. It's damning on its own and doesn't need any further overt imprimatur from Obama. That he rescinded the practices and that he's released the docs are huge signals in their own right. They, and the political language he's used,are the defence to any alleged "opposition", either on the left or in the shreds of opposition among Repubs.<br /><br />He wants the country as a whole to move on. OK, maybe he could have said that congress can decide themselves as to the future conduct but it's implied (you may disagree, but as I say, from my distant vantage point, that's how I understood it as soon as I read BO's statement), as is his desire to not having it either seen or perceived as being directed by the executive. This is a very shrewd line he's walking.<br /><br />I was for HRC originally but I reckon the guy has not put a foot astray in these last couple of months among astoundingly difficult terrain. One thing I keep seeing is that he works outside the daily news cycle mentality -- in this case, attempting to parse the whole picture by dissecting the specifics of the language -- and that the effect of his manoeuvring doesn't really become apparent until later.<br /><br />So I say be observant and vigilant but also accept that there is a fairly good track record so far of acting in good faith, even if the elaboration isn't always so obvious at the outset.peacayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03997731249622552311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-63270056848728967082009-04-17T19:28:00.000-07:002009-04-17T19:28:00.000-07:00I anticipate there will be congressional/senatoria...<I>I anticipate there will be congressional/senatorial hearings which may go some way further to resolving this thorny issue of which you speak. It's just something that won't be actively initiated by Obama. I think it's a smart move on his part. God knows he has enough to juggle.</I><BR><BR>I can't rule that out. What I'm taking issue with is the language, not the strategy...being as I don't know what the strategy is, or if there is one. As far as the Congress vs. Executive point goes, I agree with you. <br /><br /><I>By releasing unredacted docs, he's inviting chatter: he wants the people to demand investigations - through their representatives - rather than it being by decree in a top-down form.<br /></I><BR><BR>That's possible. But if so, it's an extraordinarily subtle invitation, especially for this country at this time. And if that is his goal, I'm afraid the more superficial meaning is the one that the opposition will seize on when fighting him...probably with some success.<br /><br />But what it really comes down to for me is that this sort of talk is intensely demoralizing to a lot of people. As such, I'm not sure that it's the way to get people to demand anything. They're at least as likely to decide the fix is in and become (more) apathetic, as I see it. <br /><br />That said, your points are good ones: I don't know what's going to happen next, and I might be pleasantly surprised. I hope you're right.Philahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15849261651028725772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-21981786100354773382009-04-17T18:44:00.000-07:002009-04-17T18:44:00.000-07:00I suppose from this distance I can see a larger pi...I suppose from this distance I can see a larger picture emerging for which the platitudes act as a curtain of invitation.<br /><br />If you consider the 'we' and 'our' to which he refers in attempting to deftly sidestep the inevitable legal mire of prosecutions as 'his' administration rather than the American people, then it seems to me that he is laying the groundwork for both avoiding claims of partisan witch-hunt AND, more importantly, setting up the future on the question of torture as one that ought to properly derive from Congress rather than the Executive.<br /><br />I anticipate there will be congressional/senatorial hearings which may go some way further to resolving this thorny issue of which you speak. It's just something that won't be actively initiated by Obama. I think it's a smart move on his part. God knows he has enough to juggle.<br /><br />The 'we' might be intentionally ambiguous too. It's in keeping with the considered rhetoric he's been using with respect to the future on a number of topics, Cuba most recently - it's a continuation of the hope message; the post-partisan loveydovey inspiration of 'we' going forward (vacuous, possibly but not wholly without impact, if only by contrast with W); while at the same time giving him some cover in avoiding the appearance of chasing down his predecessor and the opposition party.<br /><br />By releasing unredacted docs, he's inviting chatter: he wants the people to demand investigations - through their representatives - rather than it being by decree in a top-down form.<br /><br />All IMHO of course.peacayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03997731249622552311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-15946267093590965182009-04-17T14:00:00.000-07:002009-04-17T14:00:00.000-07:00we live in a generation of swine.politically exped...we live in a <A HREF="http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/4244/870/1600/hst%20002resizecrpshrpbrite2.jpg" REL="nofollow">generation of swine.</A>politically expedient platitudes aside, it's more disturbing to me that slightly half of the population believes "we" just did what needed to be done.charleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07715767298959808948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-9421093855490694632009-04-17T11:27:00.000-07:002009-04-17T11:27:00.000-07:00I think the answer to your questions must be "yes,...<I>I think the answer to your questions must be "yes, apparently", which is kind of interesting in itself.</I><BR><BR>Yeah, that's basically where I'm going with this. IMO, the question is whether it's a force of habit, and it never occurred to him or anyone else to say something different, or a conscious expression of an actual worldview.<br /><br />I don't much like it either way. But I dunno...perhaps I'm reading too much into it.Philahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15849261651028725772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8695598.post-72316890055906302772009-04-17T10:26:00.000-07:002009-04-17T10:26:00.000-07:00...does he have to spout platitudes that specifica...<I>...does he have to spout platitudes that specifically undermine ...?</I>I think the answer to your questions must be "yes, apparently", which is kind of interesting in itself.P. Drānohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05412231793647016993noreply@blogger.com