2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[Lemur]

However, the claim that this was a 'tough decision' with 'a lot of downside' is insulting to my intelligence.

I seem to recall specials ops gone wrong having some impact in the past. Perhaps you're right and now would be different. But I shudder to think of the heyday Rushbo and the conservative media complex would have if Obama got a bunch of SEALS killed on a bum tip. Safe to say in that scenario the entire operation would have been a product of his fevered Alinskyite brain. But since it worked? Clearly he had nothing to do with it and/or it was so blindingly obvious a special needs child would have done the same. (Alternate: It could have been even better but OBOMBER screwed it up somehow, according ot our super-secret source. He deliberately allowed that stealth Blackhawk to crash so as to give the Chinese our tech, because he is a mulsin communist.)

I think most right wing people had the bin laden killing down as a positive for Obama without even thinking about it. If anything that ad will make them disinclined to give him any credit.

Because they were so on-the-fence before hand. These are largely the same people who believe that this administration's lack of movement on gun control is all part of a chilling Freemason scheme to take their guns away. Nah, I suspect those who turn purple with rage from this web ad are not the "persuadables."

Based on Obama's response to Team Romney's fit of apoplexy, I suspect this is a classic rope-a-dope. Obama's great political talent always has been inducing self-destruction in his opponents.

As for Corn, sorry for referencing, had no idea he was such a partisan hack. And SK, thanks for the gratuitous Tu Quoque of the screeching WMD-style article. Yay, two wrongs do make an omelet!

[PanzerJaeger]

I seem to recall specials ops gone wrong having some impact in the past. Perhaps you're right and now would be different.

It would be very different. The Carter Administration, being the Carter Administration, announced the failure of the mission to the world on the night that it happened and detailed pretty much the entire affair. The Iranians were not even sure what was going on until they read the administration's statement, which caused them to split the hostages up - making future rescue missions nearly impossible. These days, SOCOM raids on HVTs in the AfPak region are quite common and the military has developed a public relations architecture to deal with any eventuality, which is essentially silence followed by denial followed by outright lies. And maybe long after any potential story has died in the news cycle, some relevant half truths are dumped on a Friday afternoon before a holiday. This can be done because pretty much everyone in these missions is SOCOM or absorbed into SOCOM before they go, which did not exist in its current form in the '70's. Carter used lots of regular forces and there is, or was (the military keeps plenty of stuff they do hidden these days too), a perceived duty to be more transparent about their circumstances.

And my personal favorite, which appears to be addressed directly to Sasaki and Panzer: "So the Republican position on the operation that took out Osama bin Laden is that it was no big deal? Good luck with that one."

Bah. The backroom is searchable now. Go look at the thread I started about the killing of OBL. I made it clear that it was a big deal and gave the president plenty of credit for doing it - and I still do. I simply take issue with the notion that it was a particularly tough decision that only a president with Obama's resolve () could have made. Any president would have loved to get the man. As Romney said yesterday, 'even Jimmy Carter would have made that call.'

[Lemur]

I simply take issue with the notion that it was a particularly tough decision that only a president with Obama's resolve () could have made.

I guess I don't understand the outrage. Two thoughts: (1) Saying, "Hey, I did this thing and I'm uniquely cool for doing it" is pretty basic stuff, politically. It's not remarkable or abhorrent. (2) Sending in a team was riskier than bombing. Bigger risk for bigger reward, in terms of intel gained. I don't see how that's arguable.

[Papewaio]

Bombing is higher risk to all levels involved except to US special forces servicemen.

Bombs tend to kill civilians, destroy intel and like the cave bombings you are never certain that your target is now vapourised or living it up with his wives at another location.

The risk with going into Pakistan was invading a sovereign nation... well to be precise running a military operation against a wanted terrorist but not informing the local chain of command... Risk was to political and social whilst minimizing flight or fight combat risks. Mind you the Pakistan government may have know but they way it was spun gave them plausible deniability with their hardline elements. Bombing however would have created a larger backlash.

Intel could be confirmed that they got their man. Even if he shoulder camera did just happen to fail on entry to the room, and that capture and parading him in front of the world would have been the gold star... It is still much better from an intel point of view to shoot, tag and bag him rather then bomb and pray.

Bombs have a habit of missing targets. You don't want to start bombing military base towns in a spray and pray mission. Great way to not just burn an alliance but to start a war.

So bombing really wasn't the least risk option when doing he total tally. Whilst executing OBL was certainly not the highest return on risk, it was at least a return. The problems with getting OBL back would have been much harder than getting in.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Personally it just seems like the Republicans are crying foul because they don't have any sort of counter or spin. Usually when someone makes a claim, it's easy for the other to construct a spin and turn t around on the other guy. How can you spin this against Obama? Well, other than complaining about being unfair. But then again, Bush himself said that he honestly didn't care where OBL was after Tora Bora. Something along the lines of "He's not important."

Honestly, the Republican PR machine has been dropping the ball recently. They lost the War on Women, and now their defense with OBL is McCain saying, "Well, the thing about heros, is that they don't brag."

Uh huh, thanks John McCain, I'm sure you have followed that advice.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Personally it just seems like the Republicans are crying foul because they don't have any sort of counter or spin. Usually when someone makes a claim, it's easy for the other to construct a spin and turn t around on the other guy. How can you spin this against Obama? Well, other than complaining about being unfair. But then again, Bush himself said that he honestly didn't care where OBL was after Tora Bora. Something along the lines of "He's not important."

Honestly, the Republican PR machine has been dropping the ball recently. They lost the War on Women, and now their defense with OBL is McCain saying, "Well, the thing about heros, is that they don't brag."

Uh huh, thanks John McCain, I'm sure you have followed that advice.

Maybe you can explain it too me.

The ad overdramatizes the obama decision, and then dishonestly quotes romney out of context to claim that he wouldn't have made the call. It's obviously a bad ad, there's little to say about the ad. About obama, we could talk about how good he's been at anti-terror during his presidency, how willing to use the drone strikes. About romney, we could speculate about what his overall strategy would have been/will be. We could talk about many substantial things, so why would we ever talk about either parties PR machine? I thought generally how it went was "campaign ad gets posted, orgahs criticize whatever it is that the ad distorts, talk about something substantial".

eh, nevermind. It's not like I don't comprehend being partisan and "fighting the good fight" or whatever, so really I'm just complaining about it in overly-large posts. I'd be better off reading up on unions and the detroit bailout.

Its not like anyone votes on the issues anyway. Even on these hallowed forums, most of you have decided which side of the fence you want to be on and focus more on attempting to discredit the other side than build up any kind of meaningful platform. We should all be swing voters, but the truth is that most of you aren't and never will be. You've made your choice.

None of it is worth taking seriously until voters are willing to abandon both parties for alternatives that actually stick to their guns and support issues with conviction.

Its a joke. Just don't vote.

overly cynical

I read the other day that some of the wikileaks information could have let al quaida know that we were on to osama's hideout if it had been noticed. I also saw a bit of a speech by Paul where he called manning a patriot and a true american hero. He's not being marginalized unfairly, you guys just need a better libertarian candidate. Although I really think libertarianism is not a good stand alone political philosophy, it's too cut and dry which is the only reason libertarians tend to have such conviction.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

-meant to be an edit of the above-

[a completely inoffensive name]

Maybe you can explain it too me.

Sure!

Eh, nevermind.

...ok. :'(

[PanzerJaeger]

The unfortunate reality of being a gay conservative in America has manifested once again.

The recent departure of an openly gay foreign policy adviser and communications hand from Mitt Romney's presidential campaign has left many in political circles scratching their heads, but one conservative radio host is praising the move as a win for American families.

Ric Grenell, who served as foreign policy spokesman in President George W. Bush's administration, was recently hired by Romney and according to the campaign, was officially scheduled to begin work May 1. But when Tuesday came, Grenell voluntarily stepped down from his position.

According to a statement released to the Washington Post, it was because he felt the pushback from conservative groups regarding his sexual orientation and his advocacy for gay marriage rendered him ineffective.

...

Bryan Fischer, issue director at the American Family Association, a conservative group opposed to same-sex marriage, bragged about his role in the episode.

"It's very clear from the Washington Post that he resigned because of pressure that was put on the Romney campaign by the pro-family community," he said on his radio show, Focal Point. "So ladies and gentlemen, this is a huge win, and it's a huge win for us in regard to Mitt Romney, because Mitt Romney has been forced to say, 'Look, I overstepped my bounds here, I went outside my parameters here, I went off the reservation with this hire, the pro-family community has called me back to the table here, called me back inside the borders of the reservation.'"

Fischer then boasted, "There is no way in the world that Mitt Romney is going to put a homosexual activist in any position of importance in his campaign."

It would have been nice to see Romney stand up and defend this guy, especially since he bothered to hire him. It would have shown leadership and independence from the far Right as he moves into the general and, coincidentally, it would have been the right thing to do. Romney is no gay hater, but he apparently feels the need to keep the gay haters appeased - which is another unfortunate reality of contemporary GOP politics.

[HopAlongBunny]

Its not like anyone votes on the issues anyway.

Mainly because issues are absent from political discourse at election time. Personal attacks and fear mongering seem to have become the norm for electioneering in North America.

[Lemur]

Personal attacks and fear mongering seem to have become the norm for electioneering in North America.

Don't forget the well-established trend of people voting against their own economic self-interest, as well. So even when policy issues are raised, the voters' reactions to them are unpredictable. That's why politics seems more art than science to this lemur.

[HopAlongBunny]

That's why politics seems more art than science to this lemur.

And that art would be? Marketing? It seems the baser the instinct you can appeal to the more likely you are to motivate someone...Maslow's hierarchy perhaps? And of course "branding", never lose sight of the brand.