Snot and Centrists
Megan McArdle says:
I’ve heard two superficially plausible and, I think, completely contradictory narratives of what the Rahm Emmanuel appointment means. One: that Barack Obama is taking his administration in a more pragmatic, less ideological direction. Two: that Barack Obama is looking for a hatchet man to beat the snot out of the Republicans. Which is true? I’m not enough of an insider to even hazard a guess. But it’s interesting how the same piece of information can plausibly tell two utterly different stories.
I don’t think these are really contradictory ideas. The idea that hard-core partisanship and being a hard-core ideologue go together is a mistake. Big liberals are often relatively un-partisan because they have all kinds of gripes with various Democrats along with their gripes with Republicans. By contrast, someone dedicated to partisanship uber alles is going, by definition, to need a lot of ideological flexibility.
Meanwhile, from where I sit it’s hard to read these tea leaves. Emanuel has extensive high-level experience as a White House staffer and as a congressional leader and has a personal relationship with Obama. Those are, generically, good qualifications for a chief of staff. If there were three people with that kind of background all with different ideological leanings, then the choice of person could be seen as having great ideological significance. But that’s not the situation.
67 Responses to “Snot and Centrists”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 7th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Hey, Matt! One great benefit of changing blog venues is that you don’t have to link to toxic moron Megan McArdle! She really blows! Please stop! I’ve never read a smart word written by her–have you???
November 7th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Is Kathleen Parker still at the National Review? Perhaps McArdle could fill that slot once it’s been vacated. Her grasp on logic is certainly comparable to any of the writers at that magazine.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
God, I wish Megan McArdle were a worse dinner guest. Then we would never have to read excerpt from her terrible, terrible posts.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
I have heard many references to Emanuel being a hatchet man, but this is the firt time I’ve heard anyone float the idea that he’s there to beat up on Reublicans.
He’s there to help Obama get his agenda passed, and any effect on Republicans is nothing more than an afterthought. But of course, all the Republicans care about is how Obama will affect them personally.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
My take: it’s with an eye on the new people coming in, and the old people with DC connections. It’s to create: you can imagine Rahm being fiercely protective of his staff, and a ballbuster against those who choose to air their grievances to the press over martinis rather than going up the chain of command.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
He could always hire the Terminator to even things out.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Oops: it’s to create a firewall.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
He’s Obama’s XO. Emanuel is like Saul Tigh to Obama’s Bill Adama.
(I just hope he’s not a robot! [crosses fingers])
November 7th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Peter K wins the thread with his BSG reference. Personally, I’m just glad Obama didn’t pick Billy.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Also it may so happen to be the case that what needs to be done is indeed what liberals/progressives for the most part want to do. So being partisan is at this point in time being pragmatic. Appointing someone that can get needful things done is pragmatic and also partisan because he or she is promoting partisan, Democratic policies.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
The more I read McArdle, the more I think she is a hard-right stooge under the guise of a libertarian or independent. Look, it’s fine to pose the question that she posed. But I always feel some underlying acid there, some deeper skepticism of Democrats that goes beyond what I expect of a jaded journalist or political blogger. Am I alone on this? But I like how you have been systematically addressing her posts.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
It’s hard to believe, but history actually began before 1980! Rahm was selected to control the Democrats, not the Republicans. Although not as diverse as in the old days (before the southerners and westerners bolted), but more diverse than anything we have seen since 1980. Controlling the Democrats in the old days was a monumental task, often requiring the assistance of a Republican (anybody remeber Dirksen?). Obama will need not only the enforcer (Rahm), but a Republican as well. How about McCain as the new Dirksen?
November 7th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
That idiot.
One: this is an olive branch from the DNC to the DLC. Rightwingers never got the split, if only because it doesn’t fit their narrative about the Democrats in general. They’ve been fighting for credit for 2006 since it happened, and the primary was DLC vs. DNC.
Even I am amazed at how stupid the conservatives are, that they don’t get this. A-fucking-mazing.
Two: a COS needs sharp elbows. Rahm has them.
Fucking duh, already.
.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
He’s getting a puppy for his daughters and a junk yard dog for himself…
November 7th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
There’s an old story about a farmer having trouble getting his mule to move when a man comes walking along the road and tells the farmer, that yelling, cussing and kicking the beast won’t move it. The stranger advises that the farmer use gentle words and persuasion. The farmer cocks and eye at the stranger and asks, “I don’t suppose you would like to show me how it’s done?” The stranger agrees and walks over to the side of the road where he finds a nice sturdy stick about 3 feet long and maybe 3 – 4 inches around, walks over the mule and lets him have it as hard as he can, right between the eyes. The farmer jumps up and shouting, asks, “what about gentle words and persuasion???” The stranger responds, “First you have to have the beast’s attention.”
I think that Obama has chosen his stick if he needs to get some Republican’s attention. Here’s hoping it works.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Emanuel is a breath mint and a candy mint.
Or, if you prefer, a floor wax and a dessert topping.
November 7th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
I think we forget who they are up against to bring change -Republicans. Is there any group of more pure partisan ideologues than Republicans – really.
I would want a tough as nails guy on the other side of the fence. I think Mr. Obama recognizes he will need to be able to deal with the Republicans on their level before he can really find compromise.
Bush’s classic hand across the aisle was “my way or the highway”.
November 7th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
My take is that Obama is dead serious about legislative accomplishments, and he thinks Rahm is the guy to orchestrate the agenda with Congress.
November 7th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
here i thought he was going to pick bill ayers: how are we going to sell out to the terrorists of he keeps ayers hidden away?
seriously, i think the primary thing this demonstrates is that obama doesn’t want a steep learning curve: the issues are too serious, the risks too great.
November 7th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
You lost me at “Megan McArdle says…”
November 7th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Rahmbo is there to beat up on Democrats. Obama’s got a working majority in both houses. The problem is keeping the Blue Dogs and other strays from sinking the agenda, and to make the often spineless Senate leadership force Republicans to actually filibuster popular bills rather than killing everything with cloture votes.
November 7th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Look, this one’s pretty simple. Emanuel is an ideologically vapid corporate hack. Obama, like Clinton before him and pretty much the entire Democratic leadership, is also an ideologically vapid corporate hack. Ideologically vapid corporate hacks are comfortable with other ideologically vapid corporate hacks. The netroots is focusing on the “Emanuel is a pit bull” angle because there are still a few actual liberals – excuse me! “progressives” – who read these blogs and always good to pretend that this is an exercise in promoting liberalism, as opposed to an exercise in getting the Democratic Party in power and keeping it there. So despite Emanuel’s long history as a corporate sellout, the party line is “he’s there to be tough, and don’t you worry your pretty little heads about a longstanding proponent of welfare reform, free trade, and financial deregulation getting Obama’s ear.”
November 7th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Incidentally, I can’t wait to hear the hairsplitting and excuse-making that’ll be going on in the lefty blogosphere once Larry Summers gets Treasury.
November 7th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
As I understand it, Emanuel beat the snot out of Republicans when it was specifically his job to beat the snot out of Republicans. So I am going to go with the unifying theme of competence.
November 7th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
True enough, but I don’t think that is why Obama picked Rahm… I think he picked Rahm to keep Congressional DEMs in line. That is where the real battles will be fought, which,by the by, is why Obama needs to get rid of Lieberman more than ever.
“Cross me and I will send you off to Never-Never Land…”
Rahm is going to be Obama’s pitbull (sans the lipstick) so he can be Mr. Nice Guy. But make no mistake about it: Obama is tuff as nails when it comes to playing politics, he does it the “Chicago Way”. Remember how he got his first elected office? It wasn’t by beating them at the polls, it was by having them eliminated (from the ballot).
It is amazing to me, that after all they have seen him do, as far as he has come, as fast as he has done it, they still don’t get it, they still under estimate him, they still play the game the way they have been playing it for the past 30 yrs.
The DEMs and GOPs in Washington are in for an education.
November 7th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
As I understand it, Emanuel beat the snot out of Republicans when it was specifically his job to beat the snot out of Republicans. So I am going to go with the unifying theme of competence.
Yes, he certainly demonstrated his “competence” when he beat the Republicans into supporting HillaryCare, didn’t he, DTM?
November 7th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
OK, so all these Republicans are deeply Concerned that Obama has chosen a knowledgeable, experienced tough guy to herd the Democrats. Quelle surprise. It does rather seem that, in order to be sporting, they should really offer some alternatives, doesn’t it? I mean, it’s not obvious who their first choice would be, given that Fred Rogers has passed on and the Stay-Puff Marshmallow Man, while a seemingly compelling option, was too forceful towards the end of Ghostbusters.
November 7th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Mixner,
Stalking me, I see. Charming.
Anyway, I was referring to his time with the DCCC, for those who were too dim to catch the reference.
November 7th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Josh Lyman from West Wing was based on Rahm. Ari Gold from Entourage was based on his brother. When you go into negotiations, make sure the biggest asshole in the room is on your side.
November 7th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
Anyway, I was referring to his time with the DCCC,…
Which makes no sense in the context of a discussion about his ability to “beat the snot out of Republicans” as White House Chief of Staff. The relevant comparison would be to his time in the Clinton White House.
November 7th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
He makes perfect sense. Tough, Chicago, driven, unquestionably pro-Israel, tight with members of the House, and friends with Axelrod already. I think the three of them make a great team (think Bartlett, McGarry, and Lyman). My only problem with Rahm is his DLC centrist positions. I have no doubt that Obama recognizes the viewpoint he’s likely to get and will look for ways to balance the voices in his head. Obama seems to make his own decisions (I’m thinking of Don Corleone disappointing Sonny and Tom Hagan by not taking Sollozzo’s deal). Emanuel is a wise choice because progressive policies will be better sold to Congress by a centrist (see Colin Powell’s speech at the UN).
November 7th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Mixner,
Wow, you are slow on the uptake. That was exactly my point: to spell it out in painful detail, Emanuel acquired a reputation as a partisan bulldog when his job at the DCCC was to be a partisan bulldog. But I don’t think that implies it is his nature to be a partisan bulldog, and thus that we should expect him to behave as such as Chief of Staff. Rather, my point was that he was just doing his former job well, and it is likely that level of competence which Obama was seeking in Chief of Staff.
But seriously, I suspect you may well be the only person reading my prior comment who didn’t understand my point.
November 7th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
What DMonteith said.
November 7th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Wow, you are slow on the uptake. That was exactly my point
Your point was that your reference to his time at the DCCC makes no sense in the context of a discussion about his position in the White House? Er, okay.
Emanuel acquired a reputation as a partisan bulldog when his job at the DCCC was to be a partisan bulldog.
No, he acquired his reputation as a partisan bulldog when he was in the Clinton White House. He failed miserably to “beat” the Republicans into supporting Clinton’s agenda.
November 7th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
mixner, remember what keynes said: “people are entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.”
you just violated that on emanuel.
November 7th, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Emmanuel’s new job is to work the Democrats
It was the Congressional Democratic leadership, particularly committee chairmen, that caused Clinton problems pre-1994.
November 7th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
howard, no I didn’t.
November 7th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
The more I read McArdle, the more I think she is a hard-right stooge under the guise of a libertarian or independent. Look, it’s fine to pose the question that she posed. But I always feel some underlying acid there, some deeper skepticism of Democrats that goes beyond what I expect of a jaded journalist or political blogger.
Oh no, not a deeper skepticism of Democrats! Why would a libertarian feel that way? Gotta be a hard-right stooge!
November 7th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Mixner, find Rahm and “keeping congressional republicans in line” from the 90s. Otherwise STFU (vain hope, i know).
Al? Al??? Are you done moping yet? We need a troll-shepherd here.
November 7th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
Partisanship, like that of Karl Rove, can be motivated by a desire for power or, for most of the rest of us, to meet affiliation needs.
November 7th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
nolaboyd, find Rahm and “enforcer.” Otherwise STFU.
November 7th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Don’t ever expect me to admit that I can’t read. Or go outside. When I say something’s true, it just is, okay?
November 7th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Let’s see, Rahmbo takes over the DCCC, and 2 years later, the GOP has lost control of the House and 4 years later they are out some 50 seats. Don’t know, but that sure seems like a certain facility in “beating the snot out of Republicans”.
Don’t love the guy, but gotta give him his props. Whatever mistakes he may have made with HillaryCare, he may well have learned quite a bit from that time. No one seems to think he’s anybody’s fool.
November 7th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Let’s see, Rahmbo takes over the DCCC, and 2 years later, the GOP has lost control of the House and 4 years later they are out some 50 seats. Don’t know, but that sure seems like a certain facility in “beating the snot out of Republicans”.
I don’t think so, but to the extent that it does, it suggests a facility at beating Republican candidates in elections, not at beating Republican congressmen into supporting the agenda of the White House. The miserable failure of Rahm to beat Republicans into supporting Clinton’s White House agenda suggests he may not be very good at beating Republicans into supporting Obama’s.
November 7th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
Mixner,
I already explained the point I was making, which everyone else already understood, to you once. I’m not going to try again–if you don’t get it by now, you never will.
November 7th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
…. which everyone else already understood, …
Everyone else thinks you’re an idiot. I know this the same way you know everyone else already understood….
November 7th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Don’t forget Rahm worked hard to lead the Dems to help the Rethugians gut the 4th Amendment and give retroactive amnesty to the telecoms for spying on us and which BO agreed with. Also remember he is a Likudite and Palestinians can go all to hell along with complete violation of international law in the Jews building on conquered territory. The Palestinians are way screwed with this fanatic so high up. So there is way more negative to this guy re policy rather than just his style of garroting his enemies when given the chance.
November 7th, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Is the game easy to learn how to play?
Yes. We strive to make all of our games easy to learn how to play, yet difficult to master.
Is Blizzard aware of some of the game play problems that have been prevalent in other MMORPGs?
Yes. Blizzard employees are gamers first and foremost, and we have played more than our fair share of existing massively multiplayer games. We tend to agree with MMORPG gamers on the strengths and weaknesses of the genre to date. We have striven to advance the genre with World of Warcraft by building on the positives already established in the genre and eliminating as many of the negatives as possible. We think we’ve done a successful job, but we hope you will try the game to see for yourself.
How do you prevent camping and kill stealing?
There are several things that have been implemented to limit this problem. First, there is “tapping.” If you damage a monster first, you have thereby “tapped” it and thus only you and your party will gain experience and loot from it, even if another player attacks and kills it. We also limit camping and kill-stealing issues by “instancing” certain areas of the game. No other players, unless they are part of your group, can enter your instance.
How do you prevent camping and kill stealing in non-instanced areas?
Competition over rare item drops and quest items is the primary cause of camping and kill stealing. In World of Warcraft, many rare item drops are not exclusive to any one creature. Several creatures will have a chance of dropping the same item. If the required item is a quest item, the player can join a group of other players on the same quest. Every player on the quest will receive a copy of the quest item from the monster or location where it was found.
Are there other things to do besides leveling?
There is a huge variety of things to do to keep players from feeling like they just have to grind through one creature battle after another. Characters can craft items, fight in vast battles against other players, and explore distant lands. Even when players do fight monsters, it will often be as part of a quest, or in search of special ingredients for their crafts.
Is there a party system for group adventuring?
Yes. buy WOW Gold
How large is the party size for players?
The maximum number for a party is five players, and the game is generally balanced for groups of five. Smaller groups can still be quite successful, and regardless of the group’s size, everyone in the group can make important contributions. You can also create larger groups of players, which are called raid groups.
Are there ways to gain experience in the game besides fighting?
Yes, there are ways to gain experience other than by fighting. You can gain substantial experience from doing quests. Exploring is another example of how you can gain experience; a character can receive experience by simply journeying to areas where your character has yet to explore.
How does group experience work?
All players in a group share experience for a kill. However, to offset the lesser experience that comes from grouping, all players in the group also get a group xp bonus depending on the number of players in the group. You gain more experience for kills if you group with players closer to your level, while you gain less if you group with players more than a few levels higher than you.
http://indihot.com/indihot-news/gautam-gambhir-banned-for-one-test.html#comment-9560
Is there a way to finish World of Warcraft? How long can I play?
There are thousands of hours of game play in the game (and even more in The Burning Crusade), and nearly infinite goals for players. Because our live team is regularly adding new quests, creatures, and items, the game will never truly end.
November 8th, 2008 at 12:22 am
So there is way more negative to this guy re policy rather than just his style of garroting his enemies when given the chance.
If Rahm Emmanuel is the sort of COS that is controlling the executive agenda, he’s a disaster of epic proportions. If that’s what’s going on it’s well worth destroying Obama’s presidency. He’s Lyndon Johnson.
I don’t think that’s the case, I don’t think he is going to have policy dictated to him by frickin Rahm Emmanuel. Rahm will do what he’s told, and if he doesn’t like it and has to quit that’s fine to.
November 8th, 2008 at 3:58 am
Libertarians are like that. Peel a little of the mask,and you find the typical Republican.
Never met a ‘libertarian’ who really cared about Griswold,Roe or Lawrence.
November 8th, 2008 at 5:29 am
Emmanuel is there because AIPAC wants him there – and Obama doesn’t have the nerve to refuse.
Look at today. Obama threatens Iran again simply because Ehud Barak criticized him suggesting the US was not going to attack Iran.
Obama: Iran’s Pursuit of Nukes Is Unacceptable
http://news.antiwar.com/2008/11/07/obama-hits-out-at-iran-closemouthed-on-tactics/
Ahmadinejad sends him a letter offering an olive branch – and Obama spits on it with this response.
November 8th, 2008 at 8:33 am
A chief of staff isn’t a Congressional liaison. He’s someone who’s personally loyal to the president and who has extraordinarily thick skin. He’s there to facilitate daily routine.
A chief of staff won’t beat up on anyone. The Republicans have been whining again. Sooprize sooprize.
November 8th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Josh Lyman from West Wing was based on Rahm
So Emanuel’s a whiny loser who’s going to spend eight years of an Obama administration trying to passive-aggressively bang his secretary?
November 8th, 2008 at 11:20 am
Megan McArdle is far to the right of where I am. I get that, but she really isn’t that bad. You can learn interesting things from her, some of which are probably even true. Democrats are almost certainly wrong about some things. It is important to listen to smart people who are telling you where and why you are wrong if your goal is to be wrong less. It would be a pretty strange coincidence if progressives happened to be right about all these things that aren’t really related to each other.
November 8th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
A hacket man beating the snot out of people is either a very strange image or a mixed metaphor, no? Maybe Rahm is a hatchet man who will restrain himself and instead of chopping his opponents up he’ll only beat them with the handle. Till snot comes out.
“Libertarians are like that. Peel a little of the mask,and you find the typical Republican.
“Never met a ‘libertarian’ who really cared about Griswold, Roe or Lawrence.”
I’ve met a few, but not many. A lot of the libertarians I know take their ideological persuasion not from the desire to protect the individual, but to be all the more harsh and unforgiving to the individual (some *other* individualm that is). (It’s a good piece of evidence that modern, not classic liberalism, is the most authentic variety.)
McArdle’s not like that. She’s the other kind of libertarian. Call it banker’s libertarianism.
November 8th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Democrats are almost certainly wrong about some things. It is important to listen to smart people who are telling you where and why you are wrong if your goal is to be wrong less.
Which is why it is best to ignore McArdle.
You also forget that if you want to be wrong less, you should listen to people who are right about where you are wrong. Just listening to someone tell you that you are wrong is unlikely to help, in and of itself. Liberals, once again, have the problem of refusing to take their out side of the argument.
November 8th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
While it would be impossible not to grasp the historical importance of the victory of a black man in this election or the good it does for America I would not recommend waiting till February to stop congratulating ourselves on his victory .I supported his run for president and did what I could to expose the hypocrisy of the republican strategy and to reveal every reason why the Obama/Biden ticket was the best choice , I had little illusion, after his broken pledge on FISA, that I would be only partially pleased with his performance as President ..I have no time for rock stars or celebrities in any case .
That being said I would like to point out that all the constitutional issues created during Bushes tenure remain unchanged including the loss of posse comitatus which now means the army is active on American soil as of Oct.1st ..Also we are still at war in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Russians are also not likely to be pleased that according to the Polish President ,Obama plans to go ahead with the missile shield in Eastern Europe despite speculation the he would not be so enthusiastic about the project . Perhaps it doesn’t bother some that FISA was passed with retroactive immunity and that the telecoms threw the democrats a big party , that the first thing the president elect has done is to appoint a hawk who favors a strike against Iran and that knowing what we now know about Iraq would have still supported the invasion .
I have heard Emmanuel is a tough customer and many feel that he will be able to play hardball inorder to help advance this presidents agenda in the first 100 days of his administration , I find it nonetheless worrisome that a center right hawk with dual citizenship and obvious ties to AIPAC will be controlling access to the President. 1 1/2 million Iraqis or the more than 4 million refugees caused as a result of the invasion do not have the luxury of our taking time off to celebrate and I believe neither does our ailing democracy .The democrats have had a free pass for the last 3 months from me in my active blogging , half time is over .
February 24th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Interesting blog, i have bookmarked it for future referrence
February 28th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Wow! what an idea ! What a concept ! Beautiful .. Amazing
March 1st, 2009 at 7:02 am
viagra
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 1st, 2009 at 8:11 pm
cialis
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:42 am
tramadol
It is the coolest site,keep so!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:47 am
buy viagra online
I want to say – thank you for this!
April 2nd, 2009 at 6:08 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
buy cheap viagra