Here’s something you don’t see every day: a columnist at a liberal newspaper saying bad things about Democrats. In this case, it’s especially odd given that the targets of the disaffection were primarily media darlings Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
Yet, there it was in Wednesday’s Boston Globe:
Eight Democrats, eight would-be commanders-in-chief -- all running for president in a time of war. So which of them, on getting into the race, had this to say about the nature of the enemy confronting us?
"We are engaged in a war against an axis of Islamists, extremists, and terrorists. It is an axis of evil. It has headquarters in Tehran and Waziristan. But because of the unconventional nature of this war, it also has headquarters in cities throughout Europe and Asia and Africa and the United States of America, in cells that operate in the shadows but are prepared to strike us again as they did on September 11th, 2001.
"The enemy we are fighting is . . . totalitarian. It is inhumane. It has a violent ideology and a goal of expansionism and totalitarianism. It threatens our security, our values, our way of life as seriously, in my opinion, as fascism and communism did in the last century."
Alas, it was a trick question: “Can't match that assessment of the global jihad with the Democratic candidate who uttered it? Don't feel bad…Those words were actually spoken by Senator Joseph Lieberman at a forum on Iraq this month.
Jacoby’s marvelous point eventually emerged (emphasis mine throughout):
The Democratic candidates, by contrast, are virtually silent on the subject.
Barack Obama launched his exploratory committee with an online video that mentioned the economy, healthcare, vanishing pensions, college costs, and the fractiousness of partisan politics. His only nod to national security was a passing reference to the war in Iraq, which he opposes. But 9/11 and its aftermath? The worldwide jihad? The global conflict between democratic freedom and Taliban-style repression? Not a word.
Hillary Clinton's highly praised kickoff video likewise included nothing about the overriding threat of our time. Her website does contain a speech she gave at the Council on Foreign Relations last October, but it is filled with vague rhetoric about diplomacy and international conferences and how we must address the "troubled conditions terrorists seek out." New Yorkers don't need to be told "that we are in a war against terrorists who seek to do us harm," Clinton says. But if she recognizes that the future of the civilized world depends on winning that war, she shows little sign of it.
What is true of Obama and Clinton is more or less true of Edwards, Richardson, and the others. The Democrats seem prepared to emulate John Kerry, who insisted in 2004 that "we have to get back to the place we were" before 9/11. Back, that is, to treating Islamist terrorism not as "the focus of our lives," but merely as "a nuisance" that we need "to reduce" -- like gambling, he said, or prostitution.
No, folks. This isn’t from the National Review, the Weekly Standard, or the Washington Times. This really is an article by Jeff Jacoby, who writes for a paper owned by The New York Times Company. And he splendidly concluded:
Heading into the 2008 campaign, our political universe is still divided. On one side are those who see the Islamists as a nuisance to be controlled. On the other: those who regard them as an existential enemy to be destroyed. On the relative strength of those two camps, the next election may well depend.
Bravo, Jeff. Encore. Encore.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
This is amazing Noel. Is t
January 24, 2007 - 14:39 ET by Dee BunkThis is amazing Noel. Is this Jeff Jacoby a regular conservative columnist there?
Absolutely. Jacoby is relen
January 24, 2007 - 14:43 ET by Prester JohnAbsolutely. Jacoby is relentless on hammering the Libs. He's one of the good guys.
But I repeat myself.
January 24, 2007 - 14:46 ET by Prester JohnBut I repeat myself.
Jeff is the token conservativ
January 24, 2007 - 14:44 ET by hs29fanJeff is the token conservative at the "Boring Broadsheet" as Howie Carr calls it.
Poor Liberal, he's educated betond his intelligence"
In fact, Jeff was for some 7
January 24, 2007 - 15:08 ET by Del DolemonteIn fact, Jeff was for some 7 years the chief editorial writer at Howie's newspaper, the Boston Herald.
I read Jeff Jacoby all of the
January 24, 2007 - 16:32 ET by donsalesI read Jeff Jacoby all of the time....he's the one "conservative" at the Globe in the same role as David Brooks at the NYT who took over for William Safire....I highly recommend that you bookmark his column in the Globe.....
He's from the same school as the late Michael Kelly who was the only "sane" columnist at the WP before his untimely demise imbedded with US military during the march on Baghdad at the start of the Iraqi conflict....
Nowhere to Run....Nowhere To Hide.....
The more the firewalls fall
January 24, 2007 - 15:06 ET by JDWThe more the firewalls fall the more knowlegeable general public will become as to future security disasters. If the dems cut and run America will be confronted terrorism the likes of which one cannot imagine, here. Their current position is political. Their candidates defect positions more often than weather forecasts. Previous dem presidents have fought wars, will one of these switch and take America's side against terrorism?
JDW
Kerry: "You know, education, if you make the most of it ... you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
"Silence" is not golden
January 24, 2007 - 15:12 ET by Gary HallSilence is not golden in this case.
But Noel, as you know, it's not just the Democrat(ic) - thank you Scott - candidates. It's the entire MSM. Each and every day, we see tens, dozens, and way too often, a hundred or more innocent civilians murdered by either al Qaeda terrorists, their Sunni associates in Iraq, or as a result of al Qaeda's call for all of this, the reprisal, and equally horrible, killings by the Shia extremists (Muqtada al-Sadr's sect).
This so-called socially responsible, human rights driven leftist media does what? Well, it's not what they do, it's what they don't do in this case. Oh, they'll do their thing with Darfur (now that Clinton is out and Bush is in - I note that they ignored the Congo (1997-2000, 2.7 million dead), calling for Bush and the world to stand up and stop the senseless killing of innocent civilians.
But in Iraq? The MSM is not calling attention to the outlandish killings for the sake of putting the terrorists on notice, that we as a people will not tolerate such crimes against humanity, or for the purpose of challenging the world, at large to take a stand; rather, they are doing it only for the sake of damaging the Presidents effort to give the proud people of Iraq back their country.
The media (MSM) has no conscience, and no true vision. Rather, they are driven by their short-term and self serving partisan agenda. To the end of my dying days, I will support the right to debate the war, it's historic causes, it's purpose, and it's execution, however only as I condemn the indecency of our media for caring more about their own politics, then humanity itself.
I calculate that an average of 171 people died from violence per day, during the reign of Saddam Hussein (24 years - 1.5 million dead). Fewer are dying per day now since he is gone, than before.
It is my feeling that now is
January 24, 2007 - 15:17 ET by NazarethIt is my feeling that now is the time for the democrats to either get on board or be seen as anti-American- you'll note that those democrats running for the presidency aren't calling for retreat and defeat (even though they might think that's the best policy- Lord only knows why they would- but just sayin) But they do NOT have a plan and will simply not commit to one- but at least they aren't actively calling for opposition to the war like the far left who aren't running for office are doing- that's not saying much I know, but just pointing out that it seems funny to me that those running for Preidency won't come right out and say 'run away' while their compatrios do. Those running know darn well the American public won't put up with a defeatist running for the Presidency- so it's do or die time for the dems I think- either get on board and fight terrorism, or get off the boat altogether- because hte public won't stand cowards in office who actively call for our defeat.
Hopefully we can get the message out ot the public more and more that the democratic agenda is a truly dangerous agenda for this country and break through the campaign of silence and slight of hand the MSM foists on Americans.
I think it was obama who said that we 'need to form a committie to explore the right direction in Iraq' or something to that effect- well cripes, they've had what? 5 years now to do so? And haven't? And we're going to elect someone who has dropped the ball on national security for 5 yuears straight? Every last dem running SHOULD have been 'exploring' the war issue all along now and presenting an alternative IF they dissaprove with the President's plan for success, but nope- NOTHING from them for 5 years!!! Hey Obama-Hillary etc, too little too late- you ALL blew it!!!
http://sacredscoop.com
Yes, libs are doing their thi
January 24, 2007 - 16:02 ET by dscottYes, libs are doing their thing with Dafur is typical of the idiocy. Why aren't they holding the French, Russians and Chinese accountable for selling the guns and ammo to the people (Sudan/Janjaweed) doing the killing? Oh, that's right, they are Socialists. You know the love affair they have with Socialists. Just as they said nothing when Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and the rest murdered millions. Why? They were Communists. Liberals love Communists. Heck, they loved Hilter (another mass murdered) before they hated him, that was because he double crossed the Stalin. Nothing new here, and quite frankly sickenly consistent.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
WOW - I am stunned here, but
January 24, 2007 - 15:26 ET by I am conservativeWOW - I am stunned here, but not really. These blowhard Democrats have no clue about world terrorism, ie: Bill Clinton. They all live in this bubble and think nothing bad will happen to America, well they are wrong...
To be running for president and not mention anything in regards to terrorism shows their ignorance.
Exactly- Billary said we need
January 24, 2007 - 15:35 ET by NazarethExactly- Billary said we need to 'address the issue of terrorism'? What the H.E.*.*. Does she think we HAVE been doing for 5 years now?
Sure, she means of that by 'addressing' the issue, we should play nice and pull troops out and 'negotiate and dialogue' with them, but that WILL bring us back to pre 9/11 where were all just 'hoped and prayed' that the terrorists would never hit us here at home. Well guess what Billary, obama, edwards et all- they DID hit us DESPITE our 'dialoguing' with them and they WILL KEEP hitting us over and over again- take your defeatist mentality and bring it to another country if you can't let it go- those hwo died to secure freedom in this country are DIHONORED by your lack of common sense and because of you folks on the far lefts' derilection of duty to protect us from terrorism.
Spin it all you like Hillary, obama, edwards etc, but you crap Still stinks to high heaven and those who fought and died for this country are turning in the graves at the sounds of your shrill voices calling for defeat!
Sorry for the angry words folks- but this issue really burns me- I can't stand the bald faced lies comming from the left and their defeatist mentality and the lies and bull crap they feed us in an attempt to justify their defeatist mentality to cover up the fact that they are severely lacking in leadership qualifications during a time of obvious war! Running and cowering and 'dialoguing' is NO way to defeat those who DO NOT dialogue!!!
http://sacredscoop.com
Fault
January 24, 2007 - 17:18 ET by UnsaneWorse: according to the Left, if anything happens to America, inflicted upon it by enemies, IT'S ALL AMERICA'S FAULT.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
My thoughts are the same
January 24, 2007 - 15:35 ET by blackrain4xmashttp://www.floppingaces.net/2007/01/24/good-morning-sunshine/
This is true not only for the
January 24, 2007 - 15:48 ET by NeoCon JediThis is true not only for the Dems '08 presidential candidates, but for the party in general. All we've heard since the President announced his new strategy is how it's the wrong approach, a bad idea, etc.
Okay, well... what's your idea Nancy? How about you Ted? Hillary? Carl? How about you, John, anything, anything? No? ... didn't think so.
"At an end your rule is, and not short enough it was!" -- Yoda
Jedi, they are just going to
January 24, 2007 - 15:56 ET by RJWallJedi, they are just going to ignore it and hope it goes away. That seems to be their strategy for a lot of things and much of the MSM helps them along with that "strategy".
Actually RJ, they aren't goin
January 24, 2007 - 16:04 ET by NeoCon JediActually RJ, they aren't going to ignore it, they'll simply continue to call it "President Bush's war" and avoid any responsibility for it, until we win. Then they'll chime in and take credit for it's success like they were war heroes.
I bet you if the President's plan succeeds and Baghdad is secure by November, just before the first primaries, every Dem candidate will be boasting how they initially called for a surge and if the President had done it sooner, etc., etc.
Flip-flop!
"At an end your rule is, and not short enough it was!" -- Yoda
Don't worry guys, Hillary and
January 24, 2007 - 16:35 ET by JayTeeDon't worry guys, Hillary and Hussein don't have a chance. Movie stars don't get elected, unless they have the Arnold S.'s image of kicking butt and taking names. Arnold's got bigger Pects than Hussein, and all the women love male movie stars, not leading ladies. The Dim convention will not nominate these losers.
Wait a minute..... they nominated Kerry last time, didn't they ?
Nevermind.
JT,Yeah, but The Hildebeast h
January 24, 2007 - 16:41 ET by Dave RJT,
Yeah, but The Hildebeast has bigger thighs than Arnold. I mean, her thighs are bigger than Arnold, period.
DaveR......YOU looked at her
January 24, 2007 - 18:04 ET by JayTeeDaveR......YOU looked at her Thighs ? ?! Even Bill doesn't go there.......
Ughhh....why do you think they only show her on TV from the waist up ? I'd rather see a Pic of her on Obama's beach with both of them shirtless.....HEY, that's a possible episode for the new TV show "Dirt" ?
JT,Actually, Friday Night Fri
January 24, 2007 - 18:15 ET by Dave RJT,
Actually, Friday Night Frights would be more appropriate, as long as it was preceeded by a strong warning message for people who have weak hearts/stomachs etc.
Time for the big question to come
January 24, 2007 - 16:53 ET by blackrain4xmasNow that the 08 race is well on its way (we know this because MSNBC has a graphic saying so), it's time to ask the candidates the big question. Everything is IraqIraqIraq. Dems played that hard in 02, 04, and 06. In each case-thanks to Newsbusters!-we know there never was a plan for "A New Direction In Iraq" as the Dems pumped up and promised the electorate. SO, what will they do in 08 re Iraq?
Well Iraq in 08, Iraq is going to be one of two things-no middle ground:
1) a continuing war with US troops still there if the Bush plan fails
2) chaos, anarchy, and a terrorist safe haven like Beirut in the 80's, Mogadishu in the early 90's, Sarajevo, Grozny, or Kabul in the late 90's.
SO, let's ask the candidates the big question:
If you are elected President, and American troops are still in Iraq in 2009, will you pull them out, or do you have a secret plan for victory, and if Iraq has collapsed into chaos, or there's a regional war requiring American intervention...will you send troops back in or let it go unchecked?
Sen Edwards has a live video blog Q/A tonight at 9. I submitted the question. LOL! We'll see.
I might as well wait for Chris Matthews to ask Dean how the New Direction In Iraq plan is coming along.
Dean will give the same answe
January 24, 2007 - 17:04 ET by dscottDean will give the same answer, waffle, waffle, waffle.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Jeff Jacoby could not of said
January 24, 2007 - 20:42 ET by bigtimerJeff Jacoby could not of said anything about the state of our country and this world more precise, Lieberman is the only democrat that I know of in the Senate that sees what we are facing, we have our own RINO's running for cover with the leadership of the oh so genteel but strong Warner, we are in big trouble if we duck and cover, retreat, do not fight to win.
Thank you Mr. Jacoby....maybe you should consider running for President, you seem to be the only liberal that says the truth in the msn media...maybe you can knock a few heads together so some of your colleagues will wake up and see the real light.
Thanks Noel for finding and sharing this, it gives me a small glimmer of hope.
Even if briefly.
BT--- Jeff
January 24, 2007 - 20:57 ET by misterbillBT--- Jeff is a conservative. He is , as far as I know, the only one on the Globe. Some time back , the fools at the Globe suspended him for 4 months without pay for publishing something without checking it out. Even the lib writers protested it was an unusually harsh punishment. When you are the only one who is different, then you are treated differently. Keep up the good work Jeff.
PS He used to be with the Boston Herald , a conservative (relatively) newspaper.
Thanks for the info misterb..
January 24, 2007 - 21:16 ET by bigtimerThanks for the info misterb...thats what I get for assuming things just because it is in a liberal fish-wrap.
His name is one I am going to remember...that's for sure.
Hey, not completely off-topic
January 25, 2007 - 16:00 ET by skeptic1Hey, not completely off-topic, but did anyone not read Jack Cashill's column today?
http://www.cashill.com/twa800/why_bush_rolled.htm