Back to nuanced political conversations

-
-


So I was commenting over at Loring's on his excellent Clown Time post saying that back in the days of W, columnists were wistful for nuanced political conversations. Politics had become binary, and wouldn't it be nice to some day get back to the subtleties of politics again. But now in these days of Rush Limbaugh's top entertainment dollar, I was saying, we might be glad to have Mr. Obama's intelligence in the White House, but look at the Republican Party, getting less nuanced than ever, trying to paint the President as a socialist.

Today the New York Times has this article about Mr. Obama wanting to reach out to the moderate elements of the Taliban. 

Asked if the United States was winning in Afghanistan, a war he effectively adopted as his own last month by ordering an additional 17,000 troops sent there, Mr. Obama replied flatly, “No.”

Mr. Obama said on the campaign trail last year that the possibility of breaking away some elements of the Taliban “should be explored,” an idea also considered by some military leaders. But now he has started a review of policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan intended to find a new strategy, and he signaled that reconciliation could emerge as an important initiative, mirroring the strategy used by Gen. David H. Patraeus in Iraq.

That's a "NO!" I can live with. What? We're not winning a war? Mr. Obama may someday think we're winning that war, we know it's expedient to talk in terms like that when you're trying to reassure the American public. There's no winning in war, but at least I don't think he'll fly in Marine One to a carrier's deck and declare "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED."

the rest of the story?

When Paul Harvey died last week, I remembered the many times I listened to his, "here's the rest of the story" - saying "rest" with that bluejay-like upturn, telling the other side of famous historical or news-worthy events. (Read a short Tribune review of Harvey's career by Phil Rosenthal.)

So then as I read about Obama signing his budget filled with almost 8,600 earmarks costing $3.8 - 7.7 billion, depending on which side of the aisle is talking, thereby reneging on his campaign pledge against Congressional earmarks, I wondered, what is the rest of the story?

Compromise and moving on for the sake of making room for the battalion of other concerns is part of it. Presidents get worn down. In forty-one days since Inauguration Day, this President has faced ungodly choices between bad and worse. Too bad he's so busy, otherwise he might tell us his thought process on this broken pledge.

Well, it's not like we didn't expect it. It was just a matter of time.