Home / General / Concern Troll of the Day

Concern Troll of the Day

Comments
/
/
/
588 Views

Shorter Ruth Marcus: The story of the Iran Deal is Barack Obama lacking civility and dignitude. Heavens to Besty, he suggests the arguments against the deal are “ideological or illogical.” What at appalling lack of etiquette! Plainly, there are good arguments against the deal that Obama must acknowledge. I can’t identify any, but by definition they must exist because of the greatest truth of all: both sides do it.

…whenever there’s an argument this hackish, you just know Fred Hiatt is going to get in on the action.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • SP

    Oddly she ends the column saying that both sides shouldn’t do it- that even though critics of the deal insult Obama, he shouldn’t insult them. Thus the only principle higher than “Both sides do it” is IOKIYAR.

    • JustRuss

      I think you’re too kind to Marcus. Here’s the quote:

      The less [the president] insults his critics — yes, even the ones who insult him as a feckless, naive negotiator — the better.

      I hear a dog whistle for “Some folk need to know their place and quit being so uppity.”

      I’m not going to click on Marcus’ piece, does she actually offer any substantive criticism of the deal, besides “some people don’t like it”?

      • ThrottleJockey

        That’s the odd thing. She says she supports the deal.

        I generally like and agree with Marcus but this piece was so horrible it made me throw up in my mouth a little.

        • ColBatGuano

          What possible reason is there to like Marcus. She is the epitome of tasteless centrist gruel served lukewarm.

      • ThrottleJockey

        And, by the way, I’m happy as hell to see Obama striking a strong, bold, brook-no-opposition approach as opposed to kowtowing to unreciprocated demands for ‘civility’. Why be civil to people hell bent on war? And here’s hoping those feckless Senate Dems grow a pair and tell Schumer he can eff off with his ambitions for majority leader. I like Durbin a ton more.

  • howard

    If there’s a word I’ve had my god-damn fill of from smug pundits, it’s “civility.” Fuck that.

  • Nick056

    On the one hand, a deal that delays a nuclear Iran for easily 15 years, during which a lot can change for the better. On the other hand … Crickets. And the Likud Party. How is this even a conversation? Because furriners!

    • carolannie

      Furriners cuz the Israelis are citizens of our 51st state. Too bad Puerto Rico and DC don’t get the same thoughtful, financially generous treatment and consideration…but you know…the r-word that should never be uttered around white Republicans

      • John not McCain

        Clearly, Israel is the 1st state. And the only one that really matters. The rest are just the hired help.

        • DAS

          Nah … Israel doesn’t matter either. Anti-Semites may think that Israel is driving the opposition to the deal and that Israel is duping the US. Israelis may also think that they are in charge and are duping the US into doing its bidding. But, the easiest marks for a con are those who think they are in on a con themselves. If it were just about the best interests of Israel, there would be no US opposition to the deal because those who actually know a thing or two about what is best for Israel’s security are saying we need to take the deal: c.f. articles like this one.

          I don’t always agree with Obama, but he is right. Opponents of the deal are on the same side as the Iranian hardliners. And this should not surprise any of us: the neo-cons have, since the days they sold arms to Iran in the Reagan admin, consistently done things (e.g. remove Saddam Hussein) for the benefit of Iranian hardliners. I may be paranoid, but I wouldn’t be surprised if Iranian agents are found in neo-con think tanks, AIPAC leadership or in the Likud party.

    • njorl

      Without a deal, and without sanctions, the likelihood of a US military action against Iran increases. That is the only acceptable goal for some.

      • Judas Peckerwood

        Those End Times aren’t going to bring themselves on, baby!

        • Bill Murray

          Rapture, be pure, take a tour of the sewer

  • Phil Perspective

    Crap like this is why any liberal should laugh in the face of conservative who claims the TradMed is liberal.

    • NonyNony

      The thing is – when right-wingers talk about “liberal media” they don’t mean the word “liberal” to mean what anyone outside of their sphere thinks it means.

      To them “liberal” just means “does not agree with me”. This is why Fox News, Red State and others got labelled as “liberal media” during the past weekend when the Trump-splosion hit the internets. Liberal basically means “opposed to what I believe” to them – it has no coherent political meaning at all beyond that opposition.

      • Judas Peckerwood

        Works for “socialist” too.

      • Cleek’s law, of course.

  • njorl

    It’s quite the editorial. She made no statements at all which support her thesis. She made some which contradict it. I can only conclude she chose her thesis for illogical or ideological reasons.

    • Scott Lemieux

      WE WILL NOT TOLERATE THIS LACK OF CIVILITUDE IN OUR COMMENT THREADS.

    • Hogan

      I guess “the truth lies somewhere in between” could count as an ideology.

      • DrDick

        I think her entire ideology boils down to IOKIYAR and liberals need to know their place.

  • jim, some guy in iowa

    lucky for her (well, everybody, I think) Trump isn’t running as a Democrat

  • Morse Code for J

    Well, if you let Obama call out members of Congress for having been wrong about every previous foreign policy question in the Middle East, what’s to stop someone from doing the same with op-ed columnists who have been just as wrong with no professional repercussions?

  • hylen

    Off topic, I guess, but this is J. Rubin in the same paper today:

    An incoherent argument from a Hillary Clinton flack. “ISIS grew out of al Qaeda in Iraq, and where did AQI come from? It didn’t exist before the invasion. It emerged in no small part as a result of President Bush’s failed strategy, and it gained strength by signing up former Sunni military officers, officers from the very army the Bush administration disbanded.” Didn’t she vote for the war, and wasn’t Iraq at peace when George W. Bush left office?

    Emphasis added.

    What a maroon.

  • DrDick

    Marcus is the reigning queen of concern troll hackitude.

  • DAS

    Concern trolls remind me of the banker in this old joke

    A beggar approaches a banker and starts screaming loudly: “you are a cheap bastard! you never give any of your ill gotten gains to the needy! I need money, but you aren’t giving anything to me!” etc.

    The banker responds “I’ll give you $50. Just be quiet and go away.”

    The beggar quietly responds “thanks”

    As the beggar is taking the money, the banker adds “if you wouldn’t have made such a ruckus, I would have given you twice as much money”

    To which the beggar responds “look, I’m not giving you banking advice, so please don’t give me begging advice”

  • Murc

    Stuff like this pisses me off because… well, I can’t speak for others, but I do genuinely believe that a certain degree of civility in discourse, at all levels, is not only laudable but necessary. Especially when dealing with honest interlocutors, and there do in fact exist people on the right, even the grift-adjacent parts of the right, who qualify as that. I’ve seen too many conversations that should have been productive devolve into spittle-flecked invective.

    So it enrages me when I see people deploying calls for civility in the name of respectablity politics, in the name of both-sides-do-it-ism, and in contexts where it is not appropriate. Because that poisons the entire concept, it makes people actively repelled by the idea of being civil because they associate it with people saying “shut up and sit down, you filthy peasant,” with people wielding linguistic norms not as a tool for understanding but as a weapon for domination.

  • Howlin Wolfe

    And when they lie with an attitude of certainty, it really pisses me off, too. Lying is one of the most uncivil acts, but because the lie didn’t contain any swear words, concern trolls don’t troll the liars. Bibi talks about the “existential threat” Iran poses to Israel, but it’s a fucking lie; his own intelligence service doesn’t believe that. We’re supposed to nod appreciatively at the rank propaganda. To quote Miles Davis, “Fuck that shit.”

    ETA this is in reply to Murc

It is main inner container footer text