3 Issues Team Blue Can Resume Caring About Now That They've Re-elected Obama

Now that the election is over, it's time for liberals to start worrying about Obama's misdeeds again.

(Page 2 of 3)

2. The War in Afghanistan

In 2008, Obama managed to parlay his 2003 opposition to the war in Iraq as an Illinois state senator to help propel himself past the rest of the Democratic field, filled as it was with senators who voted for the Iraq War before opposing it. Yet by the time he was a general election candidate, Obama pivoted to a more aggressive stance on Afghanistan, calling it the “good war.” Upon taking office, the president took his time in moving on Afghanistan, eventually approving a troop surge similar to the one ordered by George W. Bush in Iraq. Bush’s surge at least helped make possible a status of forces agreement that saw U.S. troops leave Iraq in 2011 (though not before Obama tried to renege on the agreement). Nevertheless, any hopes that a similar surge might create a comparable opportunity to end the war in Afghanistan have been dashed by now.

Meanwhile, Obama campaigned for re-election on the issue of bringing the war in Afghanistan to a responsible close even as his government negotiated with Afghan officials for the kind of long-term presence Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was pilloried for proposing in 2008. And matters have only gotten worse since the election, with America's military leadership all but announcing that the president’s word on ending the war is worthless and that the U.S. is in Afghanistan to stay. One more thing: U.S. forces returned to Iraq just a few months ago.

Perhaps it's time for Obama supporters to dust off their anti-war signs and hit the streets.

NEXT: Metal death is not a genre of music.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Juice||

    Yeah, Bill Maher, you wouldn't want to muddy the waters. Your logic is always so impeccable that the arguments you make are always so crystal clear.

  • SIV||

    Obama isn't perfect. Sometimes he forgets how great he really is!

  • Tman||

    I don't believe that for a second. This dude is about as humble as the Kardashians.

  • SIV||

    It's time for Team Blue to hold the president's feet to the fire and demand a more sensible drug policy.

    Why should he care? The dopers voted for him and he isn't facing relection. The pro WoDs Team Blue faction is of much more importance to him and they really, really care about the issue of continuing the status quo. only with more power and funding.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Precisely. They're suffering from a variant of the same misconception that Reasonoids do -- that you can have an effect on politics if your votes aren't "in play".

    If you always vote Dem or always vote GOP, you're getting ignored. If you never vote Dem or GOP, you're also getting ignored.

  • fish||

    If you always vote Dem or always vote GOP, you're getting ignored. If you never vote Dem or GOP, you're also getting ignored.

    I guessing that if you switch TEAMS...ya know...just to keep em guessing ....you are also being ignored! Isn't this democracy thing great!

  • RightNut||

    I guessing that if you switch TEAMS...ya know...just to keep em guessing ....you are also being ignored! Isn't this democracy thing great!

    Huh? Campaigns actively pursue voters who voted one way a few elections ago and voted a different way recently.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Your guess is incorrect. That would make you a highly-desired swing voter.

  • Adam330||

    Only on the off chance you happen to live in one of about half a dozen states and happen to be in a demographic group that the pollsters have identified as swing. Even then, all you'll get is politicians offering some goodies that they think you'll care about, but which you very likely don't care about.

  • ThomasD||

    Exactly, why would Obama end the drug war? Then how would all those people at the DEA, FBI, ATF, DOJ, et al do to protect their phony baloney jobs? Obama might actually have to SHRINK the size of the government if they didn't have all those laws to enforce.

    Never going to happen. More government is always better for the statist.

  • SIV||

    the U.S. is in Afghanistan to stay.

    Obama is wildly popular with foreigners, particularly Muslims. Except for the racist teabaggers at home everyone loves Obama. HE is even more popular in Afghanistan than here at home. Why would Team Blue want to deprive poor Afghanis of Obama's just rule? To hastily end the war would be the real war crime.

  • T o n y||

    Surely it's the case that the teabaggers are the only ones in the world who are right about things.

  • Hopfiend||

    I don't give two craps about the TEA party but a silly slobbering fluffer girl for team blue slinging pejoratives is really fucking idiotic.

  • ΘJΘʃ de águila||

    Obama Bombs 8-Year-Old Children in Afghanistan. Tony's progressive wet dream comes alive.

  • SIV||

    Drone attacks? WTF? Drones allow precision attacks against the true bad guys with minimal to no collateral damage. Obam's focus on common sense humane drone warfare as opposed to the Republican tactics of "shock and awe" attacks on civilian targets to produce maximum terror and casualties should earn him another Nobel Peace Prize. It should be of no surprise that a truly intelligent and progressive comander-in-chief can fight a just war without atrocity or collateral damage.Do you want another 9/11?

  • Tman||

    Needs more DRROOOOHHNNSSS..

  • Tulpa Doom||

    Drones actually are potentially better instruments of military strikes than what preceeded them, but the danger is that they make it easier for the WrongPeopleInCharge to dish out death and destruction out of sheer laziness. Just like giving tasers to cops has actually increased violence against citizens by cops, which was opposite the intention.

  • ΘJΘʃ de águila||

    The Peace Laureate needs to assassinate some more 10-year-old Pakistani kids that potentially could grow up to be WTC bombers. Beside the fact that they are easy targets, it could earn him a second Peace Prize.

    BTW, he is following exactly the same plan that a BUSH III war-waging administration would have followed.

  • LibertyBelle||

    Tell me how you're a military genius and you know all this. Please. Enlighten us.

  • RightNut||

    Sometimes I think the supposed liberal bias in the media is overstated. Then I see quotes like the one in the article from Bill Maher or that idiot in the New Yorker. As long as a Democrat is in the White House, they are Pravda, and nothing more.

  • Hopfiend||

    This is precisely the reason I am so put off by him. I had an epiphany during the election. It isn't him per se, it is the fact that the media go prostrate and break out the pom poms for him. I know he isn't as great as they (and he) say that he is. But I am in the minority.

  • T o n y||

    How about you stop bitching about what liberals aren't doing, and then go do whatever it is you think they should be doing yourselves. If Congress feels sufficiently electorally threatened over drug policy, it will be motivated to make a change.

    I'd bet $10 if we hadn't spent the last four years responding to every fantasy-based tantrum thrown by the lunatic morons in the Republican party, Obama, Reid, and Speaker Pelosi would be well on their way toward liberalizing drug policy, since they'd have already accomplished economic and fiscal priorities, immigration reform, energy and climate policy, and the other things higher on their to-do list. Because said lunatic morons are sure as hell not going to get to drug laws any time soon.

  • Tman||

    Oh Tony, you're so cute when you're ridiculous.

  • ||

    Oh Tony, you're so cute when you're ridiculous.

    Wouldn't that imply that there are moments when he isn't ridiculous?

  • T o n y||

    I'm always cute.

  • seguin||

    And you're always ridiculous.

  • R C Dean||

    How about you stop bitching about what liberals aren't doing, and then go do whatever it is you think they should be doing yourselves.

    And we will, as soon as we take the White House and the Senate.

  • Tulpa Doom||

    How can you have your pudding when you haven't had your meat?

  • RightNut||

    I LOLed at the last part. Damn those Republicans who stopped Democrats from making the country a statist Utopia! Libertarians revolt! Republicans are stopping drug reform by marginally slowing down the pace of government growth!

  • T o n y||

    In what way are they accomplishing that?

  • The Other Kevin||

    Remember all the legislation and budgets they passed when they had the Presidency and majorities in both houses of Congress? Neither do I.

  • Tman||

    That's one of the main things that pisses me off about Team Blue over the last four years. They had a majority in both houses (for two years), the executive office, and they even got to appoint two new SCOTUS judges for chrissakes. And I'm supposed to believe that it was those meddling Republicans that prevented them from doing what they really wanted?

    Fuck off statists.

  • ||

    "And I'd have gotten away with it too if it wasn't for you meddling kids!"

  • T o n y||

    They never once had total control over government thanks mostly to the filibuster.

  • Calidissident||

    They need total and utter control before they can be held even remotely accountable? But all Republicans need to be blamed for everything is 41 votes in the Senate, right?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Filibusters which they basically never employed. But they might have!

  • T o n y||

    So the rule is solve everything in two years or you're out? Also, if I wanted stale rightwing talking points I'd watch Hannity.

  • Hopfiend||

    I think you took a wrong turn at Fox.com.

    The day your reactionary fools solve anything...

  • Not an Economist||

    Shorter Tony -- Bend over and take it... and smile while your doing it.

  • sticks||

    Forward. That is what they mean, right?

  • ||

    Just don't say "Lie back and think if England" - that's misogynistic.

  • ||

    I don't think you can get any shorter than Tony, sorry.

  • T o n y||

    Nobody asked you to smile.

  • ant1sthenes||

    No, they'd be trying to repair the damage wrought by getting all the incredibly stupid things that were high on their to-do list.

  • BMFPitt||

    since they'd have already accomplished economic and fiscal priorities

    I'm willing to sacrifice drug and immigration policy to prevent that.

  • American||

    Because it's really fucking hard to say "here is our plan to "liberalize" drug policy."

  • mr simple||

    His loyal supporters haven't cared about this for the last four years, so why would they now? Only Team Red can draw their ire.

  • ||

    The left wing criticism of Obama over the next 4 years will be based entirely on the fact that he didn't dissolve congress, declare himself beneficent dictator for life, and set about implementing the proletarian revolution that would have surely saved the United States from itself.

  • American||

    The left should also criticize Obama's anti-capitalism. The left never cared about imperialism. They voted for the Iraq war, if you remeber. What the left was all upset about was the people from TEXAS killing "NON-WHITE" people foir "CORPORATIONS." As soon as they got their dreamy liberal non-white candidate elected, they trusted him to always put the needs of "Humanity" first.

  • JeremyR||


    Reason uses that non-white people trope constantly, too.

  • ΘJΘʃ de águila||

    let's use it again. Who kills more non-white Africans, Barry Obama or the Grand Dragon of the KKK?

  • Nuked||

    But people don't seem to care about black violence if black's are doing it to themselves. Africa for example.

  • American||

    And what's wrong with "drones?" I oppose imperialism, whether it's with human piloted planes or drones. But if war is absolutely neccesary, I'd prefer the cheaper, safer alternative. And yes, drones are safer, not just for our soldiers, but for the civilians as well. That doesn't mean civilians don't die. Civilians die in war. Cosmatarians need to know that. Do cosmatarians think that we beat the Germans without killing any civilians? So why argue against "drones?" Because the American people fear technology,(such as GMOs, vaccines) they don't understand computers, they think these drones are "autonomous,"(they are not) and they admire soldiers,(few will tell an air force pilot that they are a "war criminal").

  • XM||

    I think the problem is that drones hasn't always been accurate.

    Theoretically, unmanned weapons makes it easier for a nation to "invade" or strike foreign nations, because they're operated by someone far away. You don't have to worry about collateral damage on your side.

    Unfortunately, terrorists will use human shield or honest mistakes that killed civilians to their own gain.

    On military interventionism, Obama tried the middle ground. No outright isolationism or outright invasion - just funds, weapons, and moral aid to " the freedom fighters."

    Obama made all the mistakes Reagan made and achieved none of his accomplishments. It took African Americans many, many years to realize that OJ was actually guilty. In time, they and everyone will look back at his presidency and wonder "what could have been".

  • Jerryskids||

    But if war is absolutely neccesary, I'd prefer the cheaper, safer alternative.

    I think that's the point you aren't getting. If war is necessary, Congress will declare war - being mindful of the fact that the voters will be second-guessing their determination as to whether or not war is in fact necessary.

    Drones, on the other hand, are being used where war isn't necessary. They are, however, being used by a president who thinks it entirely appropriate that he use drones to kill people who need killing - which determination he makes by some secret calculus that it's none of your goddamn business how it works.

  • Skip||

    They will just say we can't criticize Black Jesus because the Republicans will win seats in Congress/elect Rand Paul in 2016 etc.

  • waaminn||

    Seems to know whats going on over there. WOw.


  • BMFPitt||

    Again? When was the first time?

  • uythsb||

    Barack Obama became the first president in U.S.
    it is the smart men,and who is the nice mode

  • wei||

    To support Obama, I believe he can do well.


Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties