David Cameron’s No Poodle – He’s a New Breed

It was just like old times when British Prime Minister David Cameron came calling at the White House this month. Yes, the “Special Relationship” felt really special again just like back in the days when Tony Blair lined the U.K. up behind the Iraq War – when those French and Germans were having none of it – and made his reputation as “George Bush’s poodle.” For a couple of years in between, that sour old Gordon Brown was Prime Minister and obviously didn’t enjoy the sound of his master’s voice in Washington nearly so much. But now it seems that Barack Obama has his own pet at 10 Downing Street. Of course, Cameron’s Conservative, not Labour, so he’s an entirely different breed than Blair. But the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank seemed a bit off in characterizing Cameron as “serving as Obama’s guard dog.” Perhaps something more along the lines of a Yorkshire Terrier – Obama’s Yorkie.

It’s been a rough stretch for the president’s Afghanistan War policy: the Koran burnings; Afghan government soldiers and police killing NATO soldiers; American soldiers urinating on corpses; one soldier murdering sixteen civilians, Afghan President Karzai calling for the Americans to be confined to major bases. So when Cameron arrived and said of the war, “If you compare where we are today with where we’ve been two, three years ago, the situation is considerably improved,” it did suggest that the prime minister may have told his people not to brief him on the subject these past years. But oblivious support is better than no support at all and the White House loved it.

The prime minister also said “it would be hard to say that the al Qaida network is not effectively dismantled today.” Oh, wait a minute – wrong prime minister. That was Tony Blair talking – on February 6, 2003. But whatever the rationale of this war is supposed to be these days, David Cameron was here to say that he’s for it and that he and the president are “absolutely in lock-step” over the withdrawal process.

The real story here is, or ought to be, two leaders persisting in the pursuit of a ten year old war “increasingly unpopular on both sides of the Atlantic,” as the International Herald Tribune characterized the situation. An ABC News/Washington Post poll conducted earlier this month found Americans now consider the war “not worth fighting” by a 60-35 percent margin and 55 percent think “most Afghans oppose what the United States is trying to do in Afghanistan,” while only 30 percent believe they support it. Following the deaths of the 16 villagers, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found 61 percent of Americans supporting bringing the remaining U.S. troops home immediately, with only 17 percent against.

The war enjoys even less support in the United Kingdom, where an ITV1 News at Ten poll found 46 percent of respondents professing to have no idea why British troops were in Afghanistan, 55 percent thinking the threat of terrorism on British soil was increased by British forces remaining there, 57 percent not believing that the deaths of British soldiers in Afghanistan are justified by the cause they are fighting for and 73 percent considering the war “unwinnable.” 55 percent supported immediate withdrawal.

So, no surprise, Obama was thrilled with the Prime Minister’s visit, declaring that “in good times and in bad, [Cameron] is just the kind of partner that you want at your side. I trust him. He says what he does, and he does what he says. And I’ve seen his character.” Precisely the type of qualities you look for in man’s best friend.

To say that the two were joined at the hip during Cameron’s visit would be to employ too slight a metaphor. Joined at the brain is more like it: They went so far as to co-author an op ed for the Washington Post. So when Obama wrote about “imposing tough sanctions on the Iranian regime for failing to meet its international obligations” and warned that otherwise Iran would “face the consequences,” well, that was Cameron too. And when Obama failed to mention the corresponding U.S. obligations to reduce its nuclear arsenal – as U.S. presidents always do, it was also Cameron failing to mention U.K. obligations to reduce its own – as U.K. prime ministers always do.

Cameron separately told his American audience that “we take nothing off the table” when it comes to Iran, just the same as the president had said. So if any American were doubting the sanity of reserving the right to use nuclear weapons to ensure that Iran doesn’t acquire nuclear weapons, now you know that the Brits think just the same – at least the ones in power do. And, oh yeah, Cameron told us he thought Obama’s bombing of Libya was cool, too – and he said that on his own.

As a reward for being such a good political lap dog, Cameron not only got a hot dog and a basketball game from the president, but a state dinner at the White House – only the sixth of the Obama Administration. They even created a new dish in his honor – Bison Wellington, which, according to the menu, is “a perfect pairing of U.S. and U.K. cultures … a classic English dish given an American twist with the use of buffalo tenderloin.” News reports did not specify whether the prime minister ate from a bowl or at the table.

Cheney Considers Preaching Word Of Gawd

In my last column I divulged the kinds of jobs the American people think Alberto Gonzales should hold. Now I know what you’re thinking: What about Dick Cheney? Where’s he going to work? Well, cronies of mine with their ears to the train tracks inform me that our (thankfully) former VP has been offered the top position at Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University. A source has provided Demockracy with a secret taping of Mr. Cheney’s meeting with the university’s Dean of Academic Affairs in the latter’s office. A transcript follows:

Dean: I’m so delighted you’ve come to share some of your valuable time with us, Mr. Cheney. It’s a great pleasure. Scones? A donut perhaps?

Cheney: Uhm—thank you, no. My heart gets clogged up with anything fattier than celery sticks and a rice cracker.

Dean: Ah, yes, a pity sir, a pity. Well let me get right to the point.With the death of our beloved spiritual leader and founder, Jerry Falwell, we seek inspired leadership to carry on our mission teaching of alleged intolerance and creationism. We feel that you are the right man to take us on the course forward to renewed heights. As you may know, sir, our squeaky-clean campus boasts a pre-eminent natural history museum that is the only one in the world that labels dinosaur fossils as “5,000 years old.”

Cheney: I have heard of that, although it’s a radical-conservative bit of revisionist science even for me. But then again, I am a Christian….

Dean: Exactly, Mr. Vice President. As our dear departed Reverend Falwell said so eloquently, “If you’re not a born-again Christian, you’re a failure as a human being.”

Cheney: Amen to that.

Dean: And that’s why I’m calling on you today, sir, to help me follow Gawd’s mission to save our country and educate our flock in America’s holier-than-thou and debatably most intolerant institution of higher education, Liberty University. You’re especially a good fit with us since you’ve been awarded an honorary doctorate by Brigham Young University. While we abhor that particular denomination, at least they have the reactionary credentials that make your résumé stand out from the crowd.

Cheney: That’s very flattering, Dean, and I thank you. Nonetheless, even a reactionary such as myself has a hard time reconciling the basic and multiple scientific methods of dating our earth with the notion that dinosaurs lived 5,000 years ago and sailed on Noah’s Ark. Wouldn’t the T-Rex have eaten all the other animals along with Noah himself? Won’t society at large, even conservatives, question all this, not to mention my association with such educational assumptions as you put forth at Liberty?

Dean: Well, sir, praise Gawd, Reverend Falwell had the wisdom to teach us that “Christians, like slaves and soldiers, ask no questions.”

Cheney: Now that I can relate to. If we could convert the media to Christianity, we’d have something here.

Dean: Besides, it is a documented fact that you, yourself, Alberto Gonzales and Karl Rove were fossils revived from the same excavation.

Cheney: Well, you’ve got me there. I’m not a spring chicken.

Dean: Indeed, sir. Praise Gawd, Reverend Falwell brought you all to life with healing power of prayer!

Cheney: Uhm…Amen. And your curriculum? To what extent would I be able to put forward a—

Dean: [thumps a nearby bible] The Bible, sir, the Bible! Reverend Falwell said, and I quote, ‘Textbooks are Soviet propaganda.”

Cheney: Well, Dean, this has been most illuminating, and it has given me food for thought. Let me mull this over at least for a day or two or until the new Ice Age, whichever comes first.

A Progressive Health Care Solution

In one of my earlier posts, I said that I hoped President Obama would be progressive. I further tried to offer a definition of progressive, to be contrasted with liberal and conservative. That didn’t go over too well. I’m trying again, this time by using the concrete example of health care. How would a progressive go about health care reform? This is the question that I answer in Demockracy’s first-ever podcast – take a listen:

Progressivism and Health Care

Bob Barr: Obama will win Georgia

Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr predicted on his Web site yesterday that Senator Obama would defeat Senator McCain in Georgia based on the fact that McCain is not a real conservative.

Further adding to the intrigue in Georgia is that many pollsters could be underestimating the black turnout. According to Nate Silver, most polls show African Americans only making up 25-26% of the electorate. However, African Americans have made up close to 40% of the electorate in early voting, and many experts are predicting overall turnout to be around 35%.

Brad Muller made many similar arguments about why Georgia could go blue a couple months ago.