Obama made SC an impressive victory, despite all the hee-hawing by ass-pundits about race and gender.
It must be hard, I guess, for wealthy white guys to comprehend that other people can find common ground with someone who differs; they've always been able to find other wealthy white guys to vote for, and work for, and work with, and as friends, so identity politics is their only milieu.
But for the rest of us outside of the wealthy and the Beltway, diversity has been increasingly the norm and finding common ground with someone of differing race, gender, creed or what-have-you isn't all that difficult or unusual. Of course, some people don't LIKE that, and thus the Southern Strategy that has paid such swell dividends for teh Republican Party over the last thirty years; but as anti-American values such as Tolerance, Inclusiveness, and Equality have been slowly eroding the Republic, that bigoted contingent has also been eroding, as well as becoming more potent within the Right. They gave them a home; Now they can just live with the abhorrent monsters they've created.
I still have reservations about Obama, as we've been talking over the last couple of days. Hell, I've got reservations about ALL the Democratic candidates (except Kucinich. He's just crazy enough to WORK!) It's a reflection, I think, of the strength of the field; they differ little in policy and the minor details are the most intransigent.
But, still, all the talk of reaching across the aisle, and respectable compromise, and so on are not going to get us anywhere. The recent flap about the FISA law is a great example. The Democrats, pushed by Harry Reid, were ready to roll over and give this hated President everything he demanded: full, retroactive immunity for the telecoms, himself, and his cronies; and vastly expanded abilitites to use wholesale monitoring technologies to eavesdrop on any Americans he deems, for non-disclosable reasons. But, for the 'reasonable' Republicans, complete capitulation wasn't enough. They also demanded, pissily of course, that the bill be delayed JUST LONG ENOUGH that PissMaster Bush can be pissy in the SOTU speech about 'obstructionist' dems who allow TERRISTS to come BLOW US ALL UP FOREVER!!
The Crackers Crack
5 hours ago
that wasn't a victory, that was a walk to the woodshed.
ReplyDeleteOdd how those voters don't seem to care for being told what they think.
ReplyDeleteThe pundits don't want to learn this. Their life is easier and more placid when not disturbed by all these pesky democrats.
The voters' role is supposed to be to mildly accept the wisdom from on high, then be discouraged enough from voting for the republicans to win. The Chris Matthews and Joe Scarborough have done their jobs, and Tucker Carlson may remain in his sinecure.
IT IS going to be an interesting year.
Delegates, baby, DELEGATES ! !
ReplyDeleteWhat I like is that no matter who wins the Dem primary, it'll piss off a large chunk of Establishment and/or the Right:
ReplyDeleteObama: as you point out, the racists.
Clinton: the aggrieved-white-guys, and the misogynistas.
even long shot edwards: the Greedheads
I've always been entertained by the notion that Hillary gives us a two-fer: all the pundits and wingnuts who have spent twenty years hating on the Clintons and telling us all how bad a blowjob is will simultaneously have their heads explode in rage.
I am an Obama man. Also a McCain man. It is nearly inconceivable to me that two candidates I actually like and respect not only exist but might wind up being the choices this fall. Truly I never imagined a situation where such a match-up could occur.
ReplyDeleteTrue, it is still early and my nightmare match-up of Clinton v. Romney could still easily happen (and I think I write in Ron Paul at that point) but there is hope. Powerful thing hope. One of the reasons I really like Obama. Maybe he's too young but he has the audacity to hope. To believe that America can and should be better.
All that said, to say that I am "fresh to the democratic point of view" is a pretty major exaggeration. I've moved primarily to Conservative positions since 9/11 (though I am still essentially liberal on most social issues), but prior to that I was a life long Democrat. Voted for Dukakis, Clinton (twice, though with grave reservations the second time) and Gore.
Perhaps that is part of the reason I keep coming back here. Kind of like picking a scab-- painful, yet oddly therapeutic ;-) So, no worries, Zelmo-- I'll keep banging my head against the brick wall that is Billy Pilgrim.
The audacity of hope. Know it. Feel it. Believe in it.
You won't regret it. (Famous last words)
Nick, what I want (for real) would be Obama to ask McCain to be VP.
ReplyDeleteNot likely, but not unheard of.
Obama/McCain would be fine, but it seems really, really unlikely. And hopefully McCain and Obama will both be looking for VPs to add to their respective party tickets. I fear that Romney's bottomless pit of money and car salesman smoothness will be too much for McCain to overcome, but if JM can pull out Florida anything is possible.
ReplyDeleteNick, I appreciate your opinion and the fact that you like to pick the scab that is Billy Pilgrim, but I do have a question.
ReplyDeleteHow can you like a Democrat AND a Republican? The way I see it, you either believe government should play a role in the market -- or you don't. You either think that government can play an important role in peoples' lives or you don't because you think it's a waste of money.
Do you think McCain is Anti Free Market? Or do you think Obama is Pro Free Market?
Do you believe McCain is willing to help just plain old common folks? Or do you think Obama will take a more conservative approach and continue the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps as the corporations are beating you over the head at the same time" approach?
I swear I'm not trying to be a wise guy. There's just a definite difference between the two parties and I'd like to know what your thoughts are.
Is McCain more liberal than I think? Is Obamarama more conservative?
BG, McCain has one of the most right wing voting records in the Senate, voting party line 88% of the time. Although it's hard to judge, since he's been absent for over 50% of the votes. But this hasn't stopped the fauning press coverage, who love the narrative of McCain as the maverick outsider.
ReplyDeleteBut that does include an almost perfect pro-life voting record.
I don't see what would be so attractive about Obama-McCain.
And frankly, I think McCain as second in line would very nearly guarantee some reactionary racist mf taking several shots at Obama.
McCain has one of the most right wing voting records in the Senate....that does include an almost perfect pro-life voting record.
ReplyDeleteThat's what I thought.
Even with that record, my Republican friends still do not like him at all. They're tolerating him now because the GOP's in such a mess.
I *used to think* -- "the best person should win" -- but I don't see how you can think you like a candidate from *each* party. The parties are just too different.
If Obama is elected, you think he'll lead right of center? I get that feeling.
What do you think Hillary will do? Think she's more progressive than him?
I think Hillary is the most center-right, corporate leaning, business-as-usual candidate outside of the Republican slate.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Obama is much more progressive, other than maybe racial issues. Both of them had to be dragged into war opposition.
But I do think if he tries to govern from a centrist, conciliatory position with the Republicans we have now, they will treat him like they treated Clinton; they will take everything he offers and renege on any agreements, and come back next week attacking him, going for the jugular.
They don't respect compromise. They just don't.
Blue Girl, if there was much more than a sliver of truth to the traditional neat capsules of the two parties you present I think it would be difficult to like candidates in both parties. But I find the distinctions between the two to be far less clear cut.
ReplyDeleteMost importantly from my perspective are two things-- returning our country to a sane and humane position on torture and finding a way to reduce the awful, ridiculous and completely destructive atmosphere that currently infuses all of Washington, D.C.
BP may bemoan all he wishes that this toxic environment is entirely Bush/Rove/Cheney's fault (or perhaps the Republitards), but I just don't see it that way. They have a large measure of blame to shoulder, but it started before them and it is a burden of shame that taints both parties.
So, I want a President that repudiates torture and has the capacity and willingness to admit that people from the other party are not evil and may actually have some worthwhile ideas and proposals. Of those running, I see both attributes in Obama and McCain. I see neither in Romney and I instinctively distrust anything either Clinton says. Fool me once and all that.
From a policy standpoint, I like McCain better but from the standpoint of being able to return our country to what it should be and restoring a modicum of respect and usefulness to our government I like Obama. At this point I can be happy with either gentleman being POTUS.
It would be fantastic and refreshing to choose between two candidates I actually like. As for McCain being a heavy right-winger I would have to disagree. Does he vote along party lines most of the time? Sure-- he is a Republican after all. But he is far more open to working with Democrats than most of his fellow senators, he is more fiscally conservative but socially liberal than most of his party (which is why Rush, Hannity and the like hate him so)and he has solid foreign policy experience.
He certainly is no friend of George W. Bush's-- a fact which was clearly significant in Florida. Romney got nearly all of the votes by those satisfied/happy with Bush and McCain got nearly all of the votes for those unhappy with the current Administration.
Above and beyond all that, I believe Obama and McCain are sincerely interested in what's best for our country. Are they also egoists? Of course. You don't run for president if you aren't. But with Clinton and Romney all I see is that it is all about them.
So, that's how I can support both a Democrat and a Republican in the same election.
Pick, pick, pick.
He certainly is no friend of George W. Bush'
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nobodyasked.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/bush-mccain-hug-72-thumb.jpg
He will, however, do ANYTHING to get his time in the Oval Office, which he comes across as expecting as his entitlement.
I feel he is as cynical and MORE manipulative than Romney.
And that's saying a lot.
And Nick, I've been watching him for as long as you have.
Who's picking?
ReplyDeleteI actually think this is some decent discussion.
I will personally apply a boot to the head of the pickers.
No, that was me picking at my BP scab.
ReplyDeleteI do find it interesting that folks like Limbaugh and Hewitt find McCain to be disastrously liberal (as opposed to Bush who they still claim as a conservative), while folks like BP find him to be disastrously right-wing conservative. Which means he's probably pretty middle of the road.
Does he treat the Presidency like an entitlement? I don't see that. I think having it ripped out from under him by Rove and Bush in 2000 has made him keenly aware that nothing is foreordained or to be taken for granted. Clearly I view the man from a different perspective than most here and unsurprisingly I come to a different conclusion.
I temper my enthusiasm for McCain only because he has been known to sell out his values on occasion in an attempt to compromise. In general I believe in compromise, but there are some issues where compromise is unacceptable and torturing others as U.S. policy is one of those issues.
To his credit, McCain has since acknowledged his mistake. Which counts for a bit in politics where passing the buck or ducking responsibility are pretty much the norm. People make mistakes. Recognizing them and then taking responsibility for them is important.
well said. Beltway to me is same as k street. ps i blog rolled u if u dont mind
ReplyDelete