I am a liberal progressive sushi-eating anti-war Democrat and I like Barack Obama's appointments to-date.
There. I needed it stated somewhere.
Am I the only self-described progressive who is OK with the Obama-admin-to-be? I keep hearing the commentariate talk about how all of us are just groaning with each new nomination. Are you groaning? Are you wailing about how Obama is abandoning the movement? Are you lamenting that Obama is ignoring the progressive MANDATE that his election proves?
If you are, I think A) you're a little bit full of crap, and B) you do not speak for me.
Yes, Barack Obama's election was a rejection of the Bush administration. It does not follow that his election is an embrace of progressive ideology. There are not two choices: Bush or Progressive. In this election, there was Bush and Other. The country chose Other.
Certainly the string of Democratic victories (can two cycles be called a "string of victories"?) can be seen as a continuing rejection of Bush. But what exactly about Bush are the voters rejecting? Fundamentalism in government? Neoconservativism? Free-market capitalism?
See, I've been hearing the punditocracy speaking for Progressives. They say that we say that Obama's election means that voters reject all of it. I think that's dumb.
Some voters are rejecting capitalism without regulation. Not capitalism in toto.
Some voters are rejecting evangelical ideology in place of policy. Not religion in government.
Some voters are rejecting cowboy interventionist policy. They've not become peaceniks.
Barack Obama and John McCain became the nominees of their respective parties because they promised to move away from partisan politics. They did not promise to reverse the polarity of the current brand of partisanship in Washington. Obama is making sense-based nominations. (Imagine: nominating an Ambassador to the UN who thinks it is a relevant body!) He is not balancing one Republican for every Democrat.
In general, I'm happy and comfortable and comforted by the decisions the President-Elect is making.
And while we're at it, let us remember that the man isn't actually President yet. Let's refrain from piling on what we think he is going to do. Please?
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
More about us baby-eating Democrats
Seriously, every time I hear this crap I want to punch someone. Are conservatives so self-absorbed that they believe this? I know a couple of Republicans who make me feel like they really, in their heart-of-hearts, think this way:
UPDATE: If you would like to write to Barone's home publication, US News & World Report, to tell them what an irresponsible ass he is, please do so here.
Barone: Media mad that Palin didn't have an abortion
Political analyst Michael Barone has an interesting explanation for the media's coverage of Sarah Palin. In a talk he gave Tuesday, Barone said:
The liberal media attacked Sarah Palin because she did not abort her Down syndrome baby. They wanted her to kill that child. ... I'm talking about my media colleagues with whom I've worked for 35 years.
Barone has apologized for his remarks, which had prompted some attendees to head for the exits. In an e-mail to Politico, Barone said he "was attempting to be humorous and ... went over the line."
― Alex Koppelman
UPDATE: If you would like to write to Barone's home publication, US News & World Report, to tell them what an irresponsible ass he is, please do so here.
Labels:
abortion,
Barone,
Down Syndrome,
media,
Palin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)