OT: The Political Thread of KSS.

[droolmaster0]

Hmmm. But I can talk to another person in my car while driving. Or would that also be outlawed?

 

 

Well, obviously it would depend on who it was...

[droolmaster0]

Comparing Obama's liberalness in terms of the past 100 years instead of the current pool of politicians is just ridiculous. He's not Huey Long, get over it. He's anti-war, supports more taxes for public programs and less tax cuts for corporations, and supports a health care plan as close to universal health care as could possibly be proposed within a system of checks and balances with such political extremes. Liberalism and socialism are not the same thing. I'd love to hear droolmaster define what liberalism is.

 

 

but he's not anti-war. The majority of U.S. citizens supports a single payer health care system - I'm not sure you're correct that his views would be considered 'liberal'. Even among democrats, he's pretty much middle of the road, so I'm not sure how that would be defined as liberal. When has simply being a democrat become the same as being a liberal? Only since the point when 'liberal' became a bad word in the 80's. I remember Dukakis fighting very hard to avoid the label - which at the time was ridiculous. He wasn't a liberal, and hadn't been considered as such before that time.

 

You don't think that there is any space between Obama's positions, and socialism?

[The Hamburglar]

I can't discuss politics with someone who says Obama's not anti-war.

[droolmaster0]

I can't discuss politics with someone who says Obama's not anti-war.

 

 

right - because you'd lose.

 

He spoke out against the war before he was in congress, but only because he was against it strategically. He subsequently has admitted that he might have voted for it had he been in Congress, admitted that his views weren't far from Bush's, spoke for escalating the war in Afghanistan, said that nothing is off the table as far as Iran, backed down on rhetoric about withdrawing American troops, spoke about the nobility of our cause there, as opposed to strategic errors, has never mentioned the immorality of the war, and the fact that anywhere (depending on what studies you want to believe) from 100,000 - 1,000,000+ Iraqis have been killed. He has voted for all funding of the war, and voted for the patriotic act. He is not only pro-war, but uncontroversially so, if you do the slightest bit of research.

[urbanscallywag]

But McCain is also pro war, so what's the solution?

[droolmaster0]

But McCain is also pro war, so what's the solution?

 

 

well, I'm voting for Obama as the lesser of two evils. I'm not saying that there is 0 difference between the 2, just not nearly as much as the misty eyed Obama supporters believe.

[Birdienumnum]

Thank you everyone for making this such a nice, polite, civilized thread. Utterly heartwarming. You see, Paolo? It can be done!

 

I am sorry but I have to work today, it's so easy to babble on here. But I am glad I kept the political discourse going from syncretism's thread (which kept going from diametro's thread). You see, there's nothing wrong with the occasional OT thread, it keeps things lively, human, and less corporate consumer culture. A real forum!

 

Enough immodest self-congratulation. On with the show! :)

[ChristianRock]

It's been civilized for the most part because there's been no conservative or religious points of view being brought up

[The Hamburglar]

 

right - because you'd lose. He spoke out against the war before he was in congress, but only because he was against it strategically. He subsequently has admitted that he might have voted for it had he been in Congress, admitted that his views weren't far from Bush's, spoke for escalating the war in Afghanistan, said that nothing is off the table as far as Iran, backed down on rhetoric about withdrawing American troops, spoke about the nobility of our cause there, as opposed to strategic errors, has never mentioned the immorality of the war, and the fact that anywhere (depending on what studies you want to believe) from 100,000 - 1,000,000+ Iraqis have been killed. He has voted for all funding of the war, and voted for the patriotic act. He is not only pro-war, but uncontroversially so, if you do the slightest bit of research.

 

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-433

[augerinn]

I'm voting for Obama as the lesser of two evils

 

 

I was going to also, but for a different reason. To show the Conservatives (which I am one of, although quite moderate) that I'm tired of their Good Ol' Boys club. That'll show 'em....(yeah, right)

 

But, then today, I see , well, this:

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080701/ap_on_el_pr/obama_faith

 

That won't get This conservatives vote. As a matter of fact, it scares me.

[droolmaster0]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-433

 

 

didn't have the patience to get through it - looks like lots of exceptions and loopholes.

 

there is only 1 possible exit scheme that would constitute a responsible anti-war stance. We've brought democracy to Iraq, right...at least that's what these assholes are claiming. therefore our departure should be subject to the will of the Iraqi people. There should be a vote about when our troops should leave, and then we should leave. this isn't something that should be subject to a vote by Congress, or even the American people. We are an occupying country.

[The Hamburglar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War_De-Escalation_Act_of_2007

[ChristianRock]

Now this is an interesting read from USA Today.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20080701/cm_usatoday/obamasrealpatriotismproblem

[droolmaster0]

Now this is an interesting read from USA Today. http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20080701/cm_usatoday/obamasrealpatriotismproblem

 

 

wow - read a tiny bit. Thoroughly disgusting....

 

the word 'patriotism' should simply be removed from all meaningful discussion, along with terms like 'unamerican'.

[ChristianRock]

Why should patriotism be banned from meaningful discussions?

[syncretism]

Now this is an interesting read from USA Today. http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20080701/cm_usatoday/obamasrealpatriotismproblem

 

 

"I get tagged as being on the left and, when I simply describe what has been my position consistently, then suddenly people act surprised," he said. "But there hasn't been substantial shifts there."

 

Drool called it.

[droolmaster0]

Why should patriotism be banned from meaningful discussions?

 

 

Because it's generally used like red baiting is used - to smear someone by using a loaded term with no other purpose than to hurt someone's reputation. How exactly is one not patriotic, for instance, by voicing what he/she feels is wrong with this country? Why ISN'T one patriotic if one claims that the United States has NOT acted well in the world, for instance? Isn't there the implication that one desires one's country to act better? Isn't that patriotic? The problem is that in political discussions, 'patriotism' is almost always used by people who want to avoid substantive issues and just scare people - so and so is a COMMUNIST, so and so is unamerican, is unpatriotic, etc. the famous quote, "patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" is worth thinking about. I think that it's very true.

[zoink]

Drool is right. The word has become meaningless. It's not an expression so much as a blunt weapon. It is over-used and misascribed, it clouds the dialogue -- purposefully, I might add -- by evoking an emotional and visceral response. You'd think that McCarthyism would have taught us something. But then, people don't tend to learn from history after all. We never recognize the same trends when they reappear.

 

One real shame in American political discourse is that the general public wants everything to be simple, or at least simplified, for their consumption and understanding. Politicians know this. But reality doesn't work that way. Reality is complex. Ultimately people just want to feel justified in acting out (and voting) their biases. Race and class, it turns out, are more profound and lasting divisions in our society than most will recognize or admit. Moreover, words like "patriotic" and its opposite vastly oversimplify points of view whereby individuals who love America will criticize it precisely BECAUSE they love this country.

[droolmaster0]

"I get tagged as being on the left and, when I simply describe what has been my position consistently, then suddenly people act surprised," he said. "But there hasn't been substantial shifts there." Drool called it.

 

 

"Significantly, the same day Obama delivered the speech in Independence, his senior national security advisor, Richard Danzig, a former navy secretary, told the media that there was little chance that a Democratic administration would cut the gargantuan Pentagon budget after taking control of the White House.

 

 

[Michael Blue]

Thought I'd tip-toe into this one...

...Obama, in no sense of the term, is a liberal. Pro Iraq war, pro corporation, pro patriot act...on and on.

What the...?!

Whoa!

...Guess I was wrong. I'll keep my misguided views to myself.

Back to the show!

[syncretism]

I wouldn't equate voting in favor of the FISA Amendments Act with Liberalism of any stripe, reversing vigorously expressed beliefs about same with consistency, or resorting to shrill invocations of Patriotism and flagrantly quoting Wesley Clark out of context, Fox News style, with integrity.

There are politicians, and there are politicians. It's a commonplace that they'll say whatever it takes to get elected and no one expects that the public interest sits atop their priorities, but it's not unreasonable, or even naive, to expect them to cleave to assertions and promises made for months - the kind of promises that got them where they were. Droolmaster0's made a strong case for Obama as a career politico with minor, but ultimately important, distinctions from McCain, but this support for the FISA bill is a complete turnaround. There was no hedging or playing coy. He was against it; now he's for it. So, no, I don't accept that as business as usual among politicians. This isn't compassionate conservatism or Karl Rove making a talking point of his so-called elitism*. It's spying on the American people and making sure everyone gets away with it.


* He

[droolmaster0]

presidents and vice presidents while they call journalists "major league assholes."

 

 

I might be forgetting something, but was he originally against the FISA bill? I guess I just wasn't surprised that he voted for it, but I could summon up a little bit more if he had actually come out against it previously. I mean, the dude voted for the Patriot Act...

[syncretism]

Not to the extent that I would have liked {he said he'd filibuster if telco immunity wasn't struck from the bill, which is definitely important, but didn't reject the FISA AA outright for its expansion of executive powers}, but yeah.

[Birdienumnum]

Thought I'd tip-toe into this one... "Quote: Originally Posted by droolmaster0: ...Obama, in no sense of the term, is a liberal. Pro Iraq war, pro corporation, pro patriot act...on and on." What the...?! Whoa! ...Guess I was wrong. I'll keep my misguided views to myself. Back to the show!

 

 

I will tip-toe back into this thread with you, holding hands . . .

 

I confess that, like you, I share the "misguided" view that Obama is a liberal. And you and I are not alone. The National Journal rated Obama as the most liberal Senator of 2007.

 

As far as droolie goes: to bolster his rather far left viewpoint (and I don't mean that in a bad way; droolster is just as entitled to his views as pighood or da schnizzle my mizzle) droolie likes to quote from sources as out there as he is, like the relentlessly ax-grinding Paul Street at Z-Net (their slogan: "The Spirit of Resistance Lives!"). I would dearly love to see him back up his minority opinion with articles from the mainstream press, whether conservative, moderate, or liberal - but he can't.

 

Once again, having been around the block a few times (voting, protesting, and going door to door getting out the vote since 1972 for dear Mr. McGovern) I can assure you, Michael, that water is wet, trees are wood (not made out of wood . . . they are wood), Obama is a liberal, and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[droolmaster0]

... I confess that, like you, I share the "misguided" view that Obama is a liberal. And you and I are not alone. The National Journal rated Obama as the most liberal Senator of 2007 .

I don't think that the fact that this magazine rated Obama (was it based on a vote - how was it decided?) as the most liberal has any bearing as to whether the judgement that he's a liberal is misguided or not. In any case, I think certainly recent actions and statements by him show that he isn't, and gradually the mainstream media is getting the idea....though they portray it as a 'turn to the right'.

I accept the fact that the following (in your eyes) would also have no bearing on whether it is misguided to call Obama a liberal, but for the most part, progressive sources don't consider him a liberal at all.

In actuality - the label doesn't matter. It really comes down to a set of issues, and how his opinions and record strike you. Once he becomes president (if he does) we'll see if you'll still consider him a liberal, though probably if you consider Bill Clinton to be one, you will consider Obama to be one. Clinton was not considered a liberal when he ran for president, and governed to the right of that after he become president.

As far as droolie goes: to bolster his rather far left viewpoint (and I don't mean that in a bad way; droolster is just as entitled to his views as pighood or da schnizzle my mizzle) droolie likes to quote from sources as out there as he is, like the relentlessly ax-grinding Paul Street at Z-Net (their slogan: "The Spirit of Resistance Lives!").

You see, it's stuff like this that I take exception to. "far left" - well, probably, though not as far as some. If you consider Chomsky 'far left', then you'd probably consider me to be also. When used as a pejorative, though, I take exception - I don't like Chomsky BECAUSE he's far left, but because I find his analysis to be ultimately rational and moral. I rarely see him criticized on those grounds - almost everything you can find on the internet is a thinly veiled, or totally unveiled personal attack.

"relentlessly ax-grinding" - what exactly is wrong with that, if they are the right axes? I'm not sure exactly what the point is. And really - ridiculing Resistance? Don't you admit that much progress has been made in the country and elsewhere exactly from the spirit of resistance? What exactly is your beef with that? Why is this, per se, extremist? I think that it's rather sad that you would consider a magazine devoted to the spirit of resistance to be out there and extremist.

I would dearly love to see him back up his minority opinion with articles from the mainstream press, whether conservative, moderate, or liberal - but he can't.

I'm not even sure what your point is here....obviously (at least from my point of view) the mainstream press presents a range of views that is narrowly constrained to what is considered respectable in the very corporate media. The more conservative press would obviously consider Obama to be a liberal, both because anything to the left of George Bush is a liberal to them, and also because they've found that it serves to scare people. Certainly there are people in the more liberal press who would claim that Obama isn't a liberal, but frankly, I think it's rather silly to give me a homework assignment on HC and expect me to spend the time to do it. I think that the objectivity of the American press was proven pretty conclusively during the buildup to the Iraqi war (see also recent revelations about the so-called military experts employed by the networks).

If you're not talking about Obama being a liberal here, what exactly are you talking about? Substantiation of a leftist opinion in the mainstream press?! How exactly would that work, and how would that help us here?

Once again, having been around the block a few times (voting, protesting, and going door to door getting out the vote since 1972 for dear Mr. McGovern) I can assure you, Michael, that water is wet, trees are wood (not made out of wood . . . they are wood), Obama is a liberal, and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

That's all true, but I don't see anything in this post but an attempt to ridicule me because I'm "far left". Which is your right, of course. But until I see some stubstance, it's difficult to address any of your points substantively.