|
games anime | toys
|
 
|
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
SWE3tMadness's blog
follow this blog
subscribe via RSS
send message
invite to meetup+play
|
|
| get involved register or login post a blog post a forum enter a contest contribute a news tip suggest a feature be a guest editor |
support new member's guide login assistance tech support report abuse email our editors read our dev blog nuclear crisis? |
keep in touch RSS feed Myspace Flickr Game nights Meetup+play online |
seriously about Destructoid advertising terms of use privacy policy jobs at MM buy our crap |
our network Tomopop Japanator Despingation? |
||
|
||||||
 living the dream since March 16, 2006 |
||||||
Good to see a Rep who's not already trying to de-legitimize Obama's claim to the Presidency by blaming his win on the "liberal media." If you'd care to, though, I do have a pair of questions for you, in response to what you posted above -
1) I'm curious as to where you get the impression that Obama is "very liberal" - most every policy proposal of his that I've seen puts him roughly in the league of Bill Clinton, who was hardly a raving lefty. If nothing else, he built his campaign partially on "reaching across the aisle" and bringing the parties together - how much he does of this, of course, remains to be seen, but again, what has he done or proposed that would put him so very far to the left?
2) This one you don't have to actually answer here, but I would like you to honestly consider the answer, yourself - you said above that you would not feel comfortable with either party holding such a large Congressional majority. I ask, however, how did you feel the past several years, when your party held power in all three branches, and all but completely excluded any opposition to its mandates? Most conservatives I know were happy as clams while their party ran rampant, and have just very recently began distancing themselves from the goings-on of the Bush years, demanding "bipartisanship" from the party they refused to let into the room for a decade or more - I have no idea whether or not you're among them, but I'd say that this is one thing that every conservative needs to ask him/herself at this point, in order to understand how many liberals have felt for so long, and how we feel now.
"I'm curious as to where you get the impression that Obama is "very liberal" - most every policy proposal of his that I've seen puts him roughly in the league of Bill Clinton, who was hardly a raving lefty."
His health care plan alone puts him squarely in the progressive (liberal) camp, as does his stances on abortion and gun control. He also supports increased governmental restrictions on many industries and areas of the economy.
Most conservatives I know (and I know a lot of them) were happy when the Republicans controlled the legislature because they assumed that the party would pass measures that they agreed with. That obviously wasn't the case. Conservatives now identify themselves more as "conservatives" and less as "Republicans" because they realize that not one party will pass every law that they want. I suspect that after a few years, liberals will start to do the same.
Well, obviously Obama's "in the progressive camp," and his basic philosophy is in that direction - I'm still not sure where the "very liberal" (or, as some talking heads put it, "most liberal Senator") stuff comes from - while his proposals fall on the "liberal" side of things, as I said, none of them go much farther than Clinton's did. Now, if he was proposing to immediately abolish for-profit health care and have Bush immediately tried for war crimes I'd figure you were onto something, but the fact of the matter is, he's not, at least for now, out to do anything all that extreme - again, that's part of what got him elected. So what am I missing here?
As for the latter part of your comment, perhaps the conservatives you know are different from the ones I'm acquainted with, but even as Bush was circumventing the rule of law, spending like a prodigal, sticking the government's nose where it didn't belong and promoting people who threw notions of both "qualification" and "morality" straight out the window, I heard hardly a peep of protest from GOP-ers and their ilk, not to mention that whenever I'd point something like this out I was, if not ignored, labeled a terrorist sympathizer and a bitter liberal hack. I'm sure there were voices of dissent out there, but I certainly didn't hear any of them, even as the administration abandoned every "conservative" creed you could name. The impression I got was that none of those really mattered anymore, and the excuse I got was that "9-11 changed everything."
Again, not saying this is/was you, but I know a great many who do fit that bill.
I think its good Destructoid can have different opinions without senseless flaming.
@Bulletmagnet: I lean more towards the right myself, and I can tell you that I and many others where very upset with some of Bush's policies. Hell, even his supposed talk radio worshipers call him a neo-con(which, by the way just means new conservative, or in this sense not really conservative at all). There are some of us who even consider him a closet liberal when it comes to his excess in spending. Now, I personally only agreed with his tax cuts and the war. I'm sure if you talked to some of them, or maybe some other conservatives they would gladly tell you their opinion of him changed after his re-election. There will always be the people who worship the ground of any republican, good or bad, same as some on the democrat side. But a lot of actual conservatives do not care for Bush's behaviors.
You can count me among those, Usedtabe and Bulletmagnet. I've been conservative since I reached the age of reason, but in my opinion, Bush 43 really let down the Republican party, for precisely the reasons Bulletmagnet was referring to. It's impossible of course, but I would be interested to know how many people voting for Senator Obama were doing so to try to stick it to Bush on his way out.
As for Obama's supposed centrism, I find that hard to swallow. For the most part, he's an unknown quantity... which I suspect is one reason for his astonishing popularity, as people could project their own hopes onto him. It's important to remember, however, that the two houses of congress have more power than the executive branch. As our hostess was pointing out, a democrat supermajority in both houses and a compliant President would have nothing to slow them down. It remains to be seen whether the president-elect will govern from the center-- but it's awfully hard to push something from the middle when you're standing on the left.
My apologies if this is less than coherent... it's been a rather long day. Also, if I might make a suggestion, perhaps a [NVGR] tag might be appropriate? Combo breaker picture aside, (Which is pretty damn awesome, by the way) this doesn't have much to do with the vidjamagames.
That pic is so epic.
Qalamari, that's actually pretty much exactly the way I feel.
Forgot about the NVGR tag though, I'll get to that now. >.>
@Usedtabe: I must take issue with your characterization of "liberalism = spending mindlessly" - liberals are at least as concerned with "trimming the fat" as conservatives are (IIRC Clinton is the only President since and including Reagan who even came close to balancing the budget). The difference is that we consider dead-end military projects and top-tier corporate tax credits, and not universal health care or public education, to be that "fat."
@Qualamari: You're correct that Obama's relatively new on the scene, but again, he's been telling us for some time now what he plans to do on a number of issues - granted, I'll be the first to say that he hasn't been specific enough on several of them, but on many fronts he's made it pretty clear where he stands, and I've seen nothing that puts him in the radical wing of the party. Once again, if anyone else has seen anything specific that suggests otherwise, I'm waiting to hear it.
Also, in response to what you say about it being "hard to govern from the center while standing on the left"...wouldn't the same thing apply on the right? Every candidate we elect is going to lean to one side or the other, so are we to assume that nobody is ever going to be able to keep himself in check and try to consider the other side's stance before making a decision? That's a bit of an overgeneralization, if you ask me.
I love you all. Loki Power is right. This is a very mature way to discuss things. We are a loving community... like a family. I'm glad Obama won.
@ Bulletmagnet: Of course my statement applies to both sides. I figured that was self-evident. Unfortunately it seems as though you can't get elected in this country if you're too far away from the center, so candidates claim they're moderates even when their records show otherwise. Recall Bush's claims of being a "compassionate conservative," whatever the hell that was supposed to mean. The upshot is that candidates tend to hide what they truly are until after they get elected.
Regarding your other statement... I'm not neccesarily worried that Obama will flip out and go ultra-liberal. I AM worried that Nancy Polosi and Harry Reid will expect him to and force bills through accordingly, causing him to go along with the party or else. Like I said before, congress has more power than the president, and if one doesn't like the other, they can effectively make the other's efforts worthless. That's by design, that's the Check and Balance system we all learned about in high school. I guess what I'm worried about is the peer pressure aspect, if that makes sense. "Hey man, we're all gonna pass this bill, you in? C'mon, man, everybody's doin' it."
Maybe I'm just paranoid.