The liberal base and far-left are unhappy that they’re not getting the sufficiently liberal president they wanted. Sorry to be snarky, but excuse me if I don’t give you my sympathy. If you’d been paying attention during the election, you might have seen that the man you thought was going to bring about a renewal of completely leftist domestic policy and dovish foreign policy never existed. Obama has never presented himself as a leftist ideoulouge and hardliner and it was quite apparent for a long time. So why are you whining now?
Fear not, though. Some elements of Obama’s domestic policy may shape up to be liberal enough to keep you just satisfied. In particlar, it looks like the Education, Energy, and Health posts could go to liberals. And there might be others. But to pretend for a second that posts like Defense were ever going to go to a liberal was wishful thinking at best. Obama has been singing the praises of Robert Gates since before election day.
So, next time you want a leftist for a president, pay attention to who you’re nominating. Just don’t whine after he was elected when you ignored the obvious signs before hand.
Too bad it takes his assistant Patrick Appel to point it out:
While signing off, Andrew mentioned the months long argument he and I have had with regard to Sarah Palin’s fifth child. I am the only other person who has read all the obstetrician interviews, the interview with a reporter at the scene, and all the primary sources. I strongly believe that there is nothing to this story.
Also, on Sullivan’s harping on the birth not being reported in the hospital records:
This is highly misleading. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) (pdf) protects patient information. The “formal record” Andrew is referring to is a list of newborn babies on the Mat-Su website. This list is voluntary. Parents have to give their approval for their children to be listed (The Dish checked with the hospital). Trig not being on this list isn’t proof of anything.
Sullivan wanted the medical records released, even after the election was done and over, insisting that it would all be over only if Palin would do that. To me, that’s like those conspiracy theorists practically screaming for Obama to appear on national television with his birth certificate,because only if he would do that, there would be no question anymore.
Questioning the official record is fine when something seem to smell nasty. But when, time and again, proof has been offered, it really is time to move on. Continuing to harp on it makes it look like you have a derangement syndrome.
I figured the time was ripe to say it again. Biden. Palin. Medical records please.
About a week ago, I wrote an entry warning the two major candidates to not become cocky (in Barack Obama’s case), depressed (in John McCain’s case), or downright complacent, given the “inevitability” of an Obama win. Now obviously, I didn’t actually think this was going to happen, but Barack Obama said something the other day that shows he recognizes the danger, and will do his best to not let it get to him.
Here’s what he said, as noted by Chicago Sun-Times writer Lynn Sweet:
“Don’t underestimate the capacity of Democrats to snatch defeat from
the jaws of victory,” Mr. Obama said. “Don’t underestimate our ability
to screw it up.”
The idea of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory has a long history with the Democrats. It happened to John Kerry in 2004. Obama doesn’t want it to happen to him.
Basically, I think this debate was not much different than the last two. There were some good points brought up by both sides, however. John McCain did better in this debate that the last two, and made a good attempt at defining his economic stances, and calling on Obama to explain his connections. Obama, meanwhile, remained the cool candidate he’s portrayed himself as in the previous debates, by not letting things get to him.
It’s amazing how things can change in a matter of hours, isn’t it? Mere hours ago, I was pondering my options for the future, given John McCain and Barack Obama’s contempt for their critics.
Yesterday, Sarah Palin brought up the Obama-William Ayers connection , saying Obama was “palling around with terrorists.” Then hours ago, Politico had a report about Obama’s return volley in the form of the Keating 5 scandal, which McCain was embroiled in some years ago. Our own Michael ver der Galien discussed this development in another article.
Both are misleading at best. But both are the types of things I thought I’d never see from both campaigns. And thus, my support for them is lost. On November 4th, my vote goes to Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr.
If you’ve noticed in my past couple posts, I’ve skewered both John McCain and Barack Obama. I will continue doing so until the election. Both have much to account for and each day that goes by makes my choice to vote for Bob Barr much easier.
The gloves are off.
There’s been much hoopla around the blogosphere in recent days about Barack Obama’s questionable associations with domestic terrorist William Ayers. Seems that there is bad judgment there at best.
But what about Sarah Palin’s associations with the Alaska Independence Party? Is her various levels of association with them not just as bad judgment?
(Cross-posted from Poligazette)
Earlier, our own Michael van der Galien wrote about the switch in the McCain campaign to attacks on Barack Obama’s character, judgement, and associations. In particular, he discussed Sarah Palin’s questioning of Obama’s past associations with domestic terrorist William Ayers.
I seriously hope that ‘questions’ are not all the McCain campaign has. How many staff members do they have on their campaign? Surely there are people looking for any and all facts with which to destroy Obama? And if there is something, I would think that releasing it sooner rather than later would be the proper thing to do.
Karl Rove today warned both the Obama and McCain camps over statements they have made in recent ads must check out on the fact meter, or they will risk hurting themselves. Continue reading