Discussion in 'Civil Rights & Privacy' started by Lisa Simeone, Sep 8, 2011.
No, I agree, it won't happen. sigh
This might be the one time that history is rewritten.
Even the Dem party understands that O has O chance of getting reelected.
I don't think they do, I really don't. They're out of touch.
I think they think that progressives don't have a choice but to fall in line because we don't want Perry or Romney or some other scary republican to win. And then when a scary republican wins, dem leaders will be genuinely shocked.
I certainly plan on doing my part to help O end his career as the worst President in the history of the United States. And you guys thought Bush had that honor all locked up.
I still think Bush has that honor. There's no one in the Obama administration like Cheney.
Obama might win in the 'meh' category though.
Obama (unfortunately) turned out exactly as I thought he would. Not that that really matters.
This is very similar to the thinking that many conservatives had towards McCain (and even GW Bush - though many reading only left or "main-stream" sources never really understood this.)
With these folks, the November dilemma usually boils down to 1) do you vote for someone that you agree with 30-40% of the time or 10-20% or 2) Do you vote for the person right on the 1, 2 or 3 most important issues to you or 3) do you vote for someone who you agree with, but has no realistic chance of winning.
What should one do if one's cat is named "Mussolini?"
My cat's name is "Moe," as in "Moe, Larry, and Curley"
Most of his votes: "Present"
My tag line lately has been that the Ds and the Rs are closely-related branches of the Authoritarian Party.
Not to inject political advocacy into our genial relationships here, but I think a strategic play for civil-liberty-loving Ds that will certainly stir the pot and engage the civil liberty conversation is for civil-liberty-loving Ds to vote for Gary Johnson in the Republican primary.
Though I commend his anti-war, pro-legalization-of-marijuana positions, and though he seems like a level-headed guy, this stuff scares the crap out of me: "shifting Medicaid to managed care, constructing two new private prisons . . . " If many of our aged parents didn't have Medicare, they'd be out on the street. I would have gone bankrupt long ago trying to care for my mother, so I would be out on the street, too. She was healthy as an ox her entire life -- low blood pressure, not overweight, exercised every day, didn't smoke, independent, full of energy, could run circles around people 30 years younger, blah blah blah. Then she had a massive stroke. She says every day she wishes she had died, and none of us blame her. I can't physically or financially care for her myself.
Caring for the weakest in our society isn't a sign of our weakness; it's a sign of our strength.
And for-profit prisons?? We've discussed the dangers of that model even here on TUG. There are too many people in prison in this country as it is (with perhaps some of us dissidents in the future?). I don't want people making money off that sad, sick fact.
Point taken ... but given that the probability of his winning the nomination is small, raising his profile is a way to make the other candidates of both branches of the Authoritarian Party actually have to discuss civil liberties and other topics that they currently find politically repugnant.
You are absolutely right about that!
Separate names with a comma.