Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
John Orr
Is this you? Claim Profile »
10 months ago
in Why the Democrats Keep Losing Elections on Windley's Technometria
Phil,
Please let us know in what way Barack Obama is a liberal and not a centrist?
I f you're talking about abortion and gay rights you have half a point. He is certainly not in line with conservative thinking but is very much in line with the majority of Americans, including liberals and moderates. In my book that would make him a centrist.
On many of the issues he favors market solutions. For example, he favors a cap and trade solution to the carbon crisis over a carbon tax. He favors tax cuts to stimulate the economy. He has backed off his stance on off-shore drilling, hoping to get a comprehensive energy policy out of the congress.
He has proposed trying to find middle ground on the abortion issue by reaching out to anti-women's rights people to lower the number of unwanted pregnancies. I don't see the "conservative" side as being motivated towards pragmatism. You would rather force religious ideas on the whole population.
No, Democrats keep losing elections because your side won't sit and talk about issues as equals. The press lets you drive the conversation. Fair enough, that's the reality today.
Conservatives are always ready to "reach out" as long as you can dictate the terms and set the issues agenda. Republicans have practiced the politics of divisiveness to perfection over the last two presidential cycles. The message fell short in state after state in 2006. 2008 may be the year it fails nationally.
McCain's campaign is more of the same and the HuffPo writer is correct. Last week's convention speakers lied repeatedly and the press didn't call them on it.
The signature lie was Sarah Palin on her stance regarding the "Bridge to nowhere." Her new position is strictly politics. When she was running for governor she supported it. The "conservative" answer, "Stop talking about her family!" The blogs were talking about everything they could find out about her, not just her family.
The press does not function very well today and that's why they're losing their readership to the blogs and viewership to the Daily Show and YouTube.
The Dems may not lose this year. Beware of Obama's ground game. How are your registration numbers looking?
John Orr
http://coyotegulch.net/
Please let us know in what way Barack Obama is a liberal and not a centrist?
I f you're talking about abortion and gay rights you have half a point. He is certainly not in line with conservative thinking but is very much in line with the majority of Americans, including liberals and moderates. In my book that would make him a centrist.
On many of the issues he favors market solutions. For example, he favors a cap and trade solution to the carbon crisis over a carbon tax. He favors tax cuts to stimulate the economy. He has backed off his stance on off-shore drilling, hoping to get a comprehensive energy policy out of the congress.
He has proposed trying to find middle ground on the abortion issue by reaching out to anti-women's rights people to lower the number of unwanted pregnancies. I don't see the "conservative" side as being motivated towards pragmatism. You would rather force religious ideas on the whole population.
No, Democrats keep losing elections because your side won't sit and talk about issues as equals. The press lets you drive the conversation. Fair enough, that's the reality today.
Conservatives are always ready to "reach out" as long as you can dictate the terms and set the issues agenda. Republicans have practiced the politics of divisiveness to perfection over the last two presidential cycles. The message fell short in state after state in 2006. 2008 may be the year it fails nationally.
McCain's campaign is more of the same and the HuffPo writer is correct. Last week's convention speakers lied repeatedly and the press didn't call them on it.
The signature lie was Sarah Palin on her stance regarding the "Bridge to nowhere." Her new position is strictly politics. When she was running for governor she supported it. The "conservative" answer, "Stop talking about her family!" The blogs were talking about everything they could find out about her, not just her family.
The press does not function very well today and that's why they're losing their readership to the blogs and viewership to the Daily Show and YouTube.
The Dems may not lose this year. Beware of Obama's ground game. How are your registration numbers looking?
John Orr
http://coyotegulch.net/
2 replies
fozzmoo
Barack Obama is a far-left leaning liberal not because he's vehemently pro-choice or pro- "gay rights," but because he is in favor of growing the size of the federal government by leaps and bounds to provide the biggest increase in federally mandated social services since the New Deal.
Cap and trade legislation is actually an excellent example of socialist legislation that is wealth redistribution in disguise. One of the few pieces of congressional legislation Obama has personally been involved with is the Global Poverty Act which proposes taxes on wealthy nations with the revenue to go to the United Nations for distribution among less-fortunate countries. If this isn't income redistribution, a staple far-left liberal policy, I don't know what is! It's wrong on SO many levels. First of all, the United Nations has proven itself to be a liability in projects where the transfer or holding of money is concerned. Secondly, many "poor" nations are poor because they're run by power-hungry dictators and/or incredibly corrupt governments. The UN doesn't have a reliable track record for preventing corruption.
While I'm not a GOP shill, I am offended by your accusation that "we" practiced the policy of divisiveness. Both parties, and the media, have been increasingly dividing the country on each and every issue for almost two decades now.
Abortion is a non-issue regardless of which side you're on. We've had an assortment of pro-life and pro-choice administrations for the last 20-30 years since Roe v. Wade and none of them have significantly affected the legality or availability of safe abortions for women who choose to kill their unwanted, unborn child.
Cap and trade legislation is actually an excellent example of socialist legislation that is wealth redistribution in disguise. One of the few pieces of congressional legislation Obama has personally been involved with is the Global Poverty Act which proposes taxes on wealthy nations with the revenue to go to the United Nations for distribution among less-fortunate countries. If this isn't income redistribution, a staple far-left liberal policy, I don't know what is! It's wrong on SO many levels. First of all, the United Nations has proven itself to be a liability in projects where the transfer or holding of money is concerned. Secondly, many "poor" nations are poor because they're run by power-hungry dictators and/or incredibly corrupt governments. The UN doesn't have a reliable track record for preventing corruption.
While I'm not a GOP shill, I am offended by your accusation that "we" practiced the policy of divisiveness. Both parties, and the media, have been increasingly dividing the country on each and every issue for almost two decades now.
Abortion is a non-issue regardless of which side you're on. We've had an assortment of pro-life and pro-choice administrations for the last 20-30 years since Roe v. Wade and none of them have significantly affected the legality or availability of safe abortions for women who choose to kill their unwanted, unborn child.
since I'd say anyone outside of the party is probably more complex
than your black and white statements would support. The Republicans
certainly don't speak for me and I don't speak for them. I find
myself disagreeing with McC as much as Obama.
That said, Obama and McCain aren't that different with respect to
"sticking to the facts" if you look at sites like Politifact.com:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/
On the issue of divisiness, both parties do this masterfully. They
use different things as "wedge issues" but they both do it.
Republicans tend to use social issues. Democrats use economic
issues. Obama's statement yesterday about "investors" and "working
families" is an effort to divide the middle class off from the
Republicans.
My point is, if you want to discuss issues that works. If you want to
paint me into a corner with strawmen arguments and paint Republicans
as evil and Democrats as good, then there's nothing to discuss.