The “Take That” Vote
When I read certain arguments from so-called conservatives — like this one (exposed at The Daily Dish) or this one (skewered at Think Progress) — I’m tempted to vote for Obama just to distance myself from the idiocy of these voices.
I have similar (though not identical) thoughts whenever a so-called liberal misrepresents McCain’s “100 years” comment … or accuses him of offering nothing more than “Bush’s third term” … or defends Wesley Clark for dissing McCain’s military service.
I include the “not identical” caveat because it seems the conservative voices are often, at their core, meaner and less defensible. Granted, this perception could be the direct result of my tendency to hold conservatives to a higher standard than I hold liberals; my first priority is to attempt to clean up the house in which I live before I try cleaning up my neighbors’ houses.
Then again, out of frustration, I might just punch the ticket for both Obama and McCain in November — negating my vote and proving nothing, but giving me a helluva good story with which to bewilder my grandchildren.
17 Responses to “The “Take That” Vote”
Whatever you do, don't promote Hillary Clinton as a remedy for your frustration.
Es ist verboten. And if you do, you risk being called an emotional old angry white woman. Better to sabotage our country's future by inanities like punching both McCain and Obama. Yes, by far that is more acceptable than saying, “I think we made a mistake. Clinton seems more qualified and more likely to unify for a win in November.”
Silhouette,
There is no reason to promote Hillary at this point. Because as you said, she is assured victory at the Democratic convention. All hail the Clintons!
Pete,
Clark didn't deride McCain's military record. McCain did say verbatim that he would like to stay in Iraq for 100+ years. Of course McCain isn't offering exactly the same platform as Bush, but in terms of the most important questions facing the country, aside from climate change, he's singing the same song.
I think you're right in believing that the comments by Republicans–I'm thinking of the guy in the Sullivan link who thinks Obama prsents the greatest threat to America since the Civil War as well as the 3% of people in the link to your last post who think Obama is a Muslim–are less defensible.
Nobody really has to like this simple truth, but in our system, there are effectively only two choices. So if one of the parties is being indefensible, it throws the whole system out of whack.
But I understand you're not a liberal. If you don't want to vote for Obama or McCain, you can, despite my proclamation that there are in effect only two parties, always cast your vote a third party candidate. If there is one closer to your thinking, that vote might be indicative of a desire for both a change in the Republican party and a non-endorsement of the Democrats.
Well, I agree with you that often we don't want to be associated with “people acting like that” and so we vote against them.
So that you can distance yourself from me, you should know that I still don't think Clark did diss McCain's military service. At best, you saw a little bit of a general's arrogance.
Call it a “no confidence” or protest vote. Even after his blow-ups, Perot was such a legitimate protest vote in 1992 and arguably cost the elder Bush re-election. (I also believe the elder Bush was to blame although one of two principal reasons he was rejected by even GOP-leaners, not finishing the war in Iraq and “going all the way to Baghdad” is something of a cruel joke on Americans nowadays.)
PeteAbel said: “conservative voices are often, at their core, meaner and less defensible. Granted, this perception could be the direct result of my tendency to hold conservatives to a higher standard than I hold liberals”
I think you are right in your critique of this perception.
Our Progressive Left comrades above seem to have forgotten Aravosis' accusing McCain of “disloyalty” to the US while a POW (perhaps the most appalling thing that can be said of a serving officer in the US armed forces); Aravosis' mocking of McCain's disability. and his collecting a pension for same, due to his POW treatment; and the Great and Mighty KOS bizarre mocking of McCain's bad teeth (again, a result of his POW treatment).
When someone can point to a major conservative voice accusing Obama of committing treason against the United States of America (not just insufficient patriotism, but actual active treason, a la Aravosis) then perhaps I would share your view.
Oddly, I think the candidates are both more decent…and better choices…than Americans have had in recent years.
Sadly, many conservatives seem prone to sit this one out for a variety of reasons.
My advice: don't vote for Congressional races…as the GOP in Congress has been particularly appalling (see the budget…porkbarreling etc). But vote in the Presidential.
I should add that not everyone on the Left shares the views noted above. But both KOS and Aravosis are major Left bloggers (significantly, the liberal Left commenters on KOS almost universally in droves condemned his smear of McCain…an unprecedented response).
Politico has a good round-up of the swiftboating from the Left:
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=D8A…
Sen. Obama, to his credit, has expressly distanced himself from these voices and their smears.
You know Obama is in trouble when Marlow is praising him.
ChrisWWW said: “You know Obama is in trouble when Marlow is praising him.”
Hahahahaha…
Actually, I have been very impressed by Obama throughout this campaign.
Senator Obama has displayed intelligence…he is well-disciplined, and very politically sophisticated. (I should note that the McCain campaign, in contrast, has exhibited a lack of discipline and political astuteness).
I don't believe for a moment that Obama is a moderate. However, I think some of his proposals are good (cf. health care). Also, I believe he would make a good president. I just think McCain would make a better one (well, that belief is being shaken as the weeks pass).
Anyone seen the fallout of the Republican County in Orange County California. The Lincoln Club is stopping their funding of Republican incumbents in the house and senate to punish them for their fiscal irresponsibility and encourage the party to make change via a complete overhaul.
check out this blurb, which has a link to the article that started this whole thing.
http://www.greenfaucet.com/hanlons-pub/methinks…
Anyone seen the fallout of the Republican County in Orange County California. The Lincoln Club is stopping their funding of Republican incumbents in the house and senate to punish them for their fiscal irresponsibility and encourage the party to make change via a complete overhaul.
check out this blurb, which has a link to the article that started this whole thing.
http://www.greenfaucet.com/hanlons-pub/methinks…
The sad thing about the Republicans is that they all too often cower in the face of opposition (normally emotional and illogical and frequently pathological) and become “me-too” Dems Lite in some kind of pathetic “compliance” response as if that's going to win them hordes of Dem voter conversions or acclaim from the media.
The sad thing about the Republicans is that they all too often cower in the face of opposition (normally emotional and illogical and frequently pathological) and become “me-too” Dems Lite in some kind of pathetic “compliance” response as if that's going to win them hordes of Dem voter conversions or acclaim from the media.
OMG!!
Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice didn't cower!!!
Though Republicans were happy to cut taxes even as they waged two wars and created the largest entitlement program since medicare.
OMG!!
Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice didn't cower!!!
Though Republicans were happy to cut taxes even as they waged two wars and created the largest entitlement program since medicare.
For a number of reasons, I can't be a conservative, the primary one being that I find their top-down view of all policies unacceptable. I think the bottom has to be lifted up in order to have a stable and successful society, though how that's done needs more careful analysisis than it often gets. Also no taxes and no regulaltons is so simplistic a policy as to be outright dangerous. Let's talk about what kind of taxes and what kind of regualtions would work best, instead.
So, that makes me a Democrat. But I'm a Democrat often at war with my own party, especially the Far Left, like Daily Kos, who drown out the more realsitic and less ideological Democrats in media and blog attention. I have a lot of bones to pick with some Democrats in Congress, as well. But I'm stuck with the best hope, shaky as it may be, that I can find today.
At this juncture, with the US in crisis mode about the economy, health care and its wars (current and potential ones) I'm looking for someone who will try to reach an inclusive position on social issues so that we can put those aside while we deal with what's crucial and immediate. We can fight effectively only about so many things at the same time or we we risk becoming a crazed mob. We need to prioritize.
I think Obama is trying to do that. I don't agree with him, in principle, about same-sex marriage, for example, but ensuring that civil unions truly do have alll the rights and privileges of marriage without forcing churches who don't agree to such marraiges to perform the ceremony seems like a realistic way to stop arguing about it. while we consider how to get out of Iraq.
I'm also not happy with his entanglement with faith-based groups, but realistically, these groups represent a large proportion of our citizenry, and if government can cooperate with them constructively, I welcome the chance to stop fighting about it. Instead, we do have to make sure that the partnership for particular programs, doesn't become a union of state and church in a more basic way and that it doesn't become a partisan enterprise.
On iraq, too, it matters more to me that Obama is careful getting us out, like he promised, than what words he used on what day. Caution plus the goal of getting out are my priorities, and the minutia are just distractions. Getting out will hard and risky, and that shouldn't be forgottend..
it is true that McCain's '100 years' has been twisted way out of shape by Democrats, even Obama. However, it does display a state of mind, an approach, that I don't agree with. I think it betrays a lack of appreciation for Arab perceptions of our presence and a belief that the US can still impose its will whereever and however ti wants with impunity. The world has changed and McCain's models from the past just aren't applicable anymore.
I can't vote for MCCain. I intend to vote for Obama, because I think he is what the country needs right now, not because I agree with with him about everything.
That's how I prioritize, anyway. . .
For a number of reasons, I can't be a conservative, the primary one being that I find their top-down view of all policies unacceptable. I think the bottom has to be lifted up in order to have a stable and successful society, though how that's done needs more careful analysisis than it often gets. Also no taxes and no regulaltons is so simplistic a policy as to be outright dangerous. Let's talk about what kind of taxes and what kind of regualtions would work best, instead.
So, that makes me a Democrat. But I'm a Democrat often at war with my own party, especially the Far Left, like Daily Kos, who drown out the more realsitic and less ideological Democrats in media and blog attention. I have a lot of bones to pick with some Democrats in Congress, as well. But I'm stuck with the best hope, shaky as it may be, that I can find today.
At this juncture, with the US in crisis mode about the economy, health care and its wars (current and potential ones) I'm looking for someone who will try to reach an inclusive position on social issues so that we can put those aside while we deal with what's crucial and immediate. We can fight effectively only about so many things at the same time or we we risk becoming a crazed mob. We need to prioritize.
I think Obama is trying to do that. I don't agree with him, in principle, about same-sex marriage, for example, but ensuring that civil unions truly do have alll the rights and privileges of marriage without forcing churches who don't agree to such marraiges to perform the ceremony seems like a realistic way to stop arguing about it. while we consider how to get out of Iraq.
I'm also not happy with his entanglement with faith-based groups, but realistically, these groups represent a large proportion of our citizenry, and if government can cooperate with them constructively, I welcome the chance to stop fighting about it. Instead, we do have to make sure that the partnership for particular programs, doesn't become a union of state and church in a more basic way and that it doesn't become a partisan enterprise.
On iraq, too, it matters more to me that Obama is careful getting us out, like he promised, than what words he used on what day. Caution plus the goal of getting out are my priorities, and the minutia are just distractions. Getting out will hard and risky, and that shouldn't be forgottend..
it is true that McCain's '100 years' has been twisted way out of shape by Democrats, even Obama. However, it does display a state of mind, an approach, that I don't agree with. I think it betrays a lack of appreciation for Arab perceptions of our presence and a belief that the US can still impose its will whereever and however ti wants with impunity. The world has changed and McCain's models from the past just aren't applicable anymore.
I can't vote for MCCain. I intend to vote for Obama, because I think he is what the country needs right now, not because I agree with with him about everything.
That's how I prioritize, anyway. . .