« Here's what I don't get | Main | And now for something completely different »

Obama and the right

So Glenn published a letter the other day that began like this.

I consider myself a libertarian/conservative. Like many people of that bent, I was uncomfortable with Bush when he was nominated. But Al Gore's increasingly-erratic behavior during the 2000 election made me hope Bush won.

Once Bush won, and it became clear that the Florida democrats were trying to steal the election, I became something of a Bush loyalist. Throughout his first term, I took note of all the really horrible things that were said about him, saw that a large portion of the left would rather see Bush fail than see America succeed, and was alarmed by the complicity (and often, participation) of the MSM and mainstream Hollywood. It wasn't far into his second term that I succumbed to Bush Fatigue, due to his inability to make the case for his foreign policy to the American people, and his inability to find the veto pen. He has truly been a terrible steward of the Republican brand, and because of this, the Conservative and libertarian causes are suffering.

So far, I couldn't agree more. I might have written every word myself, verbatim. After that, however, the author and I part company.

I'm no fan of McCain , but as I dislike Obama (and love Palin), I'll be pulling the lever for McCain in November.

This is surely small of me, but if Obama wins, I plan on giving him as much of a chance as the Democrats gave George Bush. I will gleefully forward every paranoid anti-Obama rumor that I see, along with YouTube footage of his verbal missteps. I will laugh and email heinous anti-Obama photoshop jobs, and maybe even learn photoshop myself to create some. I'll buy anti-Obama books, and maybe even a "Not My President" t-shirt. I'm sure that the mainstream bookstores won't carry them, but I'll be on the lookout for anti-Obama calendars and stuff like that. I will not wish America harm, and if the country is hurt (economically, militarily, or diplomatically) I will truly mourn. But i will also take some solace that it occurred under Obama's watch, and will find every reason to blame him personally and fan the flames.

Obama's thuggish behavior thus far in this election cycle - squashing free speech, declaring any criticism of his policies to be "racist" (a word that happily carries little weight with sensible people these days), associating with the likes of Ayers, Wright, and ACORN - suggests that I won't have to scrape for reasons to really viscerally dislike Obama and his administration. And even if he wins, his campaign's "get out the vote fraud" activities are enough to provide people like me with a large degree of "plausible deniability" as to whether he is actually legitimately the president.

I've seen a President that I am generally-inclined to like get crapped on for eight years, and I've seen McCain and Palin (honorable people both, despite policy differences I may have with them) get crapped on through this election season. If the Democrats think that a President Obama is going to get some sort of honeymoon from the folks who didn't vote for him, as a wise man once said: heh.

The author doesn't speak for me. I'm more inclined to agree with with this guy. If Obama wins, I'm going to give him a fair chance until he has demonstrated he deserves otherwise. This blog is not going to become a daily, anti-Obama harangue for the duration of his presidency, as I'm afraid some other right-leaning blogs may. If Obama wins, he will be my president, and I want him to succeed, not to fail.

I think there is a good chance that Obama will make a fine president. The paucity of his record makes it difficult for me to substantiate that claim, and that's one reason I'll be voting for McCain next month, but I do see some hopeful signs from the guy. All of this is subject to change, of course, if he really starts pissing me off. But I at least owe it to him to wait until he does so before I go bad on him.

But at the same time? I do understand where the author of that letter is coming from. And while it's not the path I'm choosing for myself, I can't really say I blame him either. And at times, in my pettier moments, I'm sure I'll probably derive occasional satisfaction from watching the tables get turned by guys like him. It's much easier (not to mention more fun) to sit back and piss and moan and bitch than it is to lead.

I suppose that's where we still are as a nation. No matter who wins this next election, we'll be entering our third consecutive presidency with a deeply divided populace, in which one side demonizes the other with irrational hatred. And that's something that Obama, try as he might, is not going to change. Oh well.


Hey Barry,
I think it is becoming obvious that you want to vote for Obama but you are afraid it to admit it (both to others and to yourself). Let me give you an advice: It is simple. Obama is far better than McCain. This election is not about ideology. It is about competence. Just vote for Obama. It is the patriotic thing to do these days.

As much as I cannot fathom pulling the lever for McCain/Palin (mostly because of Palin and the idea that McCain actually chose Palin), I don't believe that all people who will are somehow unpatriotic, and it's counter-productive to argue such.

>I think it is becoming obvious that you want to vote for Obama...

You think everything is obvious. You use it as a substitute for constructing an argument.

You think everything is obvious. You use it as a substitute for constructing an argument.

You see? The fact that you did not simply deny it, further supports my conclusion and points to the obvious :-)

Oh, and it's nice to see that the cycle that (for me, since I don't really remember Reagan) started with conservatives all up in arms over WJC winning in '92 that then spilled over to '00 with liberals up in arms over W is going to continue regardless of who wins next month. I'm so looking forward to the future by looking backwards. Really. It's a joy.

I plan to give Obama 100 days of unqualified support, followed by the benefit of the doubt for the remainder of his first year in office. If he hasn't solved all of my problems by the 2010 election then I'm done with him and will start photoshopping pictures of him and parsing every sentence that emenates from the White House. I believe that is a more than fair compromise considering the last eight years.

Excellent! I like the specificity of it. Count me in.

I think people forget that Bush 43 received a 91% approval rating following 9/11 and was still at 70% during 2002 and early 2003.

I know many New York liberals who thought Bush was doing a good job immediately following 9/11.

I heard conservatives (and even liberals) trashing Al Gore more than liberals trashing George Bush the first year of Bush's administration.

>I know many New York liberals who thought Bush was doing a good job immediately following 9/11.

I believe you, PE, but I also wonder where you lived. In the Upper West Side, where I lived at the time, I didn't know a single Democrat (read 'single person') who was willing to give GWB even the slightest benefit of a doubt from Day One, 9/11 notwithstanding.

I worked in Midtown, after having moved to Jersey, during 9/11, but, yes, I once lived on the Upper West Side. Ted Weiss was my congressman. 'nuff said.

>Ted Weiss was my congressman.

Jerry Nadler. Gotcha beat. ;-)

(I think.)

Nadler was Weiss' handpicked successor.

You really should really consider changing the name of this blog. To mangle a Vaderism- I find your abundance of faith disturbing. Optimists believe in happy endings despite all evidence to the contrary. Being a true cynic means never having to say, "I'm disappointed."


This is news, Barry? Obama's thuggish behavior? Aw, the thin-skinned wingnut losers and going to throw a fit ... that isn't new.

Limbaugh and Hannity hammered Clinton every day of his presidency, claiming that he was a murderer, a traitor, a Marxist, that he had an ugly daughter, that Hillary was actually the president, etc ...

They also claimed he was a liar, but that one was kinda true.

Anyway, this whole "because of the way Bush was treated" argument is nonsense. Repugs are naturally hateful and vicious people.

Get a life.



The above proves that the REAL RED ALERT seems to be "BARELY HANGING CAN'T READ!!!

As, "I plan to give Obama 100 days of unqualified support..." (WF) and Barry's response, espouse giving Barack Obama a fair shot at turning things around....and even "100 days" is far more of a grace period than the brain-dead, mouth-breathing Left gave G W Bush.

Am I right or am I right?

I honestly haven't seen all that much personal animus directed toward Barack Obama. If anything, there's been a good deal LESS directed at BO than was directed at G W Bush at the start of his tenure, but that's also despite Obama's ties to nefarious figures like Wright, Ayers, ACORN and Rezko.

OVER-regulation caused the current credit crisis - the re-tooled and turbo-charged CRA allowed government to force banks to offer "bad" high-risk/subprime loans (more proof that most "government-elites" didn't take much math, not only did they know nothing about banking, they weren't too strong in the logic dept either). Banks exist to make money for their shareholders, NOT to provide loans to deadbeats who can't afford conventional mortgages.

The bills for the ill-conceived spring "stimulus package" and the current $700 Billion bailout haven't come due...YET, but they're coming due and we'll all feel it pretty soon.

Chicago's public employees pension system was listed as the most underfunded in the nation, but all public employee pension funds are at risk AND all our Municipalities are taking in less in tax revenues and even places like NYC (with its usually reliable tax base, Manhattan's RE market remains strong) are almost certainly going to see some massive budget cuts and layoffs in many of the public services.

Personally I don't think EITHER one of the current candidate's policies will do anything but make things worse, especially with the already disastrous Pelosi-Reid Congress in power.

In my view, there's very little down side in letting a Barack Obama re-Carterize Liberalism and make "liberal" a dirty word for yet another generation of Americans going forward. On the other hand, there is quite a bit of down side in allowing John McCain to share the blame for the coming economic tsunami.

It would also serve notice on the GOP that Keynesian Republicans are as unacceptable as Keynesian Democrats. In fact, Conservatives/Libertarians SHOULD support Conservative (Blue Dog) Democrats (like me) over Moderate Republicans.

Post a comment