tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19150297.post2772242254906029662..comments2023-07-04T10:30:14.276-04:00Comments on Intrepid Liberal Journal: The Good Fight: Taking On the Axis of GreedRobert Ellmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03526287813354418269noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19150297.post-91922651137678763102009-10-06T18:13:56.875-04:002009-10-06T18:13:56.875-04:00I've got to be honest here. I saw all this co...I've got to be honest here. I saw all this coming pretty much from the get-go, which is why, after thinking long and hard about it, decided to write in my own ticket at the polls last November, rather than vote for the Obama/Biden ticket. Since then, I've been going along with the following quote (the writer's name escapes me at the moment): "It's better to vote one's conscience and to vote for someone who can't win than to vote for somebody who can win and will betray you."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19150297.post-55286561109649798302009-08-13T07:34:16.748-04:002009-08-13T07:34:16.748-04:00I just noticed this morning that Arianna Huffingto...I just noticed this morning that Arianna Huffington said almost exactly what I wrote: Obama needs to stop pretending that there's such a thing as bi-partisan consensus, this after Sen. Grassley kicked Obama in the nuts.<br /><br />The Domocrats are behaving the way they did under the Bush administration: cowed, defensive, frightened, feckless... <br /><br />In short, they're behaving like a minority party. The new Harry and Louise is the Death Panel. What's worse, Obama is freakin' running around like a god damn marriage counselor instead of defending his party and defending his allies.<br /><br />I just want to bang my head on the table.Patricknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19150297.post-13670201705506950972009-08-12T11:06:27.434-04:002009-08-12T11:06:27.434-04:00Rob, your blog is really impressive. The seriousne...Rob, your blog is really impressive. The seriousness, depth and quality of your interviews and subjects are first rate.<br /><br />My impression is that Obama seriously misread the nature of partisanship - which has always been what I've dreaded about him (see my previous comments). Being a formal social worker, he gives the impression, or seems to have the belief, that the persuasion of reason can overrule partisanship. But partisanship is only secondarily about ideas.<br /><br />And I'm still not sure Obama gets it.<br /><br />He thought that if he allowed Congress to initiate health care reform, they would own it and want to invest in its success. But the truth is that there *is* no good or easy way to pass health care reform. The Conservamentalists have clearly stated their priority. Destroying Obama's efforts will further their own party and careers.<br /><br />This is about getting Republicans and Conservatives back into power. The debate, for them, isn't about health care, but how to undermine and destroy the Democrats at every turn. Party first, country second. This has been the mantra of the Republicans during the last decades, especially under Bush, when they allowed Bush to undermine the Constitution for the sake of party cohesion and unity. (And they have said so themselves.)<br /><br />And then there's the money - the lobbyists.<br /><br />Obama, when cornered, does have a good counterpunch but Jesus, when will the guy start anticipating the first punch?<br /><br />At this rate, the public option looks almost dead. If the public option *does* die, then this whole effort will have been mostly wasted. Obama will have his Pyhrric victory, the Conservatives will be disgruntled because he got even that.<br /><br />The insurance industry will breathe a sigh of relief and loopholes, to whatever law is passed, will proliferate like flies on a corpse.<br /><br />I blame Obama for this. He just doesn't seem to *get* his opposition and the nature of it.Patrickhttp://poemshape.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19150297.post-18953510532310946112009-08-03T00:01:48.103-04:002009-08-03T00:01:48.103-04:00Forget, please, "conservatism." It has ...Forget, please, "conservatism." It has been, operationally, de facto, Godless and therefore irrelevant. Secular conservatism will not defeat secular liberalism because to God both are two atheistic peas-in-a-pod and thus predestined to failure. As Stonewall Jackson's Chief of Staff R.L. Dabney said of such a humanistic belief more than 100 years ago:<br /><br />"[Secular conservatism] is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today .one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution; to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt bath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard, indeed, to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth."<br /><br />Our country is collapsing because we have turned our back on God (Psalm 9:17) and refused to kiss His Son (Psalm 2).<br /><br />John Lofton, Editor, TheAmericanView.com<br />Recovering Republican<br />JLof@aol.com<br /><br />PS – And “Mr. Worldly Wiseman” Rush Limbaugh never made a bigger ass of himself than at CPAC where he told that blasphemous “joke” about himself and God.John Lofton, Recovering Republicanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15687524008871521220noreply@blogger.com