A Conservative for Obama

[Predicto]

I know we have been throwing around endorsements and such, back and forth, and I don't usually start new threads, but I find this piece interesting. The author of this article is the former Publisher of National Review, William F. Buckley's original magazine, and a well-known conservative of long standing.



THE MORE I LISTEN TO AND READ ABOUT “the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate,” the more I like him. Barack Obama strikes a chord with me like no political figure since Ronald Reagan. To explain why, I need to explain why I am a conservative and what it means to me.

In 1964, at the age of 16, I organized the Dallas County Youth for Goldwater. My senior thesis at the University of Texas was on the conservative intellectual revival in America. Twenty years later, I was invited by William F. Buckley Jr. to join the board of National Review. I later became its publisher.

Conservatism to me is less a political philosophy than a stance, a recognition of the fallibility of man and of man’s institutions. Conservatives respect the past not for its antiquity but because it represents, as G.K. Chesterton said, the democracy of the dead; it gives the benefit of the doubt to customs and laws tried and tested in the crucible of time. Conservatives are skeptical of abstract theories and utopian schemes, doubtful that government is wiser than its citizens, and always ready to test any political program against actual results.

Liberalism always seemed to me to be a system of “oughts.” We ought to do this or that because it’s the right thing to do, regardless of whether it works or not. It is a doctrine based on intentions, not results, on feeling good rather than doing good.

But today it is so-called conservatives who are cemented to political programs when they clearly don’t work. The Bush tax cuts—a solution for which there was no real problem and which he refused to end even when the nation went to war—led to huge deficit spending and a $3 trillion growth in the federal debt. Facing this, John McCain pumps his “conservative” credentials by proposing even bigger tax cuts. Meanwhile, a movement that once fought for limited government has presided over the greatest growth of government in our history. That is not conservatism; it is profligacy using conservatism as a mask.

Today it is conservatives, not liberals, who talk with alarming bellicosity about making the world “safe for democracy.” It is John McCain who says America’s job is to “defeat evil,” a theological expansion of the nation’s mission that would make George Washington cough out his wooden teeth.

This kind of conservatism, which is not conservative at all, has produced financial mismanagement, the waste of human lives, the loss of moral authority, and the wreckage of our economy that McCain now threatens to make worse.

Barack Obama is not my ideal candidate for president. (In fact, I made the maximum donation to John McCain during the primaries, when there was still hope he might come to his senses.) But I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history. I disagree with him on many issues. But those don’t matter as much as what Obama offers, which is a deeply conservative view of the world. Nobody can read Obama’s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man. It gives me comfort just to think that after eight years of George W. Bush we will have a president who has actually read the Federalist Papers.

Most important, Obama will be a realist. I doubt he will taunt Russia, as McCain has, at the very moment when our national interest requires it as an ally. The crucial distinction in my mind is that, unlike John McCain, I am convinced he will not impulsively take us into another war unless American national interests are directly threatened.

“Every great cause,” Eric Hoffer wrote, “begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” As a cause, conservatism may be dead. But as a stance, as a way of making judgments in a complex and difficult world, I believe it is very much alive in the instincts and predispositions of a liberal named Barack Obama.


http://www.dmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?nm=Core+Pages&type=gen&mod=Core+Pages&tier=3&gid=B33A5C6E2CF04C9596A3EF81822D9F8E

[dcnativenerd]

So...why doesn't he just vote Libertarian?

[Corcaigh]

So...why doesn't he just vote Libertarian?

'cause he wants his vote to be counted?

[TMat184]

Yeah, He should vote for Bob Barr!!! LOL

[dcnativenerd]

That's right, folks. Keep telling yourself the two party system works. Believe!

I can understand that he's upset with the Republican party and with their selection of John McCain; but I can't for the life of me figure out why any conservative would really want to vote for Obama. Yes, Obama is a fine speaker and I believe him to be a patriot; but there's nothing even vaugly conservative about his platform. You're just going to support him because he's on the "winning team"?

[Burgold]

Nice article. I agree with much of it, especially in the ways that modern Conservatives have lost or forgotten what the better part of conservatism is about.

[MonkFan8]

That's right, folks. Keep telling yourself the two party system works. Believe!

I can understand that he's upset with the Republican party and with their selection of John McCain; but I can't for the life of me figure out why any conservative would really want to vote for Obama. Yes, Obama is a fine speaker and I believe him to be a patriot; but there's nothing even vaugly conservative about his platform. You're just going to support him because he's on the "winning team"?Huh? I thought he was pretty clear in describing why Obama.

[PeterMP]

"Today it is conservatives, not liberals, who talk with alarming bellicosity about making the world “safe for democracy.” It is John McCain who says America’s job is to “defeat evil,” a theological expansion of the nation’s mission that would make George Washington cough out his wooden teeth."

He didn't understand Goldwater much.

[dcnativenerd]

Yes, he did. He said that:
"Nobody can read Obama’s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man."
Fantastic. I feel quite similarly about Senator Obama; but if you've got a rotten platform, it doesn't amount to anything. What I'm asking is why doesn't he go to the guy that's closest mirrors his political philosophy?

[luckydevil]

It is John McCain who says America’s job is to “defeat evil,” a theological expansion of the nation’s mission that would make George Washington cough out his wooden teeth.

Reagan talked like this as well.

[Redskins Diehard]

I wouldn't support anyone I thought would take us into a war impulsively without our interests being threatend either. I don't think any of the candidates are going to do that.

[luckydevil]

I wouldn't support anyone I thought would take us into a war impulsively without our interests being threatend either. I don't think any of the candidates are going to do that.

You mean the guy who was one of the senate's biggest supporters of the Iraq war? This is a guy whose foreign policy team consists mostly of neocons ( a few token realists on it). He is hell bent on taking on Iran and now Russia. Since about 1997/98, he signed on to much every conflict we have been involved in ( loudly supported each one).

[dcnativenerd]

I thought McCain, at first, was apprehensive about the war.

[SkinsTerps26]

That's right, folks. Keep telling yourself the two party system works. Believe!

I can understand that he's upset with the Republican party and with their selection of John McCain; but I can't for the life of me figure out why any conservative would really want to vote for Obama. Yes, Obama is a fine speaker and I believe him to be a patriot; but there's nothing even vaugly conservative about his platform. You're just going to support him because he's on the "winning team"?

this is an adult thread. come back when you are 18

:)

[Redskins Diehard]

You mean the guy who was one of the senate's biggest supporters of the Iraq war? This is a guy whose foreign policy team consists mostly of neocons ( a few token realists on it). He is hell bent on taking on Iran and now Russia. Since about 1997/98, he signed on to much every conflict we have been involved in ( loudly supported each one).

Pretty sure I said I don't think any of the candidates will take us impulsively into war. Since 97/98...you mean those 2 wars?

[sleazye]

Ok, we've heard from a DNC member who is supporting McCain; a Conservative who is supporting Obama, so when are we going to hear from a Rainbow Coalition member who is writing in Buchanan?

[dcnativenerd]

Yeah, yeah, SkinsTerps. You old foggies can have whoever you deserve. :D
(Noticed you were from Rockville. Great place. Have a lot of great memories there. I was born right down the road in Silver Spring)

[luckydevil]

As far as the conservative movement goes, there is nothing really conservative about it ( be it the fusionist, Burkian, traditionalist, or Kirkian type).

A more apt description of the modern movement conservative is nationalist.

[EersSkins05]

I've heard a number of fiscal conservatives echo much of the viewpoints of this article. They feel that while neither candidate is a real fiscal conservative, oddly enough, it is Obama that has a greater chance of curbing spending and balancing the budget than McCain. The reason? He's at least proposing some tax increases to pay for the massive debt brought about by the last 7 years of the Bush administration.

Couple this with Obama's reluctance to take the country to war unnecessarily while his opponent is a staunch war hawk, and it's not hard to understand how someone would come to this conclusion.

Yes, they could vote third party for someone that shared all of their platforms and problems, but if you believe that a major candidate is going to behave more favorably than the other, putting your vote behind that candidate isn't something to lightly dismiss.

[SkinsTerps26]

Yeah, yeah, SkinsTerps. You old foggies can have whoever you deserve. :D
(Noticed you were from Rockville. Great place. Have a lot of great memories there. I was born right down the road in Silver Spring)

i remember feeling the same in 2000 with Bush/McCain primaries, but so frustrated to not be able to vote

yeah, hope to make it back to MD or DC in a few years.

[luckydevil]

Pretty sure I said I don't think any of the candidates will take us impulsively into war. Since 97/98...you mean those 2 wars?

The Iraq war wasn't impulsive?

[dcnativenerd]

Well, we'll just see what happens. If I were voting this time around, I'd probably vote third party for Barr (since the Boston Tea Party isn't on the NC ballot...by the way, for all you libertarians out there, check out the Boston Tea Party. Interesting offshoot of the Libertarian party). Eh, but what can ya do?

I also hope to return to the D.C. area (specifically the Maryland side) before too long. D.C. will always be home sweet home for me.

[Redskins Diehard]

The Iraq war wasn't impulsive?

Iraq may be many things(and I don't want to turn this into an Iraq thread), but I do not think "impulsive" is one of them.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Iraq may be many things(and I don't want to turn this into an Iraq thread), but I do not think "impulsive" is one of them.

Impulsive is the last word I'd use to describe the Iraq War. That war was planned out in 1998

[DRSmith]

You guys want to see your future, take a look at Michigan

Higher taxes, higher energy costs and high unemployment

[dcnativenerd]

Alright, DRSmith, we get it. Canada has all the answers and we should be bowing at it's awesomeness.

[Destino]

Impulsive is the last word I'd use to describe the Iraq War. That war was planned out in 1998

I agree with this.

[TrumanB]

Wick Allison? Never heard of him.

[Smoot Point Really]

Obviously, an idiot...

[WVUforREDSKINS]

Obviously, an idiot...


I know several conservatives who are voting Obama because they feel the Republican party is no longer Republican. And feel Obama is the better overall choice when it comes to leadership and getting this country back on track and respected by the world.

Its hard to argue for the Republican party. They haven't gotten much right and have been worse than liberals with spending.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Obviously, an idiot...
Well, apparently there are quite a few idiots out there.

[Smoot Point Really]

Well, apparently there are quite a few idiots out there.

Liberals can have them... :)

[WVUforREDSKINS]

Liberals can have them... :)

That is funny.

Because collectively, liberals (actually I should say democrats) are much more intelligent than Republicans. There is a lot of evidence to back this up.

[TrumanB]

That is funny.

Because collectively, liberals (actually I should say democrats) are much more intelligent than Republicans. There is a lot of evidence to back this up.
:doh: Yeah and they're so smart that they've lost the last 2 presidential elections to an idiot (according to the libs).

[WVUforREDSKINS]

:doh: Yeah and they're so smart that they've lost the last 2 presidential elections to an idiot (according to the libs).


"Don't worry sir, all thinking people are on your side."

"That's what worries me, I need a majority."

[WVUforREDSKINS]

:doh: Yeah and they're so smart that they've lost the last 2 presidential elections to an idiot (according to the libs).

More people voted for Gore than Bush.

Don't forget that.

[TrumanB]

"Don't worry sir, all thinking people are on your side."

"That's what worries me, I need a majority."
The arrogance of the American liberal never ceases to amaze me. That's why you're going to lose this next election too.

[TrumanB]

More people voted for Gore than Bush.

Don't forget that.
Well, except there was that constitutional thingy that gets in the way of Gore actually winning.

[WVUforREDSKINS]

The arrogance of the American liberal never ceases to amaze me. That's why you're going to lose this next election too.


Expalin? How was that arrogant? Are you disputing that, overall, liberals are more intelligent than conservatives?

Or are you angry that liberals (of lately) tell it like it is?

[WVUforREDSKINS]

The arrogance of the American liberal never ceases to amaze me. That's why you're going to lose this next election too.


And im not a liberal. Im a moderate.

I actually subscribe to more conservative philosophies. But not even Republicans (in power) subscribe to them anymore.

[TrumanB]

Expalin? How was that arrogant? Are you disputing that, overall, liberals are more intelligent than conservatives?
Wow. :doh:

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Wow. :doh:
Brilliant! (I'm sure you remember that):mad:

[WVUforREDSKINS]

Wow. :doh:

What a great response.

But when you say that "liberals can have them" speaking about idiots, its only fair that I back up my belief. I gotta find that map that shows the collective IQ's for red states vs. blue states.

Both sides have their idiots. The left has their lazy, stupid, anti-gov hippies, and the right has its fair share of bigots, bible thumping (my way is the only way), believe everything I hear, morons.

[TrumanB]

Brilliant! (I'm sure you remember that):mad:
Refresh my memory. :silly:

The reason why libs don't understand why Obama is called an elitist is because they mistakenly equate that label with financial status. All they really need to do is look at WVU's last couple of posts for an explanation. And even then I still don't think they would get it.

[TrumanB]

But when you say that "liberals can have them" speaking about idiots ...
uhhhh, I never said that. :rolleyes:

[WVUforREDSKINS]

Well, apparently there are quite a few idiots out there.



Liberals can have them... :)

:)


Yup... you never said that. Unless you meant that we can have idiots because you have enough.

[TrumanB]

:)


Yup... you never said that. Unless you meant that we can have idiots because you have enough.
Uh, do you actually see my name on that post? :doh:

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

The reason why libs don't understand why Obama is called an elitist is because they mistakenly equate that label with financial status.


Liberals understand that being a elitist doesn't necessarily have anything to do with one's financial status.

We just don't happen to believe that Barack Obama is an elitist.

[WVUforREDSKINS]

Uh, do you actually see my name on that post? :doh:


LOL:doh:

My fault. I owned myself.:doh:

[TrumanB]

LOL:doh:

My fault. I owned myself.:doh:
Would you like to revise your statement on who's smarter, conservatives or liberals? :silly:

[WVUforREDSKINS]

Would you like to revise your statement on who's smarter, conservatives or liberals? :silly:


http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm

[dcnativenerd]

As far as I'm concerned, both sides have their share of brain dead sheep. That became even more evident as I watched both conventions.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

As far as I'm concerned, both sides have their share of brain dead sheep. That became even more evident as I watched both conventions.
And your side doesn't?

[WVUforREDSKINS]

And your side doesn't?


Libertarians?

[luckydevil]

Impulsive is the last word I'd use to describe the Iraq War. That war was planned out in 1998

That's a fair point.

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Libertarians?
Yeah. :)

[WVUforREDSKINS]

Yeah. :)


bunch of flip flopping idiots who can't make up their mind:doh:

:D

[dcnativenerd]

Not saying it doesn't, but the left claims to be SO enlightened and the right claims to be SO in touch with the working man. When are both sides going to wise up and realize that both sides have their advantages and drawbacks. Also, when are we going to realize that President Washington was correct when he warned us about forming political factions?

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

bunch of flip flopping idiots who can't make up their mind:doh:

:D
Every libertarian I know is basically a disgruntled conservative.

[dcnativenerd]

bunch of flip flopping idiots who can't make up their mind:doh:

:D
Says the "Centerist" :D
And I'm a libertarian
(the little l makes a big difference, m'friend :))

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Also, when are we going to realize that President Washington was correct when he warned us about forming political factions?
YOU think Washington was correct. Not me.:)

[Redskins Diehard]

Impulsive is the last word I'd use to describe the Iraq War. That war was planned out in 1998

I was assigned to 3ID in 1998, guess where I spent almost all of that year. Apparently someone was under the impression that Iraq had WMD. So sure of it that they shot my *** full of anthrax vaccine

[Oldskool]

Any "conservative" who votes for Obama won't due so because of the issues at all; he isn't fiscally, socially or conservative in foreign policy. He is the antithesis of anything conservative.

[luckydevil]

Any "conservative" who votes for Obama won't due so because of the issues at all; he isn't fiscally, socially or conservative in foreign policy. He is the antithesis of anything conservative.

Or that they want to see the republicans punished.

[Oldskool]

Or that they want to see the republicans punished.

One man masochistic vote down the drain then. :2cents:

[luckydevil]

One man masochistic vote down the drain then. :2cents:

Who should a small government conservative with realist foreign policy views vote for?

[MikeInJc aka M.I.A.]

That is funny.

Because collectively, liberals (actually I should say democrats) are much more intelligent than Republicans. There is a lot of evidence to back this up.

This statement reeks of ignorance. Please provide us with your "evidence" for all us uneducated rednecks, so we can see the socialist light :rolleyes:

[WVUforREDSKINS]

This statement reeks of ignorance. Please provide us with your "evidence" for all us uneducated rednecks, so we can see the socialist light :rolleyes:


You're right it is arrogant.


Here.

http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

You're right it is arrogant.


Here.

http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm

It's funny that the top four "red" states are all very strong possibilities to turn "blue" this year.

That would make the entire first-half blue.

Brilliant!

Edit: Make that the top-FIVE. I forgot Ohio.

ANd for those who don't want to click the link:

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z307/Colin1983/Politics/IQRedvsBlue.jpg

[Burgold]

This thread is so disappointing. Sigh.

A chance to really discuss where the Republican party is heading and where it went right and wrong degenerated into a pissing contest.

[dcnativenerd]

The Republicans went downhill the moment they let the neo-cons take control of the party. Their agenda is neither conservative or prudent, but it reeks of quasi-fascism and paranoia. The Republicans were once a party that defended civil rights and believed in fiscal conservative ideals. That's why the party was created in the first place. Now...it's a completely different party that would have Lincoln rolling in their graves.

[Burgold]

The Republicans went downhill the moment they let the neo-cons take control of the party. Their agenda is neither conservative or prudent, but it reeks of quasi-fascism and paranoia. The Republicans were once a party that defended civil rights and believed in fiscal conservative ideals. That's why the party was created in the first place. Now...it's a completely different party that would have Lincoln rolling in their graves.

I think post the 1950's the Democrats became the party of Civil Rights and the Republicans slowly became the party that defends the big guy... the corporation, the billionaire, the government institution itself. The most common refrain from Republicans over the last eight years was "How dare you challenge the government or what it wants to do! That's anti-American." Modern Republicanism, I think, is the party of the Establishment for the establishment.

To be somewhat fair, I think the modern Democratic movement (say the last twenty years) has lacked an identity altogether. I certainly don't think that the Democratic Institution is the champion of the little guy and civil rights... although they like to pretend they are. They are or were better at that, but I think they're somewhat rudderless.

[dcnativenerd]

The modern Democrat, from what I've noticed, doesn't even know where he or she stands on the issues. A party of flakes, almost (and this no offense to to those who REALLY believe in the Democratic platform). They've also become a party of "excuses". If something rotten happens to you, it's not your fault. The "man" *coughrepublicanscough* are to blame somehow for your plight. I agree with you, Burgold. I don't buy the Democrats as the "Knights in Shining Armor" bit.

Once again, this doesn't apply to ALL Democrats, just like my prior statement doesn't apply to all Republicans. Both parties have their share of wisdom to contribute to the country; but at the same time, both parties have their fair share of drawbacks and I believe both parties are to blame for the current mess this Nation finds itself in now.

[Mister Happy]

I've heard a number of fiscal conservatives echo much of the viewpoints of this article. They feel that while neither candidate is a real fiscal conservative, oddly enough, it is Obama that has a greater chance of curbing spending and balancing the budget than McCain. The reason? He's at least proposing some tax increases to pay for the massive debt brought about by the last 7 years of the Bush administration.

We're never going to balance the budget by raising taxes alone. If we give the government more money, they will simply spend more money.

The only lasting way to eliminate the deficit is spending cuts.

It may surprise you to learn that McCain proposes this as part of his plan to balance the budget:

"After the completion of a comprehensive review of all programs, projects and activities of the federal government, we will propose a plan to modernize, streamline, consolidate, reprioritize and, where needed, terminate individual programs."

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM103_jobsforamericashshs.html

Obama currently has no plan to balance the budget. He does have tax increases, but their proceeds are already designated towards some of his other new proposals.

So McCain at least promises to balance the budget. Will he actually do it?

I don't think so.

Then again, I'm a Riggle supporter. He's real. I can relate to him.