I think there's a very big difference between a party holding the White House while having majorities in Congress and the kind of illegal (under the Hatch Act) partisanship that's been seen in the operation of Federal agencies over the past 8 years (the US attorneys case being the most egregious).
McCain's backbone? Oh, like how he was against the Military Commission Act before he voted for it? Or was for campaign finance reform, before he was against it (Obama did the same in fairness, but at least he wasn't breaking a law that was named after him). Or was against "agents of intolerance" before he picked a creationist as his veep? McCain's voting record shows he's conformed at least as much to his party line as Obama has. The man is not a maverick. Please can we get past that talking point.
Obama certainly isn't perfect either. The NAFTA bashing is silly happy talk. Protectionism isn't going to fly. Pandering to unions is no better than pandering to big business in the greater scheme of things. Equally, Obama voted for the most recent and very bad FISA law.
Still - the policies he announced in his acceptance speech sounded sensible - investing to create hi-tech jobs, rather than trying to protect industrial jobs that are screwed anyway. Giving tax incentives to companies to employ Americans rather than penalising them. Throwing clean coal and nuclear into his energy independence plan (which must have caused some outrage among the tree-huggers).
I get the feeling - and it's just a feeling - that Obama isn't the ideologue you seem to think he is. And that would be a good thing. America needs competent, pragmatic leadership now and I don't think McCain is capable of providing that.
SCOTUS - liberals in the majority? Are you nuts? Kennedy is hardly a dyed-in-the-wool liberal. He only looks lefty when set beside the likes of Scalia and Thomas. At the moment the court is balanced, I'd say, and that's a good thing. Another conservative justice would most likely replace Stevens (who is a liberal) and tip the court in favour of Roberts and co. Given their dissents on Hamdan and the other Guantanamo cases, I think that would be a very bad thing.
no subject
McCain's backbone? Oh, like how he was against the Military Commission Act before he voted for it? Or was for campaign finance reform, before he was against it (Obama did the same in fairness, but at least he wasn't breaking a law that was named after him). Or was against "agents of intolerance" before he picked a creationist as his veep? McCain's voting record shows he's conformed at least as much to his party line as Obama has.
The man is not a maverick. Please can we get past that talking point.
Obama certainly isn't perfect either. The NAFTA bashing is silly happy talk. Protectionism isn't going to fly. Pandering to unions is no better than pandering to big business in the greater scheme of things. Equally, Obama voted for the most recent and very bad FISA law.
Still - the policies he announced in his acceptance speech sounded sensible - investing to create hi-tech jobs, rather than trying to protect industrial jobs that are screwed anyway. Giving tax incentives to companies to employ Americans rather than penalising them. Throwing clean coal and nuclear into his energy independence plan (which must have caused some outrage among the tree-huggers).
I get the feeling - and it's just a feeling - that Obama isn't the ideologue you seem to think he is. And that would be a good thing. America needs competent, pragmatic leadership now and I don't think McCain is capable of providing that.
SCOTUS - liberals in the majority? Are you nuts? Kennedy is hardly a dyed-in-the-wool liberal. He only looks lefty when set beside the likes of Scalia and Thomas. At the moment the court is balanced, I'd say, and that's a good thing. Another conservative justice would most likely replace Stevens (who is a liberal) and tip the court in favour of Roberts and co. Given their dissents on Hamdan and the other Guantanamo cases, I think that would be a very bad thing.
P.