Much pressure from the Right, insisting that Obama, unlike GWB with his massive wins, has no mandate for any kind of leftwards move on policy. That he MUST not try to implement any "liberal" policies.
A curious view. The logic seems to be that, faced with an issue -- global warming, health, Iraq, education, the economy - and a decision to be made, Obama should not seek the correct decision, but one that the pundits of the Right would approve. So Obama should consciously make decisions knowing they will not work, in order to avoid any suggestion that he is "liberal".
This is an odd view of public policy and indeed reality. Fortunately Obama seems to be a man who considers evidence and then reaches a decision based on that evidence, rather than being an ideologue who will proceed to create his own reality after he makes a decision.
There are, probably, cases where there is genuine debate between left and right over the precise emphasis that should be placed on an approach. The role of nuclear power is one area, the precise mix of public and private resources needed in health care is another. But this kind of nuance isn't what is being suggested. Rather it is that, for example, Obama shouldn't proceed with encouraging the development of renewable energy because this is a "liberal" policy, or that he shouldn't try to help poor people get access to health services.
If an Obama presidency is going to mean anything it should mean a return to reality based decision making, not some kind of spurious process by which ideological and political decisions are made in the face of evidence. We have had eight years to see how that process turns out.
Too much reality on the Watermelon Blog?
Follow David Horton on Twitter: www.twitter.com/watermelon_man
Watching old Errol Flynn movies can be very inspirational.
Rush Limbo as Guy of Gisbourne?
is to start appointing Supreme Court judges, assuming some
of the justices who have been holding on by the skin of their
teeth will now be ready for 'glorious' retirement. Or not.
As you may remember, the Constitution does not actually
limit the number of Justices to nine, a fact which Justice
Scalia & his fellow 'originalists' are no doubt painfully aware.
Otherwise, what part of majority control of both houses of Congress
does the GOP not understand? One might fully expect them to maintain
a silly fantasy that they are 'still in control', but that doesn't mean anyone
needs to pay over-much attention to them.
The President is still president though only 29 percent approve, and Congress
is still congress with only 13 percent, BUT soon to have Demo majorities AND
a Demo chief executive. This is going to be quite different, for at least two years.
Call it 'Political Capital' if you like. This may hurt a bit...
If Obama does something that Americans like, and it is liberal, America might decide they like Liberalism, and all that hard work they've done to make people afraid of it would wear off.
Without the fear, they wouldn't be excused to hate. Without the hate... They'd have to find a whole new advertising campaign.
Media Matters: All over but the lying
http://mediamatters.org/items/200811070012?f=h_top