Sign In

Post #387804

Author
Darth Chaltab
Parent topic
Politics
Date created
6-Dec-2009, 6:58 PM

Bush was... more focused on agenda than ideology. He didn't let conservative economic principles get in the way when he needed something done, yet at the same time took a decidedly right-wing stance on social issues, even when that stance resulted in undue power given to the government.

As for Obama's associates, yes, many of them are corrupt nutcases. The problem I have with the paranoia of Beck and Hannity is that they're overplaying these connections and creating an almost hysterical reaction from some of their viewers. John F. Kennedy had mob connections, but that doesn't mean Kennedy was part of the mafia.

And the Constitution is well-designed enough that we have checks and balances. If Obama's crazy associates gain undue influence on him, it means nothing if he can't get these hypothetical bills through congress (not bloody likely given the struggle with the health-care bill); and if they managed to do so, the courts can still rule them unconstitutional.

The talk-radio hosts are essentially doing the same think that the left-wing bloggers did during the Bush years--playing up the fears of audiences. Except now it's Death Panels and the Fairness Doctrine instead of Racial Profiling and War For Oil.

To the top