A Word From The Token Liberal
To my conservative/libertarian friends: Chill the fuck out. It’s a bad day for you — and believe me, after 2000, 2002, and 2004, I know exactly how you feel — but the world doesn’t end because of this election. Remember how you told us, upon the expiration of the AWB, that there wouldn’t be blood in the streets because of that? And remember how you were right? Well, I can tell you: You’re going to get to keep your guns. You’re probably not even going to see a renewal of the AWB — you’ve got enough Senators for a filibuster, and you’ve got Feingold. So you’re going to be fine.
Yes, you’re going to get some liberal social policies that you don’t approve of. Them’s the breaks. But I expect more of a return to the “horror” of the Clinton years than anything like the Carter years. And I expect Obama will waste no time moving to the center and disappointing his leftier base on some issues. So even that won’t be as bad as you might think.
Where to go from here? Use this as an opportunity to do what my party, the Democrats, wasted too much time not doing — you could argue from about 1994 to 2005 — cleaning up your own house. Get rid of the dead weight. Your side should be every bit as embarrassed by the Ted Stephenses as mine should be by the Robert Byrds. And while you’re at it, start lobbying the other party on the issues you care about — if guns are your thing (as they are for so many here), then angle for more Feingold Democrats.
And maybe — just maybe — we can actually see about finding some common ground. And maybe I’m a Chinese jet pilot.*
Anyway, it’s not the end of the world, and this too shall pass. You’ll get over it. And if you wait long enough, the Democrats will screw themselves, as parties in power always do, and it will once again be your turn to fuck everything up royally.
* Bonus points for getting the reference without the benefit of Google.
“Token Liberal”?
but…you’ve William!
Or do you not claim him either?
As for Obama, I’m considering giving him a break, for awhile.
But then, why?
Longest campaign ever. After hearing Obama speak at the 2004 convention, I remember telling people that he would be President one day. I just would have never believed it would be in 2008, the next election. From that speech in 2004, it was apparent that he had the charisma.
As for what you said, they are already gearing up to reinstitute the Fairness Doctrine. Soon the secret ballot will be done away with as far as union thugs are concerned. The Federal Judiciary is about to be packed with the same type of judges that dissented in the last major case involving gun rights and the same ones that were in the majority in the Kelo case. Yeah, nothing to worry about. It is what it is though. Maybe the country will like Carter this time around. Guess we’ll see.
[…] Since everybody is on the edge of their seats, hitting refresh every ten seconds, I figured I’d go ahead and make a statement. Actually, I’m just going to re-post the comment I left on Tgirsch’s post. […]
Why would they reinstate the Fairness Doctrine now? For the first time since it went away, the Democrats benefited from its absence. And I wouldn’t worry too much about the courts — the big cases will make the Supreme Court, and barring an unexpected death, that court’s makeup is unlikely to change — the judges most likely to retire or die are from the court’s liberal wing, so you’ll just be preserving the status quo. Your only potential problem is Scalia (72, I think), and he’s not going anywhere.
(Digression: I have written many times, and I still fell this way, that I’d really like to see a 2/3 confirmation requirement for all federal judges — a party with a bare temporary majority ought not to be able to pack the courts. And most judges are confirmed unanimously or near-unanimously anyway, so all it would do is eliminate the really controversial picks.)