Obama is the Most Liberal of All
Based on his 2007 voting record, Barack Obama was the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate. A look at the actual votes this rating was based on doesn't reveal any frighteningly left-wing issues being deliberated (this is, after all, the U.S. Senate), but it's a bit disturbing nevertheless.
The votes show Obama consistently voting for more government - more spending, more regulation, more interference in local and routing matters in our lives. His votes on immigration are particularly alarming, as he consistently takes the side of amnesty for illegals and more open borders generally without regard to the quality of immigrants we allow in. On foreign policy most of the votes were geared towards the Iraq war, and he missed an awful lot of these votes anyway, so I can't fault him here. It would be interesting to see how he votes on interventionist policies outside of Iraq.
One major black mark against the Bush legacy will be the growth of government under his watch. Our budget has become bloated, and he has enlarged the reach of the federal government deep into our lives - No Child Left Behind being one of the most egregious examples, as this pointless policy directly affects every family in America , and its insidious effects will be with us for years to come. What we don't need right now is a president who doesn't think government does enough. While at one time the federal government was somewhat competent, those days are long gone. Increased regulations and more government programs will not lead to improvements in our lives, but will lead to even more government. When regulations and laws fail to accomplish their goals, the answer is always "we need even more." What we need is a president who will begin to reverse this tide - who will have the courage to step back and let the states take care of matters in their own states - let them compete for citizens by governing their jurisdictions wisely and economically. Barack Obama certainly is not that man - not sure who is.
Update: Mickey Kaus lays into Obama's relentless pandering. Obama will be a disaster (i.e., worse than Bush).
The votes show Obama consistently voting for more government - more spending, more regulation, more interference in local and routing matters in our lives. His votes on immigration are particularly alarming, as he consistently takes the side of amnesty for illegals and more open borders generally without regard to the quality of immigrants we allow in. On foreign policy most of the votes were geared towards the Iraq war, and he missed an awful lot of these votes anyway, so I can't fault him here. It would be interesting to see how he votes on interventionist policies outside of Iraq.
One major black mark against the Bush legacy will be the growth of government under his watch. Our budget has become bloated, and he has enlarged the reach of the federal government deep into our lives - No Child Left Behind being one of the most egregious examples, as this pointless policy directly affects every family in America , and its insidious effects will be with us for years to come. What we don't need right now is a president who doesn't think government does enough. While at one time the federal government was somewhat competent, those days are long gone. Increased regulations and more government programs will not lead to improvements in our lives, but will lead to even more government. When regulations and laws fail to accomplish their goals, the answer is always "we need even more." What we need is a president who will begin to reverse this tide - who will have the courage to step back and let the states take care of matters in their own states - let them compete for citizens by governing their jurisdictions wisely and economically. Barack Obama certainly is not that man - not sure who is.
Update: Mickey Kaus lays into Obama's relentless pandering. Obama will be a disaster (i.e., worse than Bush).
posted by ziel | 1/31/2008 10:52:00 PM
2 Comments:
So the primary season comes down to this - Obama, who is perhaps deliberately vague about what he hopes to do as president because he's actually a closet Marxist; Hillary, who I suspect will turn the country into a dictatorship of angry, man-hating menopausal women; McCain, the madman who wants to ratchet up to another level Bush's "invade-the-world, invite-the-world policy"; or the cocky Mormon (nothing more need be said about him...)
Perhaps Miles is right, that we should get behind Romney as the least of all evils (and he sure must be certain of that, since he's made that argument at every single conservative site on the internet, I think). But personally, I'm tired of playing Kiss Your Least Ugly Cousin At The Family Reunion every four years.
Obama's not vague- I know what he's going to do: he's going to give me "hope". He is so well spoken, but we don't need hope. We need a 20" wall around the US to keep the terrorists out, smaller gov- as Ziel pointed out, and we need to stay out of soooo many foreign affairs. Does anyone know where Pat Buchanan is?
It's time to focus on America.
Post a Comment
<< Home