Posted on 11/07/2008 8:29:20 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Tuesday, Nov. 4, 2008, is a date that will live in fame (the opposite of infamy) forever. If the election of our first African-American president didn’t stir you, if it didn’t leave you teary-eyed and proud of your country, there’s something wrong with you.
But will the election also mark a turning point in the actual substance of policy? Can Barack Obama really usher in a new era of progressive policies? Yes, he can.
Right now, many commentators are urging Mr. Obama to think small. Some make the case on political grounds: America, they say, is still a conservative country, and voters will punish Democrats if they move to the left. Others say that the financial and economic crisis leaves no room for action on, say, health care reform.
Let’s hope that Mr. Obama has the good sense to ignore this advice.
About the political argument: Anyone who doubts that we’ve had a major political realignment should look at what’s happened to Congress. After the 2004 election, there were many declarations that we’d entered a long-term, perhaps permanent era of Republican dominance. Since then, Democrats have won back-to-back victories, picking up at least 12 Senate seats and more than 50 House seats. They now have bigger majorities in both houses than the G.O.P. ever achieved in its 12-year reign.
Bear in mind, also, that this year’s presidential election was a clear referendum on political philosophies — and the progressive philosophy won.
This year, however, Mr. Obama ran on a platform of guaranteed health care and tax breaks for the middle class, paid for with higher taxes on the affluent. John McCain denounced his opponent as a socialist and a “redistributor,” but America voted for him anyway. That’s a real mandate.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
btt
Actually I read an article a couple of months back that was explaining what percentage of black blood a person had to have to be considered "Black" in some parts of Africa. It had to do with government handouts to its citizens.
I actually can't remember if it was posted here on FR or not. I guess I could look it up and get back to you when I have a few free moments.
Hi basil! Havent’ been on FR in a while but I need this forum more than ever. Freepmail coming your way.
Good to see you back!
Possibly true if the press had done its job and presented Obama as the full-blown progressive that he is. Furthermore, the redistribution issue wasn't on the radar until Obama happened to bump into Joe the Plumber, and that was fairly late in the campaign. Do "clear referendums" on major points of political philosophy come about this way? And how about the fact that our candidate only weakly upheld his side of the argument? The issue was weakly raised and weakly engaged, and only as a matter of chance fairly late in the game, yet this is a clear referendum?
I saw a good cartoon recently. First picture showed a caricature of George Bush with the number 51% and the words “Nation divided”. The next one had a caricature of hussein with the number 52% and the words “Nation United”.
That pretty much sums up the communists mentality of “By any means necessary.”
JoMa
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.