Right. He has some good votes, and some bad ones. More of the former, though in the further past Therefore I will likely vote for him, as I just said.
But there’s no sign it’s a passionate issue for McHeyitsmyturn, or that he will be a passionate advocate or a proactive moving force, or that he can even articulate it, unscripted.
Did you see the interchange I alluded to? Revealing.
I would bet you money that, WHEN (no point saying “if”) McIbashmyallies is asked confrontive questions on abortion in the debates, his answer will be inarticulate, shallow, apologetic, defensive, and unpersuasive. He’ll sound as if he had no idea anyone would bring up the issue, so he’s only been fed a nothing-answer to spout. Bookmark this and tell me if I turn out to be wrong which I’d be TICKLED to be!
Can you say you’re sure he’d pick a good Supreme Court justice, if it meant his “good friends” at the NYT, on the left side of the aisle, and in the MSM, roasting him alive and forcing him actively to defend and prosecute the choice?
I think there are only two possible answers to that question: “Yes,” and an honest answer.
But HSAT, I am sure what Obama would pick. And even a 1% chance of a good choice is better than a 0% chance.
Hence the reluctant vote for McIdeservethis.
Thoughtful, well-articulated post, Dan. I actually would bet he'll show some backbone when those questions are asked. If I'm wrong, FReepmail me your address and I'll send you Chicago's Greatest Hits as payment for losing the bet.