Skip to comments.The liberal case against Obama
Posted on 02/04/2012 9:42:06 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
ALL ACROSS America, liberals have been engaged in a debate over the enthusiasm with which to support President Obamas reelection. One side argues that while Obama might not have been the second coming of FDR, he was dealt an impossible hand; Republicans obstructed everything Obama tried, which forced him to attempt to compromise. The other side faults Obama for often behaving like a Republican lite rather than fighting for the things for which liberals and Democrats have stood. Complaints notwithstanding, these folks will likely pull the lever for him come November, but they are less excited about doing so than they were four years ago, which may very well affect his prospects.
If this sounds vaguely familiar, it may be because there was a similar argument in 1980 over Jimmy Carter. Carter too was accused by liberal stalwarts of campaigning to promote a liberal agenda in 1976 only to abandon it while governing and of gutlessly buckling to the right, not only because he lacked political skill but also because he lacked political will. Many liberals felt betrayed then as they do today. But there is one major difference between 1980 and 2012. While Obama will coast to the nomination despite the liberal griping, Carter found himself challenged by the left of his own party in the candidacy of Senator Edward Kennedy.
Kennedy aggressively made a case against Carter that could easily be made against Obama as well: That he is insufficiently devoted to the traditional values of the Democratic Party to deserve liberal support. Which raises the question: Is there a legitimate reason for liberals not to vote for Obama?
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
obama failed because he’s incompetent. A Community Organizer has no skills to be POTUS. What were people who voted for him thinking?
The article is an amazing piece of garbage suggesting that the most liberal president ever to occupy the White House is not liberal enough. The writer sounds psychotic.
My sentiments exactly. Liberals are absolutely and incorrigibly brain-dead. They cannot be helped. They avoid truth and reason as one would a colony of lepers.
I must disagree. In order for one to avoid truth and reason, one must first be able to recognize it when presented with it.
Oh, I dunno, Sudden Brain-Death Reversal Syndrome?
I can hear the radical liberals democrats discussing the issue right now. He ain’t no Karl Marx but he’s the nearest that we have running. The election of obama in 2008 was the beginning of the end for the socialist democrat party. The elections in 2012 will be the political end to this anti american regime.
Incompetent hard line socialist with an ego problem,and he sucks at telling the truth.
Gabler is just miffed because his Shirley Temple collection is back ordered.
Is Gabler still around? Gee, what a shame. And a waste of oxygen.
Incompetence is number 1. An incompetent Marxist (redundant) more likely.
The Rats had 2 years to transform America into a Marxst state. They waited until the republicans took congress so they can run on republican obstructionism.
And I disagree with your disagreement. Consciousness is a choice. If you choose to practice it, it becomes a habit; if you choose self-imposed ignorance, it, too, becomes a habit. The truth is out there for all those who choose to recognize it and accept it. Willful blindness is the root of all evil.
he had two years to do whatever he wanted. nothing should have been able to stop him. the only reason we’re cursed with his health care is because of backroom deals. Moron...nothing more
The real home for liberals in 2012 is to vote for Romney. There is no difference whatsoever between Romney’s views and the views of liberals circa 1776-1998. The “liberals” who have run for president over the past 14 years are not really liberals. They are leftists. We are fortunate that only one of the 3 has won an election. Hopefully we will never again have to see such a person in the White House.
I hope Romney doesn’t win the nomination. Because if he does, the choice in November will be between a liberal and a leftist. Worse and Worser.
huckfillary:”They avoid truth and reason as one would a colony of lepers.”
Bloody Sam Roberts:”I must disagree. In order for one to avoid truth and reason, one must first be able to recognize it when presented with it.”
There would appear to be a flaw of some sort with the reasoning of Bloody Sam though I can’t quite put it into words. It seems obvious that liberals are unable to recognize truth and reason henceforth they cannot deliberately avoid it yet they DO avoid it like the plague, this is observable. I no longer waste my time trying to talk to liberals but when I was young and foolish enough to do so I observed that they are able to rant for long periods while making absolutely no sense at any point. Somehow they manage to NEVER choose a reasonable position. They are like blind squirrels who NEVER find a nut, even by accident. How do they manage it? Could it be that they are all possessed by demons of illogic? If a liberal’s clock stops is it NOT right twice a day? Maybe they are so consistently wrong that on the extremely rare occasions when they get something right I just don’t see it? Is it like watching golfers and hoping to someday see a hole in one?
I should include some sort of funny graphic or maybe a sarcasm tag in future.
Couldn’t you see my tongue stuck in my cheek?
Ummm....well...not as such.
In my defense, I will say that my full attention wasn't on FR. I've been posting while listening to some juicy early 70s hits via Winamp. A little wine, a little dancing....mea culpa.