Some Republicans Like Obama, the Most Liberal Empty Suit in the Senate

17 Comments to “Some Republicans Like Obama, the Most Liberal Empty Suit in the Senate”

1. Brandon Henak Says:
   February 5th, 2008 at 5:33 pm

   To: Liberals who Support Obama

   Please respond to this post with examples of Obama’s accomplishments and how he supposedly reaches across the aisle to “rise above party politics”.

2. Dan Says:
   February 5th, 2008 at 5:35 pm

   I also find it comical that the man who claims to be a uniter was the quickest to deny he praised Reagan.

   He wants to “bring people together,” but don’t ever accuse him of praising a Republican. Right Barack.

3. Justin Phillips Says:
   February 5th, 2008 at 7:33 pm

   John McCain isnt a uniter he’ is traitor

4. william Says:
   February 6th, 2008 at 8:49 am

   Brandon,
   i just want to give a personal story that after you read you can delete but might shed light on your confusion, or make you more confused.
   for my dad of 65 who lived 90% of his life in the SF BAY AREA of California and NEVER VOTED FOR A DEMOCRAT HIS WHOLE LIFE, he voted for obama in the Illinois primary, and is pretty sure he will in the general election, although obviously that vote hasn’t been cast yet. in my confused state i tried to find out why. the answer is that he’s sick of what the republican party has done to america. his one and only issue is getting rid of taxes entirely and you could tell him how bad obama is on that issue and his response would be, “i don’t care. the republican party has spent so much time on gays and abortion and now the war, i don’t see how they are accomplishing anything. They are pandering to a base i thought i was apart of but i guess i’m not anymore. i might disagree with a lot of obama’s policies but i see in him change and unification that i care more about right now than any policy” (paraphrased.)

   your post is really at him in your point that obama isn’t a uniter, but what you don’t see is that for him and so many republicans and independants like him, when obama talks they feel he is honest and trustworthy when hilary and republicans talk, they are being tricked and lied to. no one knows whose going to win in November but from my limited personal experience, if the republicans want to win, they are going to need to have hilary as the nominee, cause he’ll never vote for her, and that kind of blind unification of the republican party is what it needs right now.

5. Jake Creecy Says:
   February 6th, 2008 at 12:49 pm

   Justin,

   Traitor is a strong word and I would caution its usage, especially for a hero like McCain.

   Ehren Watada is a traitor, not John McCain.

6. 3rd Way Says:
   February 6th, 2008 at 2:23 pm

   In no way do I support McCain, but I will stand up for him when someone calls him a traitor. He is doing what he thinks is best for this country and the majority of Republican voters are standing behind him. Whether you like it or not his policy positions connect with the current mainstream Republican voter. Calling the guy a traitor, just reveals yourself as a member of the fringe. It is not fair to call a man that has sacrificed for this country a traitor.

   Obama is able to reach across the aisle. He is certainly liberal, but he can see the issues that have a common ground and reach out to the middle to get them accomplished. Contrary to the GOP talking points he does have a history of doing this.

   He sponsored with Kit Bond (R-MO) an amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization Act adding safeguards for personality disorder military discharges, and calling for a review by the Government Accounting Office following reports that the procedure had been used inappropriately to reduce government costs. He sponsored the “Iran Sanctions Enabling Act” supporting divestment of state pension funds from Iran’s oil and gas industry, and joined Chuck Hagel in introducing legislation to reduce risks of nuclear terrorism. A provision from the Obama-Hagel bill was passed by Congress in December 2007 as an amendment to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.

   Stating that he is not a uniter is just the latest of the unfounded attacks on Obama. It is not the first and it certainly won’t be the last.

7. John Says:
   February 6th, 2008 at 2:32 pm

   Justin Phillips is a traitor. Did you spit on McCain when he returned from Vietnam?

8. Brandon Henak Says:
   February 6th, 2008 at 2:36 pm

   William-

   I am disappointed that people are falling for Obama’s rhetoric. As the rating and his voting record shows, he is the most liberal sentor out there, not some great uniter.

   “when obama talks they feel he is honest and trustworthy”

   This is precisely what I am talking about, feelings don’t run countries, policies and actions do. Obama has not proved himself on either front.

9. James King Says:
   February 6th, 2008 at 5:53 pm

   Jake,

   Good point. I would classify him as a switch-hitter. You never know which way he’s going to go. I’m not sure, but I think Newt Gingrich has commented on “The McCain Faction,” with regard to how he might vote. Republicans never really knew.

   Traitor is a strong word, insofar as not constraining the definition to the Republican Party, as opposed to leaving open the interpretation to assume “traitor (to the country).” I may have used the term with reference to McCain, but always with specific regard to the Republican Party.

10. richard martin Says:
    February 6th, 2008 at 6:13 pm

    Brandon. What is wrong with you? Reagan and Bush got overwhelming support fro Republicans because of how they feel. Bush is the biggest idiot to ever enter the White House. He got elected twice because he is one of “those guys” you have a beer with. Obama is getting such huge support from Independents because they like what he plans on doing for the country. If you don’t like what the majority of the country may choose, go live somewhere else.

11. william Says:
    February 6th, 2008 at 7:38 pm

    brandon,
    i agree policies and actions run contires. BUT i think a large part of what wins elections are feelings. like 60% how you feel about the candidate 40% how well you know their policies and if you agree with them.

    but the reason i posted originally was because i thought you were wanting to make the point that republicans shouldn’t be fooled or betray either 1. conservatism, 2. their party, or 3. themselves, or any combo of those points. and my point was to give a personal reflection simply to show you that your strategy in keeping the party united might need some retooling. ppl like my dad feel betrayed by the republican party and used and spit upon and taken for granted and people are not simply logical rational beings who will take that and go where the policy lies. republicans haven’t given my dad a reason to vote for their nominee or really even asked for it, they keep expecting ppl to just get over it and fall in line to beat the LIBERALS. but in this election because of the past 6ish years of republican politics that’s not good enough and obama has struck a message that he agrees with, more than a feeling a message that he believes in (and doesn’t see on the republican side) and obama has done a good job going after his vote and voters like him, so he got it.

    i’m a democrat speaking second hand for a lifelong republican so i’m not trying to say he should be voting for obama, i know he shouldn’t be. my purpose is for anyone who reads this to do some thinking in how to get that vote back cause the current strategy isn’t working, and it’s no fun when my dad’s voting for who i’m voting for. ALTHOUGH maybe my experience is just mine and this can be ignored altogether, but what if it’s not.

    also if hilary gets the nomination this is moot cause anyone that ever considered themselves slightly republican or independent will vote mccain no matter what policy they have to swallow. i know that for sure cause i’m thinking i might swallow my disgust for his 100 year war to vote for him, and remember i’m a Democrat

    if none of that made sense, sorry and i’ll just stop while i’m behind.

12. Matt Says:
    February 7th, 2008 at 4:53 am

    Obama has significant experience uniting Republicans and Democrats to pass meaningful legislation.

    * Enlisted the support of law enforcement officials to draft legislation requiring the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.

    * He passed a law to monitor racial profiling by requiring police to record the race of drivers they stopped. The law was at first very controversial, but due to Obama’s skills as a negotiator and bipartisanships, he won the support of the police. During his 2004 general election campaign for U.S. Senate, he won the endorsement of the Illinois Fraternal Order of Police, whose president credited Obama for his active engagement with police organizations in enacting death penalty reforms.

    * Lugar-Obama Act to decrease nuclear and conventional weapons proliferation around the world.

    * Coburn-Obama Transparency Act transparency in federal spending, found at httP://www.usaspending.gov

    For a better review of his work, go to:

    http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/01/14/obamas_strong_record_of_accomp.php

13. Matt Says:
    February 7th, 2008 at 4:55 am

    Obama Passed Law Creating $100 Million Earned Income Tax Credit, Formed A Political Alliance Of Republicans And Democrats To Pass The EITC. Obama sponsored and passed a bill that amended the Illinois Income Tax Act to create the earned income tax credit. The bill provided that each individual taxpayer is entitled to a credit against the tax imposed by the Act in an amount equal to 5% of the federal earned income tax credit allowed. The credit applied to taxable years beginning on or after January 1, 2000 and ending on or before December 31, 2002. The credit may not reduce the taxpayer’s liability to less than zero. The original legislation repealed the credit on June 1, 2003. Obama later passed legislation eliminating the sunset. The Chicago Tribune reported that the EITC was a bipartisan effort. “An unlikely political alliance has developed behind proposals to adjust the tax burden for working poor families. It includes politicians as far apart on the political map as Republicans Bill Black of Danville and Carole Pankau of Roselle and Democrats Currie and Coy Pugh of Chicago. ‘The main political dynamic is simply that it costs money, and it’s hard to mobilize support for programs that cost money but benefit low-income folks,’ said Sen. Barack Obama (D-Chicago), lead sponsor of a bill that would make Illinois the 11th state to adopt an earned income-tax credit.” [91st GA, HB 3939; 4/14/00, 3R P; 59-0-0; P.A. 91-0700, 5/11/00; Chicago Tribune, 4/10/99]

14. Matt Says:
    February 7th, 2008 at 4:57 am

    Obama Was A Key Player In Assembling And Passing The 2007 Ethics Reform Law, Which Curbed The Influence Of Lobbyists And Was Described As The “Most Sweeping Since Watergate.” In the first week of the 110th Congress, Obama joined with Senator Feingold to introduce a “Gold Standard” ethics package. Many of the Obama/Feingold bill’s most important provisions were included in the final ethics reform package passed by the Senate in late January: a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists including those paid by the firms that employ lobbyists; an end to subsidized travel on corporate jets; full disclosure of who’s sponsoring earmarks and for what purpose; additional restrictions to close the revolving door between public service and lobbying to ensure that public service isn’t all about lining up a high-paying lobbying job; and requiring lobbyists to disclose the contributions that they “bundle” - that is, collect or arrange - for members of Congress, candidates, and party committees. The Washington Post wrote in an editorial that “…Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package.” In September 2007, the AP reported, “President Bush signed a bill Friday that will require lawmakers to disclose more about their efforts to fund pet projects and raise money from lobbyists, a measure that backers call the biggest ethics reform in decades…Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. who had pushed for the bundling provisions and was one of four lawmakers who participated in a Democratic conference call to reporters said the measure marks “the most sweeping ethics reform since Watergate.” [S. 230, 110th Congress; S.1, Became Public Law 109-110-81, 9/14/07; AP, 9/15/07; Washington Post, Editorial, 1/21/07]

15. Matt Says:
    February 7th, 2008 at 4:58 am

    Obama Passed A Bill Creating A “Google-like” Database For The Public To Search Details About Federal Funding Awards. In 2006, Obama was an original cosponsor of a bill to create a “Google-like” database of information on federal spending. The bill requires the OMB by January 1, 2008, to make available to the public a searchable, free website that includes the (1) amount; (2) transaction type; (3) funding agency; (4) North American Industry Classification System code or Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number; (5) program source; (6) an award title descriptive of the purpose of each funding action; (7) the name and location of the recipient and the primary location of performance; and (8) a unique identifier of the recipient and any parent entity. The site must allow users to conduct separate searches that distinguish between awards that are grants, sub-grants, loans, cooperative agreements, and other forms of financial assistance and awards that are contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, task orders, and delivery orders. [S. 2590, Passed by Unanimous Consent, 9/7/06; Became PL 109-282, 9/26/06] SEE THE DATABASE HERE

16. Kat, Brandon's cousin Says:
    February 7th, 2008 at 1:28 pm

    Richard, that last line was uncalled for. This is a neocon blog…did you honestly expect to find love for Obama here?

    Also, to the person calling John McCain a “traitor”, grow up and wise up. Traitor has a very specific meaning, and applies to none of the presidential candidates of either party. It is not a word to be bandied about lightly, especially in reference to a man who spent his life serving his country as a soldier and a senator. Just because you disagree with him doesn’t make him a traitor.

    Now, as for you, Brandon, I understand that it’s frustrating to you that none of the Republican candidates are any good at all, even from a neocon standpoint. I also understand that that fact makes it even more frustrating to see Democrats actually happy and excited about their candidates. But as 3rd Way pointed out above, Obama does indeed have a record of reaching across the aisle to pass legislation. Why? Because at heart, he is more of a pragmatist than a liberal. That’s why he isn’t pushing for universal health care–he knows that won’t pass, and that half a loaf is better than none. That’s why, unlike Hillary and McCain, he is against a 100 years war in Iraq–he knows that saving American soldiers is more important than saving American pride. That’s why his economic policies have been praised even by the conservatives at the Wall Street Journal–he knows that neither full out socialism or unbridled capitalism has all the answers, and that neither Clintonian or Reaganite economics worked long-term. (He also knows that freezing mortgage interest rates for five years is just about the worst idea ever for our economy, unlike some people…) The man has shown that he is a pragmatist first and foremost and a liberal second; he advances liberal causes in a rational way rather than pushing socialist ideals regardless of whether or not they will work. That’s the kind of thinker we need in office, not another party puppet (of either party).

    I could also point out that Reagan won Democratic supporters with his good feelings and cheery promises despite his anti-Democratic policies, but I have never heard a conservative complain about that. But when someone from the other side of the aisle succeeds with the same style but liberal policies, suddenly the world is coming to an end! No wonder you sound so frustrated; it must be awful to suddenly realize that the same cherished tactics which benefited you work just as well against you, especially when those tactics might just put liberals in 2-3 Supreme Court slots. (How ironic is it that–despite all the debate in the Republican party about who is Reagan’s real heir–the only candidate with a comparable style and impact to Reagan is a Democrat? And they say God doesn’t have a sense of humor!)

    Perhaps you should focus on building up your inferior candidates rather than wasting your time attempting to take down the new Teflon Candidate. I know you don’t have much to work with on that score, but just consider it a challenge…

17. richard martin Says:
    February 7th, 2008 at 10:36 pm

    Yes. My comment was uncalled for. I was trying to imply that Obama is not as disastrous for the country as Brandon suggests. Many people I know did not like Reagan (considered him too conservative for President), but for all his flaws there were some good things he accomplished. I believe, as a stream of Republicans do, that Obama has much potential (what ever his liberal record) to repair things. I think he has earned a shot at trying.

Leave a Comment