If A Tree Falls …
March 26, 2008 on 1:00 pm | In Main, Race for Prez |
A few notes from the campaign trail (as viewed from Lakeville):
Could the Democratic nominating process get any closer? Rasmussen reports that 22% want Hillary to withdraw, while … 22% want Obama to get out.
* * * * * *
Hey, if a tree falls in the forest … What I don’t get is that, for all his whining about corporate America, his advocacy for a Canadian-style healthcare system and his endorsement of the Green Party’s presidential nominee, why on earth is Mike Gravel becoming a Libertarian? Above all, them libs believe in free markets.
* * * * * *
MoDo thinks Hillary is now angling to be veep:
One Hillary pal said she wouldn’t want to go back to a Senate full of lawmakers who’d abandoned her for Obama … Maybe The Terminator is thinking: if she could just get her pump in the door. Dick Cheney, after all, was able to run the White House and the world from the vice president’s residence …
* * * * * *
While MoDo speculates, the sleazy, make-my-skin-crawl Dick Morris actually goes to the trouble of cataloging all of Hillary’s lies and presumed lies. That’s quite a list of fibs, Dick. Now maybe you could show us yours.
* * * * * *
If Hillary faces McCain, I think we already have a pretty good idea of how they will attempt to define each other: Hillary is a flip-flopping lefty and a McCain presidency would simply be a third term for GWB. But this piece in today’s WaPo gives you a pretty good preview of the Republican line of attack against Obama in the fall. I’ve got one bit of advice for Obama: Don’t get in any tanks!
Update: And this is how Obama will hit back, But if he does, it will only strengthen the GOP line of attack in the fall.
6 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
Dick Morris freely admits he’s a scum bag (seen him do it several times). So that’s not news. The real crime is how often he’s been wrong in his predictions on this campaign. After being so right so often back in 2004, I’m not sure he’s gotten anything right in this cycle. But he keeps pumping it out like he’s an authority. And a certain cable news channel keeps putting him on the air. A couple of enablers, it seems.
Comment by Jake — March 26, 2008 #
Dick’s latest blunder that I can recall was that Hill would lose both Ohio and Texas. In 2004, Dean was going to get the nomination. I think it’s just Fox doing the enabling, or have you seen him elsewhere?
Comment by Terry — March 26, 2008 #
Your socialism doesn’t work. here’s a big difference between free enterprise and corporatism that is perpetrated by favorable government regulations.
I suggest you do more research. You’re a fool.
Comment by Joseph Marzullo — March 26, 2008 #
Hmm … why do you resort to name calling and insults?
Perhaps you could explain to me how single-payer healthcare and public funding of political campaigns are consistent with Libertarian principles. I like some of Gravel’s positions but many of them could hardly be described as Libertarian.
Comment by Terry — March 26, 2008 #
Gravel is actually not a bad fit for the libertarians. He’s ideologically much closer to the Georgists and left libertarians than the Randians or the von Mises school, but not so much that he couldn’t get along with the latter pretty well. His direct democracy initiative, anti-interventionist stance, opposition to the war on drugs and single tax proposal make him right at home with them, across the libertarian spectrum. On single payer health care, he’s very narrowly socialist. Vouchers for that are similar to the Georgist’s social welfare plan: the citizen’s dividend.
As for free markets, most libertarians are strongly opposed to corporate welfare of any kind, including limited liability for torts. I’m not sure where Gravel stands on that. His issues page doesn’t cover it. But given his other positions, especially his loathing of the military industrial complex, I think he’d be able to at least talk to the market anarchist faction.
He’s been treated shabbily by the Democrats. The Libertarian Party seems happy to have him. So good for him and good for them too.
Comment by Jim — March 27, 2008 #
Jim,
Looks like Gravel fits in with the Dems about as well as Ron Paul did with the GOP — square pegs, both.
I think you just made a good case for a big-tent Libertarian party that could be viable nationally.
There’s only one problem: election laws make it difficult for third parties to gain ballot access and also the access to capital afforded by big-party machinery.
That, of course, is because elections laws are written by Republicans and Democrats to discourage those who are not … Republicans and Democrats. What a lousy system!
Comment by Terry — March 27, 2008 #