The Conservative Case for Barack Hussein Obama

Very nicely written piece found Here


A few highlights

Barack Obama is no conservative. Yet if he wins the Democratic nomination, come November principled conservatives may well find themselves voting for the senator from Illinois. Given the alternatives—and the state of the conservative movement—they could do worse.

and

For conservatives, Obama represents a sliver of hope. McCain represents none at all. The choice turns out to be an easy one.

Oh, did i mention the title?

The Right Choice?

The conservative case for Barack Obama

And my favorite part


Its written by a conservative, and published in The American Conservative magazine



Can you hear that??......

Its the winds of Change

and they never sounded so good.








[edit on 7/27/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]

This is one conservative I can appreciate. His definition of conservatism is a persuasive one, and I'm a lifelong Democrat!

Its a good overall indictment of the failings of the Bush administration, but his entire case for Barack Obama hinges upon ending the war in Iraq:

So why consider Obama? For one reason only: because this liberal Democrat has promised to end the U.S. combat role in Iraq. Contained within that promise, if fulfilled, lies some modest prospect of a conservative revival.

That's understandable, given the author's history. He has lost a son in Iraq.

However, I think this particular line of thought is quite flawed. Barack Obama supports an escalation in Afghanistan. Now while *I* support that as well, logically, this stance is incompatible with the reason that the author gives for supporting Barack Obama. Additionally, Obama supports widening the war to Pakistani soil if necessary, and has indicated support of a UN (read that: US) peacekeeping action in Sudan.

Again, my intent is not to bash the author, but merely to point out the flaw in his logic. The candidate that he supports for one reason only is not what the author is portraying that candidate to be, namely anti-war. Obama is anti-Iraq War.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by vor78]

Excellent article! Thanks. I'm hoping this attitude is prevalent.

I especially liked this:

Above all, there is this: the Iraq War represents the ultimate manifestation of the American expectation that the exercise of power abroad offers a corrective to whatever ailments afflict us at home. Rather than setting our own house in order, we insist on the world accommodating itself to our requirements. The problem is not that we are profligate or self-absorbed; it is that others are obstinate and bigoted. Therefore, they must change so that our own habits will remain beyond scrutiny.

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion. Even bloggers for the Huffington Post.

This guy's ONE big issue is the war in Iraq. So there is no harm in endorsing the candidate who mimics his ONE big issue.

Ron Paul, a congressman from Texas who recently ran an unsuccessful Presidential campain based on this guy's same logic, didn't do too well advancing these anti-war views on to conservative voters. I don't see this guy doing any better.

The nomination of McCain does not have me jumping up and down, and I do not enthusiastically endorse him. In fact, I won't endorse him at all until I see his VP pick.

If McCain chooses a person more conservative than himself he would get my vote. McCain is a one-term President and his legacy will be leaving Iraq with a stable government with whom we will have strong ties with in the future.

Obama will raise taxes, if you don't believe me just ask him. His Supreme Court picks will be ultra-liberal (think Ruth Buzzy Ginsburgh). His ranking as most liberal member of the Senate is rightfully earned. Even though McCain has his wacko liberal moments, (Global Warming, immigration) but he is still alot more conservative than Obama.

If Obama happens to win, we can expect a Jimmy Carter 2nd term, and we all know who followed Jimmy Carter! That's right, Ronald Reagan! Will the next Ronald Reagan please stand up...us real conservatives are waiting.

Nice post RR, but I fear elections if Obama gets in may change for the worst. No longer will people have any choices in candidates if the US either becomes Marxist or Facist, both which are happening as the New World Order agenda becomes more prevalent.

America will be no more after 2010 if things go as planned. We will be the North American Union and one step closer to one world government. The one world government goal is within 5-10 years from now from what i've read.

Obama lets power go to his head, this is already clear and he is not even President. McCain is the safer choice, New World Order or not.

Originally posted by jetxnet
Nice post RR, but I fear elections if Obama gets in may change for the worst. No longer will people have any choices in candidates if the US either becomes Marxist or Facist, both which are happening as the New World Order agenda becomes more prevalent.

America will be no more after 2010 if things go as planned. We will be the North American Union and one step closer to one world government. The one world government goal is within 5-10 years from now from what i've read.

Obama lets power go to his head, this is already clear and he is not even President. McCain is the safer choice, New World Order or not.

Wow... I didn't realize where all of your anti-Obama rhetoric was originating, but now I have an idea.

I just realized I have been arguing with someone who isn't even on the same planet as me as far as views go.

Thanks for clearing that up.

reply to post by RRconservative


excelt post RR i agree 100%. McCain should pick Romey IMO for his V.P. and then Id be behind the guy all the way.

I love how libs with there kool-aid think Obama is different from anyother candidate. Too me I see Jimmy Carter and a fool who is letting power and media hype going to his head. I would be surpised if someone one MSNBC calls him Mr. President.. that would be a good day. Its funny really Libs Hate and NEOCons hate...it just show happens libs hate more. lol

Originally posted by RX83GP02
reply to post by RRconservative

 

excelt post RR i agree 100%. McCain should pick Romey IMO for his V.P. and then Id be behind the guy all the way.

I love how libs with there kool-aid think Obama is different from anyother candidate. Too me I see Jimmy Carter and a fool who is letting power and media hype going to his head. I would be surpised if someone one MSNBC calls him Mr. President.. that would be a good day.

Its funny really Libs Hate and NEOCons hate...it just show happens libs hate more. lol

Unfortunately, there *are* some of our brethren on both sides of the aisle who are haters. However, the Obamatrons, like myself, are turned on not by hate, but by feeling represented for the first time ever. I don't have much problem with McCain. I don't agree with him on many issues, and I think he needs to learn to work the lectern like he does the crowd on the daily show, but he's no Bush in my mind.

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


NONSENSE.

Obumma is a fierce Marxist

and

a fierce globalist.

He's also more than a little clueless and a lot traitorous.

He'd help rush us into the tyrannical global government at near the speed of light.

McChurian would only take a moderately fast train.

Aah, Obama he's the second coming is he not?

Here's a nice gem for you Obama lovers/Socialist Warmongers...

Writes Joe Cesarone: "The London Times attempts to scandalize Barack Obama with its portrayal of Mark Ndesandjo, Barack's capitalist half brother who they found living in Shenzen, China. Excerpts:

BARACK Obama's half-brother has been helping to promote cheap Chinese exports in a low-profile business career while the Democratic senator has been winning worldwide fame in his race for the White House...
...He lives in Nanshan, a brash new district of high-rises and streets teeming after dark with young migrants eating spicy street food and cramming into bars, karaoke joints and massage parlours.
"He is big, strong and full of energy, speaks good Chinese and is a really easygoing guy," said a Chinese friend, "He always wears a hat over his shaven head. I believe he has several consultancy jobs."...
... Obama painted a disappointed picture of his half-brother in his 1995 memoir, Dreams from My Father, in which he celebrated his own return to Kenya and rediscovery of his African inheritance...
... Obama wrote that Mark didn't want to ask himself a lot of questions about the meaning of racial identity, dismissing the idea with the words: "life's hard enough without all that excess baggage."

Source:www.timesonline.co.uk... _and_americas/us_elections/article4406813.ece


"So here we have one half-brother who spends his time actually delivering useful products and services to people in the private sector, especially low-income people, and another half-brother who parasitically feeds off the private sector for personal gain while at the same time seeking to strangle that sector with ever-increasing state power. It's not surprising that the first half-brother has little time for 'the meaning of racial identity', as he is an active participant of the private sector which brings all races together in peaceful cooperation, while the second half-brother must constantly divide the world up based on skin color, so he can heal the world and provide 'hope' with redistribution via the barrel of a gun."


[edit on 28-7-2008 by Gateway]

there is no conservative case for barak obamaniation.
heck there isnt even a conservative case for juan mccain.
THEY ARE BOTH LIBERALS.
there is no conservative running in this election. and anyone who says they are conservative who supports either one of these canidates needs to look up what conservatism really is.

Originally posted by TheRepublic
there is no conservative case for barak obamaniation.
heck there isnt even a conservative case for juan mccain.
THEY ARE BOTH LIBERALS.
there is no conservative running in this election. and anyone who says they are conservative who supports either one of these canidates needs to look up what conservatism really is.

From a purely economic standpoint. One who focuses more on the cost side of the equation is a conservative, and one who focuses more on the benefit side is a liberal.

reply to post by Quazga


from an economic standpoint they are both globalists who are intent on leaving our nations borders open, selling out our nations inferstructure, and setting freetrade agreements that destroy our countries ability to manufacture anything at all, whilst exsporting jobs and importing foriegn debt...

to summarize they are both GLOBALIST corperate whores. one wears a red tie the other wears a blue tie. big deal. stop drinking the kool aide people.

the winds of change sound like another corrupt puppet politician passing gas in a global corperations lobbiests limo. oh wait that isnt change thats been happening in this country for 50 years. nevermind there is no change in this election.

Originally posted by TheRepublic
reply to post by Quazga

 

from an economic standpoint they are both globalists who are intent on leaving our nations borders open, selling out our nations inferstructure, and setting freetrade agreements that destroy our countries ability to manufacture anything at all, whilst exsporting jobs and importing foriegn debt...

to summarize they are both GLOBALIST corperate whores. one wears a red tie the other wears a blue tie. big deal. stop drinking the kool aide people.

the winds of change sound like another corrupt puppet politician passing gas in a global corperations lobbiests limo. oh wait that isnt change thats been happening in this country for 50 years. nevermind there is no change in this election.

So then I'm guessing your viewpoint is focused squarely on the what this election will cost us. Which is what makes you a Conservative.

My viewpoint is focused squarely on what we might stand to benefit from this election. Which is what makes me a Liberal.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by Quazga]

reply to post by Quazga


what? you were the one talking about economics. look there is no diffrence between the two. just ponder that thought for a moment. then ponder it again. my veiwpoint is not resting squarely on any one thing. you have to look at the big picture if you ever want to understand whats really going on. if you are focused on only one thing you will never get it.

you will just ride the obama bandwagon all the way as he takes this nation straight to hell. (NOTE: Juan McCain is just as bad)

they both support free trade agreements that hurt our country
they both support attacking iran
neither one will set a date for us to leave iraq
neither one will close the damn borders.
neither one will hold george bush responsible for his 8 years of illegal and unconstitutional behavior

there is no diffrence. understand this.

double post
....obama and mccain suck

[edit on 28-7-2008 by TheRepublic]

Don't buy into that Obama or Mcain will save us Bologny.

Who butters Obama's bread: Unions, Neomarxist, biofuel industry, Large Farmers, protectionists, AIPAC, CFR, Medical Industry, Leftist-Neocons, the FED, etc..willing to send your young men and women to fight another war in the Middle East

Who butters Mcain's bread: Multinationals, Oil Industry, Large Farmers, Protectionists, AIPAC, CFR, Medical Industry, so-called right-wing-Neocons (when in actuality ALL Neocons have been leftist Troskyist, who now call themselves conservatives) the FED, etc...willing to send your young men and women to fight another war in the Middle East


Some difference, and you people think things are really going to change? Hey, I have a bridge I need to sell...anyone interested?


[edit on 28-7-2008 by Gateway]

Hillary Clinton is actually more conservative than Obama.
Using Capital Gains Tax rate(proposed by the candidates) as a guide:

Obama 28%

Hillary - variable rate, 15% - 20% depending on economic conditions

McCain 15%.

bloggers?

LOL it was printed in the American Conservative magazine.

Cmon RR, surely you read that far into the original post before you formulated a biased opinion?

[edit on 7/28/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]