Obama is a Moderate Republican

reply to post by Annee

real political analysts.

And just who might those be? Somepeople are never pleased, either they claim conservatives listen only to Fox news(but call it Faux News) or now you are claiming I don't listen to "real analysts". I'm just curious, is only Huffington Post and Bloomberg acceptable? Or wait, Fox news has been saying lately that conservatism is dead and Republicans should just be more liberal because the majority of America is now liberal(which is total bs, because clearly half the voting public voted for Romney who is still moderate anyway). LIberals sure have hubris now their guy won the WH but it is a lie to say that anything more than half the voters went for a liberal. Oh but wait, he's not really a liberal cause he's a centrist...lolol you guys just can't get your story straight.

I just figured I'd throw in a reference here to explain why some might get the impression Obama is among the most Liberal national politicians in recent history. It has been reported and cited before and in different ways. It just didn't play at all for image this time through so it was avoided almost fanatically. Not so...in a prior election.

Americans for Democratic Action, the liberal activist group, and the American Conservative Union, the conservative activist group, also rate Congress members on their votes. Their findings describe Obama as one of, but not the most liberal U.S. senator.

The ADA gave Obama a 75 percent liberal score in 2007, 95 percent in 2006 and 100 percent in 2005. Other Democratic senators received 100 percent during those years. David Card, ADA communications director, said Obama's score was lower last year because he missed certain votes.

Obama has a lifetime ADA average of 90 percent. Other senators - such as Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and others - have higher lifetime ADA ratings. Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate in 2004, was ranked as the most liberal senator by the National Journal in 2003.

Source

Now if that were...say...Fox News, it would be questionable out the gate like everything political is. That was CNN in 2008. Different election...different image played. This is the originating story: National Journal Rankings - 2007

Obama is a very skilled and accomplished actor. He's made his career on it and he's one of the best I think the world can say they've seen in high office. That's as much grudging respect as anything because he's been effective at the public appeal..to almost all sides..who still disagree on fundamental basics about his very nature and policy positions.

To be totally fair.. I've mentioned I had this stuff and I found which image vault I had them in. I have a ton of stuff I guess I can't clean out without breaking old threads... err... anyway, Here's Romney 100% totally opposite his positions most recently.





Results don't matter anymore so it's really just keeping it honest for the long term record at this point, isn't it? All candidates reaching that level....... all of them, IMO .......are exceptionally good at something. Military commander, Career Politician or Actor (or named Gerald Ford of course). Just my two cents for opinion.

Originally posted by Unity_99
Pretty much in agreeance. Many who are social democrats, from Europe and myself included from Canada, have already said, that he is not a socialist, and is right winged, no socialist acts like that. But the US calls a moderate conservative (or fasicst) a socialist, not surprisingly. So heavy is the programming.

The only party that is even close to my ideals is the NDP, which on a global political science circle with democracies on the top half and totalitarianism at the bottom, as we were taught in school, is only barely left of center. So Im more socialistic than them since they're more uninion guys and Im more kids, moms and grandma's.

But on the questionaire I took, Obama was second to the bottom in the US, 33% agreement and that was probably only because I didn't take the time to make up my own points on more than one question and because its pretty general the questions to begin with and they didn't really ask the right ones. He is the farthest thing from a socialist any socialist could see. By the way, communists are quite close to ultra conservatism, in the way they operate their scarsity systems. My friend escaped Hungary before the curtain fell and she said the only difference in her life as the working poor here, and there was a few lineups were shorter and she had a vcr now, whoopee. She was voting liberal next election. Whereas countries like Norway have good standards of living.

edit on 12-11-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

Thats exactly it. Programming and re-packaging. Other people are defining him and it is nowhere close to the truth. I feel sorry for the moderate republicans that are going to inherit this party because they are inheriting an ignorant mess that thinks Mitt Romney wasn't far enough right.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate in 2004, was ranked as the most liberal senator by the National Journal in 2003.

And yet he was in the military.

Go figure. How do they determine Liberal?

Isn't that anti-war?

Or maybe it is someone who becomes anti-war once they see what goes on during war - how horrific it really is.
Like all those loveable liberals, Hawkeye and Pierce in a mix with the detestable conservatives Frank and Margaret in those great episodes of M.A.S.H. How far we've come since the 70's. And back toward appreciating war for some reason. I thought watching those episodes war would be over in my lifetime. What a joke that was.

Originally posted by Unity_99
Pretty much in agreeance. Many who are social democrats, from Europe and myself included from Canada, have already said, that he is not a socialist, and is right winged, no socialist acts like that. But the US calls a moderate conservative (or fasicst) a socialist, not surprisingly. So heavy is the programming.

The only party that is even close to my ideals is the NDP, which on a global political science circle with democracies on the top half and totalitarianism at the bottom, as we were taught in school, is only barely left of center. So Im more socialistic than them since they're more uninion guys and Im more kids, moms and grandma's.

But on the questionaire I took, Obama was second to the bottom in the US, 33% agreement and that was probably only because I didn't take the time to make up my own points on more than one question and because its pretty general the questions to begin with and they didn't really ask the right ones. He is the farthest thing from a socialist any socialist could see. By the way, communists are quite close to ultra conservatism, in the way they operate their scarsity systems. My friend escaped Hungary before the curtain fell and she said the only difference in her life as the working poor here, and there was a few lineups were shorter and she had a vcr now, whoopee. She was voting liberal next election. Whereas countries like Norway have good standards of living.

edit on 12-11-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

Yep. By definition, the political ends of the spectrum are like this:

Republicans = Nazis

Obama = run of the mill fascist

People saying Obama is a socialist = insane.

Such is the psychotic world of USA political views these days.

reply to post by newcovenant

And yet he was in the military.

Go figure. How do they determine Liberal?

Isn't that anti-war?

You're not really suggesting here that there is some cause/effect or some absolute between Military Service and conservative or liberal are you? I mean thats a stretch it takes work to get to and I've not even made such a suggestion.

There are plenty in Uniform, especially at the higher ranks, that lean all directions. Wesley Clark is about as far from conservative as I can put it and Powell was someone I respected as neutral and a competent professional right up until he wasn't anymore and became a political tool like so many Ex-Military seem to become.

For that matter, John McCain is a war hero. A true blue no kidding war hero and I'd have issue with anyone who'd say otherwise. His record speaks for itself and stands like a rock to the truth of that. At the same time...the MODERN John McCain is someone I call a RINO at best and probably long past a trip to the retirement home. He's not what he once was, to be sure.

Kerry? heck.. now he seems to be about unchanged..for what it matters. The comparison on this thread was who Mitt Romney chose to run and campaign with and how it related to any claim of Obama or him being OTHER than what they are. Was he showing his true colors then, or now?

Well.... Ted 'The Splash' Kennedy didn't get where he was by being a bad judge of character. I've always figured his judgement wa good enough for blue blood Romney. Heck...if he'd have just NOT been the only choice..I'd so loved to have helped attack him all through the process. He wasn't a first choice for anyone but TPTB, IMO.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I'm asking.
Define liberal.
That's all.
It is an exercise. Trying to pin down what you call "Liberal."
And trying to show just what you illustrate - Liberals can be people you wouldn't expect.
They fight in wars too.

I DON'T think "Liberals" like war though.

Am I suggesting the other "side" does?

I can't say no.

I don't know. Sometimes I get that impression.
Military spending tends to define Liberal and Conservative now.