Posts Tagged ‘neo-conservatives’

Debating Cain and Obama With My Conservative Uncle

Tuesday, November 1st, 2011

I often riff of the arguments I have with my conservative uncle in this space, but sometimes I’ll write an e-mail to him that can almost be posted in it’s entirety.

This one is from a conversation about Obama’s re-election prospects and whether or not the right track/wrong track numbers doom him. Also, my uncle asked the question about why I was making fun of Herman Cain in my last post on the Republican nomination process and made some comment about how much more qualified Cain was to be president than Obama:

My response (only slightly edited) follows:

By that same rationale, do you think that, since the Teabagger Congress is polling at 9% approval (worse than Pelosi!) they will also be “soundly defeated”?

It’s not unthinkable (and how cool would it be to have Nancy sitting back in that seat?)

But I’m sure those 91% of people just don’t understand that these guys are the righteous ones and ignoring the economy, dismantling Medicare and shutting down the government at every turn is the patriotic thing to do. After all, the economy can recover after Obama is out. The “1st priority” now is to make sure that Obama’s not reelected.

Count me as one of the 75% that thinks things are going in the “wrong direction.” A radical bunch of reactionaries have taken control of one house of Congress and the filibuster has effectively neutered the “Democratic controlled” Senate. As China continues to invest in the long term growth of their economy, Republicans insist that any investment in America that is funded by the government (because corporations don’t build bridges or dams) is “giving away money to Obama’s cronies” (sound familiar?)

Taxes are lower than they’ve been in 50 years, but raising taxes in order to balance the budget is a non-starter for the Tea Bag Congress that’s exercises veto power over all legislation. All of the balancing of the budget has to be cuts in government (but not including defense, cause wars and occupying countries we already defeated in war is apparently free). Bank bailouts are not allowed, but either is getting rid of the conditions that caused those bailouts (you’ll have to explain that one).

Meanwhile, the top 1% increased their wealth by 275% in the past 40 years and the bottom 20% increased theirs by 18%. I’m sure it will all trickle down eventually, but…

The Wrong Track is right and unfortunately, there’s very little that Willard M. Romney can do about that.

Obama’s in trouble now, but don’t count him out. Romney better offer more than what the Republican Congress has offered (which might not be that hard, since that is basically nothing) if he wants that job.

Regarding Herman Cain:

As (someone who has talked at length) about the importance of defending America, you wanna elect a guy who doesn’t know what a neo-conservative is? Whether he is a neo-conservative or not, don’t you think it’s important that he understands the fundamental debate over foreign policy that the country has engaged in over the past 10 years?

On abortion, he was coached to say that he was “absolutely pro-life,” but he apparently doesn’t understand what that means because he says that “it’s a woman’s choice.” Again, whether he’s pro-life or not isn’t the point. But if you are pro-life, then by definition, the only choice women have is pregnancy or jail. It’s not their choice.  The government’s chooses. And it is strange that you would run for President of the United States and not understand the most divisive social issue in this country in the past 40 years.

Assuming that someone with his experience is not dumb, the only conclusion is that he is intellectually lazy. So lazy that he hasn’t even brushed up on the basic issues that we have been debating as a society for the past decades. These issues are not tricky, not like the president of Uz-becki-becki-becki-stan (another awesome Cain-ism). They are the the basic issues we have been debating for the past presidential elections.

You had a nice one on the Chauncey Gardiner deal, but Cain’s not much different. He started this thing to sell some books and make some money and suddenly he finds himself polling first. But instead of ramping up his organization in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, he’s in Alabama and Tennessee selling his book.

He doesn’t seem to want to be president that much, but if you guys are dumb enough to nominate him, I’ll be happy to  help Barack Obama kick the crap out of him in the General Election.

By the way, all of that stuff about Obama being “unqualified” might have worked four years ago, but Obama’s been the president for 3 years, and the only thing that prepares you to be president is…being president… so you can throw that argument out the window. By election time, he’ll have been a US Senator for 4 years and the President Of The United States for 4 years. That makes him vastly more “qualified” to be the president than anyone of those yahoos running on the Republican side.
 
Except maybe Michele Bachmann.

That’s the lady I want with her finger on the button.