View Single Post
Old 05-02-2009, 01:42 AM   #10
Achilles
Dapper Chimp
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8,204
Helpful! Veteran Modder Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qliveur View Post
OT: Do you really believe that whomever the president nominates isn't going to be so far to the left that his/her pee is pink?
I think the first thing I'm not going to do is drink the neo-con kool-aid.

If you genuinely want to have this discussion, I'll be happy to do so, however the first thing we're going to have to do is operationally define "left" and "right". The unfortunate reality is that many of the pundits on "the right" have been given free reign to establish that anyone that doesn't accept their brand of ideology is automatically "liberal". This is very much akin to establishing that anyone not living at the north pole is "south" and then calling that "fair and balanced".

2nd thought before clicking "Submit Reply": As a show of good faith, I will tell you now that I don't believe that he is going to pick someone who is liberal ideologue. However I do believe that whomever he picks, short of Ronald Reagan's animated corpse, will be painted as such by whomever needs to fill airtime on their radio/television show.

What I think to be a far more interesting question is this: what's so great about being exactly in the middle if your options are "right" and "wrong"? If abortion is truly the scourge of everything everywhere, then shouldn't you/me/everyone being routing for the pro-lifers? If opposing gay marriage is truly an affront to equal rights to all human everywhere, shouldn't we be taking up the banner too? I hear a lot of people clamoring about centrism (yourself included, with all due respect) but I fail to see why this seems like such a good idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Qliveur View Post
I would be extremely surprised if that weren't the case, but I'll admit that I don't know a whole hell of a lot about President Obama.
I think President Obama is a firm believer in the Constitution (he taught Constitutional law for several years). It is my opinion that he tends to pick people for jobs based on their ability rather than their ideology.

Lastly, if you are willing to admit that you do not know that much about him (an admirable admission, btw!), I guess I'm curious to from where such strong opinions stem. Wouldn't it be better to either a) find out more before jumping to conclusions or b) wait to find out what he's going to do before remarking on it? As always, I look forward to your response, sir.
Achilles is offline   you may: quote & reply,