Your tax dollars at work

[_beastie]

Virginia then? Even then, the odds of you casting the tie-breaking vote are extremely small. "Hit by lightning" small. Making your voting decision on that basis is not rational.

You mentioned earlier that Republicans understand this "long-term" game and punish straying representatives. You are correct, and I think that is part of what has damaged the country. Republicans are so afraid of being "punished" by the extremes of their party that they view compromise as a dirty word, and their antics succeeded in lowering the credit rating of our country due to the debt ceiling debacle. I hope that democrats don't follow their example and start punishing their representatives who stray from strict ideology.

Maybe I just don't have that type of confidence in my ability to understand complex situations, particularly when those complex situations likely entail information to which I am not privvy. I think that compromise is what allows government to work. I think it's a good thing to elect representatives intelligent enough to make decisions without having to worry about raising the ire of the ideolgues in the party, because I hope they know more about those situations and decisions than the ideologues do. So even though I may be a closer ideological fit to Jill Stein, I'm not going to vote for her simply to "send a message" to Obama that he better start toeing the ideological line.

Besides, I assume it's not just ME you'd like to use the vote to send a message, but lots of democrats. And that could end up handing Virginia to Romney on a silver platter. (see: Ross Perot effect)

The truth is that, aside from this drone issue, I think Obama has done a decent job. I have always believed his actions saved this country from a depression. And I admire him for being able to do what many a democratic president before him longed to do - reform health care. The reform isn't perfect, no doubt, and is not what I would have preferred. But it's certainly better than doing nothing. (insert predictable cries of death panels here)

[_beastie]

Hey Beastie, here's a question for you:

If the left's opposition to Obama's "war on terror" abuses is anything above a whimper, why is it that Kevin G. doesn't even have basic awareness of what's going on? I mean, Kevin clearly is highly motivated to be politically engaged and obviously spends lots of time reading Democrat/left-wing online sources. So how is this information escaping him? My answer is because there isn't much chatter about it from that area of the spectrum. The occasional Maddow comment and Glen Greenwald's of the world are the exception, not the rule.

You are likely correct. The fear of another terrorist act has lured many a representative and citizen into accepting actions that they would have formerly hotly protested. And you're right, that if a republican were doing it, the left would be using it. I don't think my voting for Jill Stein is going to change any of that.

[_Bob Loblaw]

He's worse, actually, when it comes to civil rights abuses related to the war on terror and its prosecution in foreign policy.

My sentiments exactly. My biggest disappointment with Obama is that he not only has continued Bush's aggressive foreign policy but actually extended it in the ways you mention. And it's outrageous that our president has no problem killing citizens of our own country without due process. But hey, at least he's not Bush.

Remember the people calling for Bush's impeachment and prosecution as a war criminal? Suddenly all those voices have gone silent.

[_Bob Loblaw]

You are likely correct. The fear of another terrorist act has lured many a representative and citizen into accepting actions that they would have formerly hotly protested. And you're right, that if a republican were doing it, the left would be using it. I don't think my voting for Jill Stein is going to change any of that.

Here's the scary thing: Republicans aren't using the drone strikes as a issue because they agree with their use. The left, on the other hand, has made an about-face, and I don't believe for a moment that it's because they fear another terrorist act. The sad fact is that the person behind the drone strikes is on their side, and loyalty to ideology and party Trump conscience any day.

[_beastie]

Here's the scary thing: Republicans aren't using the drone strikes as a issue because they agree with their use. The left, on the other hand, has made an about-face, and I don't believe for a moment that it's because they fear another terrorist act. The sad fact is that the person behind the drone strikes is on their side, and loyalty to ideology and party Trump conscience any day.

You may be right, however, I believe that the fear of another terrorist attack is what drives the politicians in this issue. Not only because of the potential damage to the country, but because of the political fallout to anyone who is in power if/when another serious attack occurs. Look how Romney has tried to use Libya for just that purpose.

[_beastie]

Well, I just visited huffington post, and a harsh critique of the drone policy and the lack of focus on it in the debate is their top story.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ial-debate

But the point is that this is far from certain. Just as Obama was able to achieve more than Bush ever dreamed of achieving in terms of transforming extremist civil liberties theories into bipartisan consensus, the case could be made that Obama would be a more effective instrument in bringing about these policies than Romney would be, and would certainly unite the country more potently behind them, even if he is less committed to them rhetorically or even in substance than Romney the candidate claims to be.

6.54pm: Underscoring these points, Atrios earlier today wrote:

"I don't write much about the stuff Glenn Greenwald tends to focus on anymore, not because I'm trying to be a good little Obot, but because I find it all to be completely depressing and hopeless. Under a Republican administration you can expect some half-hearted objection to the National Security State and Empire from Democrats, and under a Democratic president there's seemingly no way to do anything about any of it. Most Democrats - elected and voters - are happy to defer to Obama. And pretty soon [Romney] might control the flying death robots."

[_beastie]

Even more - the headline story on the political section of huffpo is, once again, about Obama and the drones:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/2 ... f=politics

There would have been plenty to talk about. Obama's secretive drone war in Pakistan and Yemen is unprecedented, and operating by rules the Obama administration has in some ways made up as it goes along.

The White House's constant claims of limited civilian deaths have been authoritatively refuted.

Obama has even unilaterally approved the targeted killing by drone of an American citizen who was a senior al Qaeda figure.

U.S. tactics arguably violate the laws of war.

It seems to me the left has been more openly critical of this policy than EA thinks.

[_Bob Loblaw]

Well, I just visited huffington post, and a harsh critique of the drone policy and the lack of focus on it in the debate is their top story.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ial-debate

But the point is that this is far from certain. Just as Obama was able to achieve more than Bush ever dreamed of achieving in terms of transforming extremist civil liberties theories into bipartisan consensus, the case could be made that Obama would be a more effective instrument in bringing about these policies than Romney would be, and would certainly unite the country more potently behind them, even if he is less committed to them rhetorically or even in substance than Romney the candidate claims to be.

6.54pm: Underscoring these points, Atrios earlier today wrote:

"I don't write much about the stuff Glenn Greenwald tends to focus on anymore, not because I'm trying to be a good little Obot, but because I find it all to be completely depressing and hopeless. Under a Republican administration you can expect some half-hearted objection to the National Security State and Empire from Democrats, and under a Democratic president there's seemingly no way to do anything about any of it. Most Democrats - elected and voters - are happy to defer to Obama. And pretty soon [Romney] might control the flying death robots."

Nice to know the British are upset.

[_Drifting]

Nice to know the British are upset.

[Guest]

Deleted.