Buzz Bissinger and why Liberals like Jon Stewart are foolish to vote for Obama
Dropping my Libertarian/conservative guard for a moment for some objective analysis, serious moderates and prudent liberals not of the wild-eyed Progressive type have to be crazy to vote for Obama for a second term. The answer is right in front of them if they’d drop the partisan blinders. Do they really think that fire brand conservatives aren’t already meeting them more than half way in an effort to try and solve some of this nation’s more pressing problems?
Any one paying attention knows that Mitt Romney was not conservatives first choice. I recently saw a bit by Jon Stewart in which he bemoaned the lack of cooperation in Washington and a failure to reach bi-partisan consensus to provide serious, potentially lasting solutions. Is he really so foolish so as to believe that a man like Obama – who declared “I won” and has rammed through policy after policy using every non-democratic means at his disposal is somehow going to suddenly get that done, possibly putting this country on the right track for the long run?
Every day an incredibly divisive, imprudent – if not actually impudent – and unprepared Barack Obama spends in office only moves this nation further away from progress of any lasting kind – assuming one believes that progress is driven by Washington and not the average citizen.
This thoughtful piece by Buzz Bissinger is well worth your time. As much as it pains me to say it, in terms of this national election, this passage below is key.
Voting for a president is based on a combination of factual and emotional perception. The tipping point was last week’s debate in Denver. Romney finally did what he should have done all along instead of his balky cha cha with the old white men of the conservative Republican wing: he acted as the moderate he is, for the first time running as himself, not against himself, embracing his record as governor of Massachusetts.
There are fights ahead to be had from both the liberal and conservative perspectives. What solutions result from them remains to be seen. But we can’t even get to them as long as the White House is occupied by someone who now seems to think your average American citizen doesn’t even have any skin, or say in the game. Somehow, magically, it’s now all left up to him? I don’t think so – and not as any serious American political mind ever envisioned it.
That is NOT the best example of our modern social democracy. It’s not good leadership and, like it, or not, it’s not even very American – not as most of us have come to know it in decades past. Put aside words like liberal, conservative, neo-con, ideologue and demagogue and think on words like prudent, rational, realistic, mature, adult, competent and effective. If one does that, there is, at this juncture, only one smart presidential choice for prudent thinking Americans on both sides of the political divide. That choice is Mitt Romney, whether either side’s more strident advocates like it, or not.
In fact, as an objective analyst and concerned American, the fact that there are elements on both sides of the ideological divide that don’t much like Romney may just be the best argument for making Romney the only right choice for both at this point – assuming America’s and her children’s futures are driving our vote and not self-interest, or petty politics, of some sort.