Heh. Big shocker here. Scott Brown, the Republican Liberal, voted Liberal. Well, 'magine that. Despite the overwhelming response from many Republicans of "Thank God we got Scott Brown," or "Thank Goodness a Republican got in! And in Massachusetts, too," Brown was nothing more than Same Ole', Same ole'. And guess what, you vote for Same ole', you get same ole'. Sorry, that's life.
And, of course, he was never anything different from other Republicans and Democrats. He just doesn't understand the political game in Washington quite yet, I don't think. Maybe people in Massachusetts will finally wise up and realize that, hey- neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are helping them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
And the libertarians are? I'm not trying to be mean/partisan, but seriosu, no party is really "the true one". Liberal is the same old same old? Liberals aren't perfect, but at least their agenda isn't centering on restricting women's rightsw like abortion and discriminatory policies like gay marriage/ don't ask, don't tell. A nothern republican is a joke. And thank god.
The Libertarians haven't had any chance to be anything yet. We haven't managed, to my knowledge, to elect anyone to the Federal level. We're not enough of a voice to be more of the same, because we haven't had a chance to prove ourselves.
Anyway- I generally lump the Republicans and Democrats together because they're practically the same, except in rhetoric- most of the time. Like you said, there are a few issues (like abortion, though not so much anymore, and gay marriage, drugs, etc.) that the Reps/Dems are different, but in general practice, they govern exactly the same.
I hope you're not disappointed/shocked that I was happy to hear this.
LOL Not at all Christopher. I, too, was perversely glad to have my prediction come true. :P
What's the difference in drug policy? The DEA is still busting people for growing medical marijuana (there was a big story on this out in Colorado), despite the statement that they would only do the raids where it was not in compliance with state laws.
Sun Tzu- I could be mixed up. I was under the impression that the Democrats generally were pro-legalization of drugs (not that they actually do that, anyway), and Republicans were against it (it's immoral, you know)...
Actually, they are. Democrats are pro-marijuna reform. Also, econcmic policies like captialism vs. more government control are huge deifing factors. Unfortunately, they are very different.
Rhetorical positions are fine. They're not valuable evaluations of what they actually do in office (case in point: any Republicans claims toward fiscal sanity or who oppose "government takeovers" of some industry, likewise Democrats who claim to support regulatory controls or oppose civil liberties abuses).
I have not seen a significant change in the drug policy positions other than a handful of people whose positions have long been for legalisation, decriminalization, or the use of medical marijuana. Between the drug czar, the President, and the DEA, there isn't any real change on this front to point to other than a rhetoric pass toward federalism by supposedly allowing state laws to govern the abilities of the DEA to conduct raids. Which was then violated. In addition to all that, Obama has clearly stated he is not in favor of legalization (only decriminalization, mostly related to medical marijuana laws). The rhetoric is not sufficiently different here to make it worth paying attention to as a difference.
There's several Republicans who have favored legalization, though their views could be most aptly characterized as libertarian on most policies rather than a GOP boilerplate. Gary Johnson for example. I'm assuming the Governator counts as a Republican as well. The legalisation front is much more popular out West in general than the GOP strongholds in the South or Plains states, and especially popular among younger voters, who have tended, at least lately, to be Democratic voters. If that is supposed to be reflected in the actual pursued policies of the people in charge, I'd like to see it. Frank's bill for decriminalization got only 8 co-sponsors in a Democratically controlled Congress last year. If that's your measurement of rhetorical and political support for an issue, it's pretty weak.
If it comes down to it, yes a few prominent Democrats make this a key issue and yes, they don't tend to make it an issue of fear-mongering the way some GOP candidates can do so. If pressed, I would have to admit they do have some differences here on balance as a result. Like most other issues, I'm not sure that means anything for the actual outcome.
Post a Comment