Hello, ProgMeister, You make some undeniable points in your last two posts. However, republican does not mean automatically mean conservative, just as democrat does not automatically mean liberal. I would submit that Mr. Bush, despite being so labeled, is no conservative. If you look at the polls that declare that 80% of the respondents think that the country is headed in the wrong direction, with Bush as the perceived figure-head of that direction, they give a misleading impression. It does not mean that 80% of the populace want a more liberal Govt. and want to leave behind all conservative principles. Roughly 40% want it more liberal, and name him an evil conservative (Sorry for the redundancy). The other 40% want it more conservative, and name him a sell-out. Consequently, just because the non-conservative-Republican Bush pursues a Liberal/Progressive policy does not mean that Obama would not be even more inclined to do so. I consider it quite likely that he would. Bush, who has enough people on the left screaming for his head to be labeled a conservative, has done so. It seems entirely unreasonable to expect that Obama, with the stong internationalist influences in his life (and please, don’t take my word for it go read about the man and look at who his great influences are yourself), would be less inclined to do so.
Final note YOU as a progressive may not be enamored of international law, but the progressive movement as a whole certainly is. Again, don’t take my word for it, go read about it yourself. Franklin Delano and his cousin Teddy certainly considered themselves part of the movement, and Woodrow Wilson could practically be their poster boy.
Not that I expect that any of what I have to say will change your opinion one whit. Such is the nature of blogging.
