Concerned about Obama's progressive credentials? Conservative Kudlow makes terrific case...

[jefferson_dem]

that his record is *purely* progressive. Anyone who receives this much policy criticism from Kudlow and his ilk has to be doing something right.

****

<SNIP>

Obama voted against the Bush tax cuts on capital gains and dividends, justifying his anti-growth stance with the old class-warfare saw about tax cuts for the rich. Of course, these are the very same tax cuts that spurred economic expansion, created record job growth, and reduced the deficit as revenues flooded the Treasury.

The young senator also voted against repealing the death tax. He dismissed it as a "Paris Hilton tax break" that would give "billions of dollars to billionaire heirs and heiresses." Try telling that to the owners of farms, ranches, and small businesses who are forced to sell their legacies because of this tax.

He swings a nice protectionist bat, too. He has voted against free trade (CAFTA) and U.S. energy independence (drilling in ANWR), and has opposed lifting a $0.54 per gallon tariff on Brazilian ethanol. "Ethanol imports are neither necessary nor a practical response to current gasoline prices," he claimed. Nonsense.

He's also strongly opposed to personal retirement accounts for Social Security reform, and prefers instead that the government stewards your money. As Amanda Carpenter wrote in Human Events, "When speaking out against various tax cuts, Obama has likened the 'Ownership Society' — which entails such things as personalized Social Security accounts, health savings accounts and school choice — to 'social Darwinism.'"

The George W. Bush way has been to work toward ending the multiple-taxation of savings and investment — to lower taxes and put the people's money back in the people's wallets. It's all about capital. Simply put, the economy can't grow without capital to fertilize the soil of new technologies, jobs, and businesses. But Obama scoffs at such notions.

The senator is liberal to the core. He voted against Supreme Court judges Sam Alito and John Roberts. (Even liberal senators Russ Feingold and Pat Leahy voted for Roberts.) He said no to Patriot Act wiretap extensions, despite their proven effectiveness on halting terrorist attacks over the past five years. He collaborated in blocking John Bolton's appointment to the United Nations. He earned a perfect 100 percent rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America. He voted against a ban on partial-birth abortions twice as a state senator. He opposed the Defense of Marriage Act and stood against the Federal Marriage Amendment, despite acknowledging his belief that marriage is between a man and a woman.

<SNIP>

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/14/opinion/main2265927.shtml

[MidwestTransplant]

1. There is not a SINGLE instance of a family farmer being subject

to the Death Tax.

[BluegrassDem]

2. But according to DU, he's a DINO

If you just read what is posted about Obama on here, you'd swear he was a fire-breathing Republican.

[longship]

3. Not concerned about his progressive credentials.

However, I am *very* concerned about the following:

1. From the media standpoint, Obama's sole criteria is his "rock-star" status. This is a dispicable characterization, all the more-so because that's precisely the last criteria by which a President should be selected.

2. I am very worried about Obama's seemingly unbridled run for the big ticket. He very much acts like a person whose sole goal is, "I want power, and I want it NOW!" He's very young; where's the urgency for him? He looks like a person who just wants to use his Senatorial election as a mere stepping stone to power. That won't sit well with many people, likely including many Illinoisans who voted him into office to represent them, and also me, who sees this for what it likely is: Obama wants power and he wants it, NOW.

3. Obama invokes "God" at seemingly every opportunity. I don't mind that the man's religious, but we've recently seen just how bad the confluence of religion and politics can be. Therefore, Obama's "God"-ridden rhetoric is a very serious mark against him in my estimation.

4. His track record in the Senate is weak in that he hasn't done much to distinguish himself. His voting record is pretty good, but there's not much else there. Not even having served a single term, I just don't know what to think of him. This is not a very good track record to measure the man. And I certainly am not going to decide solely on rhetoric, since we now know all-too-well from Dubya, that rhetoric can be empty.

Sadly, and no matter how much I like him, Obama will not get my support.

[Radical Activist]

4. How silly

1) Obama is great with the media and crowds. That's exactly what we need in a candidate to win, but according to you, that disqualifies him. :crazy:

2) Yes, I can tell how eager Obama is for power by the fact that he has expressed no interest in running until very recently depsite repeated calls by OTHERS for him to run and there are currently two major "draft Obama" petitions being circulated on the internet.
Yeah, he's really gunning for it. :sarcasm:

3) I've heard Obama speak many times and only rarely do I hear him mention God. I know many on DU were offended and outraged when he spoke about appealing to Christian voters, but guess what, a majority of voters are Christian.

4) I'm glad you like Obama's voting record. I'm sure you know that you can't expect much more from a Senator in his first two years due to the Senate's traditions and seniority system. If you would like to know Obama's record in more detail, you can check out his time in the Illinois State Senate, where he was one of the most reliably progressive Senators in a progressive state. Conservatives don't get elected from Hyde Park in Chicago, where socialists have monthly meetings.

[longship]

6. Sorry, but I just can't support him.

Calling my reasons silly is just so much silliness.

[Radical Activist]

7. then how about

responding to my serious rebuttals?
I suspect you know a Senator doesn't have seniority to do much during their first two years in the Senate. That attack seems unfair. Perhaps you're simply already committed to another candidate.

[longship]

8. Irrelevant

For one, it's over a year before I will commit to any candidate. It's possible, but not very likely, that Obama could be my choice. There are a couple of possible candidates, not yet in the race, and a couple already in the race who I will support over Obama on any day of the week.

But I'll go further. I'm pretty damned sure that I will not be supporting Obama no matter what happens. If he manages to get the nomination, which I feel strongly is doubtful, I will vote for him.

I just don't like him very much. I'll keep an open mind, but that is not likely to change before the candidate is decided. Let's just leave it at that.

[beaconess]

10. Nice n/t

[Radical Activist]

5. He was also named an environmental champion

by the League of Conservation Voters.

[Connie_Corleone]

9. That's not good enough for some around here.

[AtomicKitten]

11. Obama is a delightful addition to the mix.

Haven't read anything that gives me pause about him. The only legitimate objection people seem to have is concern for the media frenzy surrounding him. Since when is that a bad thing? He's personable, intelligent, and charismatic. And, gosh darn it, people like him.