"You left out two terms of GW Bush with a mostly rubber stamp Republican congress and bluedog Democrats in tow and two terms of Ronald Reagan for fuck’s sake. And, um, HW Bush one term as well? Get real.
Once again, try knocking < blink >consistently< /blink > voting in lesser evil once we’ve actually tried it."
You’re confusing me with this. I’m citing Democratic “lesser of evil” Presidents. Republicans never entered into it because we probably have agreed that none of them since perhaps Eisenhower were worth mentioning or voting for from the Progressive angle. Hell, I’d say you probably agree that Reagan and Bush were the greater evils anyway, so they don’t enter into it.
Here was my speculation; I watched candidate Obama with great interest. It was highly likely he’d get the nomination. So I watched what he would do with Telecom Immunity, a key to finding out who specifically in the Bush White House told the Telecoms they had to give up customers’ records and info. Senator Obama claimed promise that he would go so far as to filibuster any deal that gave the Telecoms immunity. When the bill came up, he not only refused to filibuster the bill but voted for it with no explanation as to why, considering the stink he had made before.
With that he lost my vote. It was too telling of how he would act as President; How Bush and Co. could look forward to no investigations and how nothing in the U.S. surveillance would change. He’s actually made things worse with his administration and Snowden really opened those floodgates of what’s happened at the very last on Obama’s watch.
I’m sorry but this issue is extremely important to me. If I can expect both major parties to act like this I cannot/will not support the current Senate or leadership. The changes they claim are mere promises, nothing more…
