Professor Bainbridge...on law, politics, religion, culture & food

Andrew also said the gasoline tax holiday was a deal breaker for him (presumably with McCain because he loaths Hillary).  Okay. I do not like the gasoline tax holiday either, but does any one have any doubt that Andrew Sullivan has been Barack’s water boy for about a year?  What is this nonsense about deal breakers? 

Many of Obama’s supporters seem to be projecting what Obama is about.  Seriously, what is Barack’s economic policy?  Seems like we just are supposed to like him and support him.  Is he running the Kerry campaign play again?  Granted Obama is a lot more likeable than Kerry (crabgrass is more likeable than Kerry) but beyond that and opposition to George Bush and the War what do we have. 

And of course, if you do not you are a hater, or too bitter, or both.

Joe asked:  “beyond that and opposition to George Bush and the War what do we have.”

Opposition to George Bush is sufficient.

BTW, if you are actually curious about Obama’s economic policies, you can read this:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/

I won’t drop out of politics either way, but my voting will certainly take longer this year if Obama doesn’t get the nomination.  You see, if Obama does end up on the ballot then I just push one button to go straight D and I’m done.  It will take two seconds.  But if Obama doesn’t get the nomination then I’ll have to go all the way down the ballot, voting for every D candidate except Clinton so that I can vote for the Libertarian or Grass Roots or some other 3rd party for the presidency.  It will be most inconvenient that way.  My time is valuable.  I really hope Obama wins.

Obama can too disavow Wright that easily. Politicians do it all the time. Whether he gets away with it is another matter. (I think he will.) As to your comment about growing up: Both parties spend oodles of money to convince millions of voters to stay home rather than vote for the other guy and this year I am quite likely to go along with them.

FWIW, it seems to me that Andrew revels in threatening to pick up his ball and go home if he doesn’t get what he wants. It’s a false promise, though. The money and the attention are too important to him.

Joel: RE: Obama’s economic policies. I was going to ask you to show us the section where Obama magically solves the contradictions between his oft-repeated promise not to raise taxes on the middle class and equally oft-repeated promise to raise the capital gains tax, but it would be a waste of time. (I believe government records show that 47% of those who paid capital gains taxes in 2005 earned less than $50,000 and 79% earned less than $100,000.)

RW Rogers, I was just correcting Joe’s fatuous statement about how everyone is projecting on Obama.  It is easy to find out exactly what Obama stands for, Joe has just never bothered to look.

As it happens, I disagree with much of Obama’s economic policy.  He is suspicious of free trade, he’s too pro-union, and I don’t believe that he has Clinton’s budget balancing genius.  Though as it happens, I think raising the capital gains tax is smart policy.  If it was up to me, earned income and investment income would be taxed at the same rate.

"If it weren’t for a bunch of unreconstructed old racists, Obama would balance the budget, stop global warming, and part the Red Sea. All with one hand behind his back.”

Well, that’s not exactly right. I don’t expect Obama to do all of those things. BUT, if it wasn’t for a bunch of old, dumb racists, there would be little confusion as to who the best candidate is. I mean, seriously, is Bainbridge even paying attention? The tax holiday doesn’t need to be a deal breaker for everyone, but its a perfect example of the difference between these three. Now I’m not saying that Obama doesn’t do things for purely political reasons, but please, anyone who accepts this tax holiday as a good idea doesn’t deserve to vote.

I wish I had the youthful innocence to think that Obama (or any candidate) will be judged on what sort of president he’d be rather than how much dirt gets thrown at him by the opposition. That was beaten out of me long ago, of course.  The fact that eight years later it’s clear now even to partisan Republicans that Bush’s stubborn ignorance had catastrophic consequences is cold comfort.

Hey, did Joe and RW actually read the post? Sullivan wasn’t the one who wrote that excerpt; it was an email from one of his readers. A reader who, quite understandably, feels turned off by politics because it seems (hold on to your hats) unresponisive and corrupt. I, for one, can harldy blame him, though I hope he doesn’t give up. Things will NEVER change if the younger generations give up altogether.

Linked to you through Sullivan.

You miss the point entirely. It’s not about entitlement - only in so much as some of us feel that our preferred candidate is entitled to a hearing and to not be judged solely by the smears cast by others.

Also - anybody who uses the phrase “Ann Althouse” and “got it exactly right” should be a little more hesitant to evaluate the judgment of others.

You know, assuming Obama becomes President, he will, at some point disappoint us.  But I have this strange feeling that he might actually say “I’m sorry” rather the never-admit-error-or-say-sorry way of the Bush NeoCons.

Funny - my anti-spam word includes the word “southern” in it…

I won’t drop out of politics if Obama doesn’t get the nod, but I most certainly won’t vote for Clinton and I’ll think long and hard before voting for any Democrat again.

The first viable African American candidate in every objective criteria against an opponent who came into the race with name-recognition, a 20% lead in national polls, and the backing of the party machine and her husband, a revered ex-President.

When the primaries end, if Obama maintains his lead in states, votes and delegates, and the superdelegates hand the nomination to Clinton anyway ... it would mean the Democratic party couldn’t trust its own voters to elect the first black president in history.

If that’s not racism, what is?

I think you’re missing the point more than a little bit here. I’m 26, the coming election will be the third presidential election I’ll cast a vote in and I have feelings similar to Andrew’s commenter. If Obama gets shafted by the DNC then I’m done caring about politics on a national level for awhile. It isn’t a sense of entitlement, narcissism, naievite or some kind of messianic following of Obama, but a conscious decision to take myself out of a process that I don’t really believe in.

The real problem that I think a lot of older pundits are running into is that they don’t understand what they see. Mine is a generation that doesn’t have an ingrained allegiance to any party. We have ideas and things that we care about. Thats why two people who had little chance or winning caught our attention (Obama and Paul). If we find out that no one cares what we think, thats fine, because we can walk away. National politics, for my generation, just isn’t that important. We aren’t yet wealthy enough to reap the benefits of power, but we aren’t poor enough to need to be on welfare. We can get the political discourse we crave with our friends or on the internet (so we don’t really need a party). We have enough education that we can think things through for ourselves and don’t need to be told what we believe by a platform. We cheat on our taxes, have a general disrespect for rules and authority, and basically have what we need. We’re secure. So yeah, we can walk away because doing it costs us very little and staying involved costs us a lot.

More importantly, a lot of young people have had it drilled into our heads that we need to think about the future, the long view. From kindergarten we were primed to think about college, as soon as we entered the work force we were told to think about retirement. We can walk away from politics for a few years because we realize that those who came before us will die. I’m 26, I’m likely to have another 60 years in front of me. What a presidential term or two?

Little Miss Sullivan can pick up her ball and go back to his over-priced DC abode if he wants--he’s not an American citizen. At the end of the day, who cares what he thinks other than a bunch of folks who are just as self-righteous and narcissistic as he is. These collegiate fools will get their comeupance when they graduate and have to deal with the real world.

I’m a gen-Y and I’m not dropping out, but it’s the first time there’s been a candidate that speaks to the issues that we care about in any kind of genuine way.  Clinton seems insincere to me and a lot of young people because of the way she’s been attacking Obama, and pandering to gun owners, the gas tax relief policy, bill o’reilly, etc.  The only *real* objection to Obama is guilt by association. 

I think the chances of Gen-Y dropping out after a huge political disappointment is very small. Iraq, healthcare and the environment are issues that young people really care about and they’re not going to drop out (maybe of the democratic party if they hand the nomination to Clinton).  I mean if Clinton was leading in pledged delegates at this point as much as Barack is and there’s no conceivable way for her to be ahead come the convention, the race would be over.  The only reason she’s still in it is an example of old-white-empowerment. Every primary no matter the outcome brings Clinton closer to the inevitable tag of LOSER. If there’s any whining in this election, it’s Clinton going home and taking down the Democratic party with her if she doesn’t get the ball.

There’s no way I’m leaving because I know on average old people die before young people so the demographic dynamics is on our side.

I think many of the critiques of the young voter who will bail on the election if Obama isn’t the nominee are not getting it. The way I perceive his comments is that he cannot, in good conscience, participate in the election if the Clintons find a way to destroy Obama. I’m 46 years old and have been VERY active in democratic politics for decades now, and I completely agree. I can’t and won’t vote for Hillary under any circumstances. I have morphed from feeling somewhat ambivalent about her to despising her with a white hot intensity.

I know there is SO much at stake in our country right now, but if the democrats can’t whip up some leadership and stop this sickening take-down, I am going to find it really difficult to even care about this shit anymore. In any case, I can’t “reward” Hillary with a vote, for anything, ever.

RW Rogers, two points:

1) Obama has made it clear that the top rate for capital gains taxes would not apply to everyone.  (See his recent CNBC interview.) We have a progressive capital gains tax today; what makes you think it would change?

2) The 47% figure you cite refers to the percent of people who reported capital gains distributions from mutual funds—not “all people who paid taxes.” Put another way, only 2% of all people making less than $50,000 realized capital gains distributions.  And those distributions accounted for 0.1% (that 1/10th of one percent) of their net adjusted gross income.

You little Generation Y whiners. I am so sick of hearing you people bleat like sheep “Hillary Clinton is running a negative campaign”. By the standards of people who have a lot more years of experience in politics than most of you whiners, she is running a pretty mild campaign in terms of attack ads. If you think *this* is nasty, then I wonder what you would have thought of Hunt-Helms in 1984, or Nixon’s “Pink Lady” campaign in 1948, or the anti-Catholic tones of the 1960 election. If war is politics by other means, then the reverse is true as well--politics is war by other means. Your parents should be ashamed of themselves to have raised such soft, easily-offended people who think if the world just Kumbaya-ed it up, then everything would be peace and love. Life does not work that way, and it is about damn time some of you started realizing that now before you get your poor little over-indulged hearts broken down the road.

One more thing--it isn’t necessarily that people dislike Barack Obama (granted, he comes across as a bit of a cold fish), because a lot of people who wouldn’t vote for him say that he seems likeable enough. What turns them off to him is the behavior of you Y’s...saying that if you don’t get your way you’ll scream and throw tantrums. Are a great deal of you Y’s going to find that offensive? Sure--and that is partly why I said it. I also said it because that is the indications your behavior is giving. You want to be taken seriously? Then grow the hell up, get over yourselves, and get on with everyday life.

Bitter much Jeff?

Here’s the response I sent to Sullivan about his reader:

Tell your gen Y reader to know hope.  The Jeremiah Wrights, Geraldine Ferraros, and Charlie Gibsons are fading into the past.  Younger generations are less bigoted than any in American history.  We are the most highly educated.  We are equipped with the internet, a tool that allows us to seek out the truth rather than be fed selected sound bites.  We have used this tool to enter the political process effectively and on a large scale.  We are changing politics in America, but change doesn’t happen overnight.

Our generation is also inheriting a host of well-documented challenges, and addressing these challenges will require patience, wisdom, and fortitude.  We cannot afford to become intolerant, irresponsible, and passive.  Whether Obama wins or loses this time around, we will run this country some day.  The only unknown, and the only thing we truly control, is who we will be when we finally do.

Jeff, I don’t know how old you are, but I’m going to take a stab in the dark and guess that you come from my parents generation. Think back, I know its hard through the stale bong resin and burgeoning Alzheimer’s but try, to when you were in your teens and twenties. Think back to Vietnam and Grant Park during the summer of ‘68. Sure, call us whiners, tell us that you don’t want us here.

Just keep that in mind when social security comes due and we have nothing at all to keep us invested in national politics.

If you think Jeff is bitter now, wait til Obama wins Indiana and North Carolina and the Democratic party is forced to throw Hillary over its shoulder and carry her from the room, kicking and screaming the entire way.

The policies may be different but the Clintons’ political tactics are indistinguishable from the kind of Rovian campaigns Jeff no doubt spent the past 7+ years whining about. It’s hard for deeply partisan types to understand this, but part of Barrack Obama’s appeal - particularly with independents and first time voters - is that he has class. Unlike the Clintons, there’s a line Obama won’t cross in pursuit of the nomination. I find it refreshing to have a candidate who doesn’t view politics as war. Even moreso because he’s winning.

Finally, does Jeff really think anybody here gives a shit what he thinks of Obama or who he intends to vote for in the fall? Get over yourself pal, before that throbbing vein in your neck bursts.

...Get off my lawn!

Wow.  I haven’t seen a more jaded jibe since Grandpa Simpson yelled “Turn down that hippie crap!” at the Springfield ballpark when they played the ‘Star Spangled Banner.’

PB COMMENTS:: Actually, My top result for the SelectSmart.com selector, Which Simpsons Character Are You?, is Dr. Hibbert

The first two sentences of the Sullivan reader’s comment would make a great Roy Lichtenstein spoof.

Anyway, I’m also Gen Y and think the old fart’s comments are reasonable. I’m a vehement supporter of the “shit happens” philosophy.

I would love for youth to sweep Obama in. But the ignorance of some Gen Y is staggering. Look at the petulant meltdowns on Daily Kos to see how the Obama coalition will fall apart. That political moron Kos and his tin-foil minions represent the worst of the Obama cheerleaders. Sullivan’s big daddy fantasies are another example of delusional thinking. No hope.

Kos is smart, but the peanut gallery (like all blog comment areas) is lame...including this one. Sullivan has a GREAT blog, and thank god for no comments.

As for “the ignorance of some Gey Y is staggering”...well, duh. Every generation has their idiots. If you are putting that forward as a reason that Obama may fail, well you are just a coward like all the people who are “afraid” of “other people” taking him down or that he is “unelectable.”

Just stand up for what you believe in, no apologies necessary.

I’m not the coward as I’d vote for a log to get rid of the GOP. But Kos is indeed a political moron. Recall his sleazy cry for his Dem minions to vote Republican in Michigan—Rush Limbaugh followed through with his Vote Clinton tactic making them political idiot equals.

And today Kos posted Clinton’s “God bless us, rich folk” out of context from the O’Reilly as if she was serious. He’s a smug little boy bully, the proto-libertarian equivalent of Drudge and as a former Republican, Kos hasn’t changed much. Sullivan resembles him further each day in his dramarama rants. The audacity!

The problem with Gen Y (and I think I qualify for the generation), is that they think Obama and the 2008 election is something brand-spanking-new that has never happened before. The lack of perspective is amazing. They think Obama is the first candidate in history to ever come out and say “I’m going to run a different campaign,” and they think the 2008 election is “the most important in history” because of things like Iraq and health care.

There is nothing “new” about Obama except for his skin color. “New” politicians show up all the time. And there is nothing more pressing or more important about 2008 than 2004, or 1980, or 1968, etc.

Our country has seen better candidates and has experienced worse times. If your candidate loses, for whatever reason, suck it up, go vote for whomever you like out of the remaining, and go back to work the next day. Relax.

And to all the commenters defending their “I’m not going to vote” with comments like “if it weren’t for racists, it would be clear who the most qualified candidate is...” Oh, really? Obama has two whole years of relevant political experience. That does not qualify him. He also has really nice words. That does not qualify him (how many smooth talkers have we all met?). His personal associations are atrocious (bad judgment, anyone?). That leaves us with his skin color as his only real asset (and, as an example of how much of an asset it is, I give to you all the people saying “if it weren’t for closet racists, it would be clear who the best candidate is...").

You miss the point so completely, it’s hard to imagine you even tried.  The original quoted email was discussing the Democratic nomination ("If the Democratic party decides that it can not.. “).  The point is that the only way Clinton can win the Democratic nomination at this point is by changing the nominating rules (Fla/Mi) or overturning the expressed will of the Democratic electorate through the superdelegates.  If that happens, it would expose a corrupt and flawed system on a scale that most young voters have never experienced.  I think I would be done with the Democratic party as well if they exhibit such disdain for their constituency and their own rules.  And since I can’t see myself ever backing the GOP in their current big-government, big-religion, pro-torture, anti-logic, anti-reality incarnation, I guess I will effectively be “done” with national politics for awhile, too.

”or overturning the expressed will of the Democratic electorate through the superdelegates.”

Except that the entire point of the superdelegates is to be able to “pick” a candidate irrespective of “the will of the people.” What other point would superdelegatees serve if their only purpose was to simply agree with the electorate? If that were the case, the same person wins with or without them. They only exist - and only serve a purpose - if they vote “their conscience” and choose the candidate they believe would be the best candidate - irrespective of ballots cast. Thems the rules. Nothing “corrupt” about it.

If this happens, and most Democrats disagree with it, then all it proves is that the Democrats nomination process is flawed. You don’t see Republicans in a similar quandary, nor could them be (winner take all system, no superdelegates, etc.). So, again, rather than “take your ball and go home,” work to change your crappy liberal nomination system and, in the meantime, vote for the candidate that best fits your personal ideology - Clinton or McCain, and quit whining about “sitting out.” As a conservative, you think I’m high on McCain? No, but I’’ll participate, because I’m not going to throw a little tantrum about not getting the guy I want, for whatever reason.