Dammit, Obama! Part Two

[muddbstrd]

In response to his selection of Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration, Obama has said that he did so to incorporate a diversity of viewpoints into the ceremony. That's a fine reason to do so, and I can even try to believe it, given that he's putting former adversaries and Republicans into his cabinet. However, forgive me for

Comments

[muddbstrd]

Not necessarily. While my social politics are liberal, my fiscal politics are conservative. I am in favor of a small government and decreased government spending. However, over the last 20 years, it has been under the Democrats when the federal deficit actually shrinks, and we don't pour billions of dollars into wars and the military. So since I'm nearly always aligned with Democrats on social issues, but the Republicans couldn't even do the whole fiscal responsibility thing, I've pretty much been voting Democrat.

But let's pull a Missy Elliot and flip it and reverse it. Suppose by 2012, the Democrats and Obama have done nothing to advance gay rights, and the Republicans sport a candidate that doesn't pander to the Christian right and leaves gay rights, women's rights, and other civil rights alone. On social issues, the two would be square. However, if the Republican candidate, and the party itself, managed to reinvent itself in these four years and demonstrate that they're fiscally responsible and conservative, I'd be inclined to vote for the Republican ticket over Obama.

However, this is all a very hypothetical scenario. Most likely I would just abstain from voting for President should Obama fail to deliver on his LGBT agenda.

[nucleophile]

Okay. For a second I got PUMA flashbacks.

...and I guess it's looking less like Palin will matter in 2012 (she just has to keep doing interviews!). And yes, Obama's support of gay issues was terribly weak during his campaign, but I'm willing to wait and see what he does when he actually has executive power.