I've spent some time this evening visiting a blog by a lady "on the other side of the aisle" as it were. The topic has been Marlin Stutzman in general and one of the specifics was his vote in favor of the tax cuts-for-unemployment extension compromise. This lady accuses Marlin of flip-flopping, to her because it was better for him to appease the rich people getting the tax break than to stand on his principle and vote down the unemployment extension. Of course, simply deciding to compromise for the good of the country couldn't possibly be his reason.
Earlier today, I heard Sarah Palin use the same rhetoric for President Obama for his flip-flop on the bill. And I thought the same thing here. Anyone who compromises for the good of the country is a horrible, evil "flip-flopper"; anyone who holds his ground is a radical, a puppet of his/her party's line, the reason why government is so f'ed up.
And maybe she's right (the lady blogger, not Sarah) and Marlin is just lining up his future nest egg. If so, consider this. Who is Obama's core constituency? Is it not the largely African-American chronically unemployed who thought his election would guarantee them a release from their mortgages and a full tank of gas? This group might bitch and complain about rich folks getting the breaks, but at the end of the day, as long as Obama comes through with their care package from IWD, he's all right. Obama may be a flip flopper, but at least he was loyal to the main group that put him where he's at.
A year ago
13 hours ago