Remember when Dave Weigel was hired by the Wash Post as a "conservative columnist" and then let go when it became clear (to them) that he was more liberal than assumed. Of course, he hadn't really changed: He'd always been more libertarian than liberal or conservative. But still: the view persists, no doubt, that he is on the left. In any case, he came out agt Slate today as a voter for, not Obama, but Gary Johnson tomorrow. Here's his rationale:
I'm copping out. On about half of the issues that I care about,
Barack Obama has been a massive improvement on George W. Bush. Drone
warfare or lie-based land wars in the Middle East? U.S. attorneys
running junk cases against "voter fraud," or the DOJ trying to expand
the vote? Endorsing the Federal Marriage Amendment, or refusing to
defend DOMA in court? I agreed with an economic stimulus in 2009, as did
the forgetful Republicans, who just disagreed about what should go in
it.
But Obama's a mediocre executive who's never figured out how to
overcome opposition in Congress. I think Romney could be a great
executive. If we fell into some Greece-like receivership, and a
coalition of bankers installed a dictator to manage our economy, Romney
would be perfect. Give him a Democratic Congress and you'd bring out his
best instincts. My problems: If you trust John Bolton and Dan Senor to
speak for you, who are you going to fill the government with? If you
agree to a Balanced Budget Amendment that would require a
California-style supermajority to raise taxes, what other dumb fiscal
decisions will you make?
So I'll vote for the Libertarian ticket, which I agree with on
everything besides the scale and speed of spending cuts, and the first
third-party team that actually seems competent enough to run a country.
No comments:
Post a Comment