Read other letters about this article

• Tuesday, July 1, 2008 02:52 PM

  Where I differ from Greenwald is on the support for Obama

  As I posted in Salon's Table Talk...

  Quite a two weeks? That's quite a four years if you ask me (and yeah, I know that no one has.)

  Where I differ from Greenwald is simple: Greenwald still supports Obama because he believes McCain is much worse. Now I will grant that McCain's positions in this campaign may in fact be much worse, but I don't think McCain would have a snowball's chance in hell of getting his positions into law through the opposition of a strongly Democratic congress whereas I am fearful (and fearful is the word) that a Democratic congress would be anything but strong in dealing with a President Obama from their own party. Seems way too close to Bush and the Republicans redux for me.

  What's more likely? That a president from an opposing party would find a way to work with an opposition congress, or that a Democratic congress would put the brakes on Obama? I'll take my chances with the first scenario. McCain, for all the talk of "McInsane" from the freeper-left**, was someone that John Kerry thought enough of in 2004 to offer up the vice presidency as his running mate. And more than a few Dems in 2004 were for it.

  John McCain is not GW Bush. I don't fear a McCain presidency as long as a Democratic congress does its job. And if we can't trust a Dem congress to hold a McCain in check, we surely can't trust a Dem congress to hold an Obama in check.

  **Freeper-left is in reference to how a sizeable portion of thee left in this past primary and now in this campaign season is entirely intolerant of dissent and is focused on goals of power and win at all costs no matter the consequences. I refuse to be a part.

  —Roman Berry Read Roman Berry's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel