Romney bans certain kinds of guns; Obama supports war and Bush-era doctrines; Romney enacts (even more) socialist-fascist health care; Obama has a near opaque administration in spite of the desire to be transparent.
The so-called “left” promotes a policy (say, universal healthcare or the individual mandate or the health care exchanges). The “right” opposes it. The opposition is usually superficial and us used as talking points to obtain votes. The object of power is power, after all. Assuming the policy becomes law, and assuming (as is often the case) it receives widespread support, the right becomes less vociferous about repealing the law. At best they want to reform; usually either nothing happens or the mildest of cosmetic changes are made, if only to appease the fringe party supporters. Today’s progressive, becomes tomorrow’s conservative. Already, for example, the financially devastating Obamacare that was such a hot topic a year ago is starting to go away in the eyes of most–that is, if you don’t have a business facing ever-higher health care costs. Soon the right will stop talking about repealing it or replacing it with something else. Florida governor Rick Scott, who initially opposed setting up the FL healthcare exchange, has changed his tune–how unexpected!
On the other “side” of the political spectrum, the totalitarian and warmongering right wing, whose most recent icon and trend setter is GWB, pushes for war and empire and crackdowns on civil liberties. The left claims to oppose it. When Bush II was in power the progressives, ever irate, regaled us with their smugness (and, as we now know, insincere) opposition to the Bush administration’s policies and tactics. Enter a democratic president. Oh my–what happened!? Suddenly Obama adopts and relishes in continuing core Bush doctrines as well as expanding into new territories of despotism: droning and NDAA come to mind. Today’s warmongering conservative is tomorrow warmongering progressive.
I for one welcome our new unipartisanship overlords.
” assuming (as is often the case) it receives widespread support, the right becomes less vociferous about repealing the law. ”
Isn’t this how a representative government SHOULD work? It’s one thing when a party runs on a particular platform, wins, and then reverses it’s position. It’s totally different if the party modifies its platform after losing.
What spoils this “moral equivalence” of left and right which has grown so “knee-jerk” amongst libertarians is that, until anarcho-capitalists have something other that blather to replace State foreign policy, foreign policy and war remains a valid function of the State. The rights tries to fulfill this function, often poorly. The LEFT is just totalitarian and takes every opportunity for expanded government.
“… foreign policy and war remains a valid function of the State.”
Corruption and murder remain valid functions of the state. Now there’s a principled argument people can get behind.