February 01, 2018

Beto O'Rourke, ConservaDem? ModeratoDem at least

Yes, O'Rourke talks a good game on issues like marijuana legalization. And yes, pretty much like Sema Hernandez, he's not taking PAC money, although a lot of his individual donors are high rollers. Yes, he's pro-choice.

But, the old saying? Talk is cheap.

Per VoteSmart, he's actually only moderately left of center on big biz issues. He's good on snooping-type civil liberties, but not perfect on resisting Religious Right encroachments on that part of the First Amendment.

And VoteSmart may be kind.

GovTrack rates him as 56th most conservative House Democrat, based on votes in the previous Congress, during Obama's last two years in office. A graphic on this page has further illustration. Given that the Democrats have 191 House Congresscritters, that puts him in the most conservative one-third. He's roughly in the middle of the pack, in Joaquin Castro territory, among Texas House Dems.

Now, Brains was dinging me pretty good a couple of weeks ago, then I responded, and he posted that in his own version of a Texas Progressives wrangle.

That's even though I think Sema is the better candidate and said so in both posts.

It's just that part of the target practice at Beto from the left comes close to "gotcha." Maybe over it.

I may have pushed back too far on the health care. But, I think other stuff was gotcha or near it.

Still do.

So, Brains, I can call him a ModeratoDem, or maybe even a ConservaDem.

(Feb. 9 — Updated proof of that is his vote for bombs and against Dreamers. Let's also not forget that some friend[s] of Beto's campaign did a fake Twitter account for Sema.)

And, at the same time, I can still call semi-gotcha on the PAC issue. And full gotcha on the universal service issue. And, for good measure, saying 'let's call him Bob." He's not the only "Robert" to have "Beto" as a nickname, and whether he took himself or others gave it to him, it was when he was pre-18. So, I stand by my first post, in large part.

==

This whole issue leads me to once again refer to a classic quote by philosopher Idries Shah:
To see "both sides" of a problem is the surest way to prevent its complete solution. Because there are always more than just two sides.
A couple of additional interpretive points by me.

First, sometimes there are more than two issues involved, which is part of why there are more than two sides.

Second and more importantly, knowing and accepting Shah's observation in no way guarantees a "complete solution."

2 comments:

PDiddie said...

Yeah, well, you still aren't getting it. Try another 30 seconds or so of Googling. Maybe click on to the second page.

Bobo says he doesn't take PAC money, but he shows up at a fundraiser with Schumer in Houston last week at $41,000 a pop. Shared the riches with Bill Nelson of FL and Joe Donnelly of IN. Even a few Democrats were pissed off, but for a different reason (they don't get it, either).

Still don't think you're off?

Here's another clue: in the big picture, what I blog does not need to be your focus, which is borderline obsessive at this point (similar to the flow of Actual Flatticus, which nobody cared about from the first post).

What matters is what Bobo O'Jerk does.

Here's a piece of unsolicited advice.

Congrats on your big career jump. You're moving up in the world. You need to mature into a role that doesn't involve these kinds of blog posts or Tweets that you think are cute, or cool, but are about the most obnoxious behavior online I have ever been pained to witness over a long period of time.

It's time to grow up, friend.

Gadfly said...

I'll just comment on one thing.

"Obsessive"?

Pots and kettles, dude, or mirrors in bathrooms.

Choose your metaphor.