A great column in the New York Times today by law professor Jeffrey Rosen about Obama's credentials as a defender of civil liberties. I'm glad to see someone give such a full explanation of the reasons why I'm supporting Obama over Clinton in the Democratic race -- I'm just a lot more confident in Obama's commitment to turning around the worst excesses of the Bush administration's curtailing of our Constitutional rights. That's not to say Clinton wouldn't do anything to combat those measures, but I just don't see her as doing so with as much determination or resolve as Obama would. This may not be a huge issue to a lot of other people, but it is to me.
It also ties into something I wrote last year, just as the presidential campaign was really grinding into motion, about how the various movements and re-positionings of the two political parties have put us in a situation where the Democrats are really no further away from Libertarians than the Republicans are -- maybe closer, in fact, given that the federal government expanded more dramatically in the last seven years under Bush than it ever did under Clinton or Carter. Insert knee-jerk right-wing responses of "Obama=soc1alizm!!1!1!!" here, and yeah, I know, there's a lot about Obama's platform, universal health care being one major example, that dyed-in-the-wool libertarians aren't going to like. All I'm saying is, maybe it's time to re-evaluate your stereotypes about the two major parties and start reconsidering whether the Republicans really do any better job than the Democrats do of standing up for individual rights.
Anyway, good column, give it a read and let me know what you think.
(Hat tip: Lawyers, Guns and Money.)