Skip to main content

View Diary: The problem with presidents (290 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  he's progressive on many social issues (11+ / 0-)

    and he has a chance to be great on climate change (kxl will do much to define that), but on economic issues he's not much better than a neoliberal, and on foreign policy and security he's not much better than a neocon.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Sat Jul 06, 2013 at 06:40:57 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  This would be laughable if it wasn't so wrong: (15+ / 0-)
      he has a chance to be great on climate change
      "Clean coal"? "All of the above"? Fracking? Bragging about increasing domestic oil production and perpetuating the false meme this will make us energy independent? Securing US rights to drill in an ice-free Arctic? Gutting effectual action in Rio? Not calling for an immediate suspension of fossil fuel subsidies? Not spending political capital for severely unimpressive cap and trade? Not calling for removal of all externalities in fossil fuel cost (for anyone still, remarkably, not disillusioned with capitalism)?

      Being better than idiotic, irresponsible, inflexible, and unresponsive predecessors doesn't make him "great" by any means. Not approving KXL is a tiny, absolutely imperative first step in the right direction, but whether he does so or not, he will be viewed with disdain along with the rest of the American Empire's presidents within a generation, when the world is on fire and the food and water supply dwindles. Only radical action could be called "great" now, and Obama is more neo-con than he is progressive in this regard, never mind radical.

      "It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti

      by Panacea Paola on Sat Jul 06, 2013 at 08:25:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And Paola... (3+ / 0-)

        Did you read the Lord Mayor (or whatever his title is) of London has been convinced that fracking is the better way to remove the huge natural gas field from under London? OMG?  How can they still be talking about drilling, fracking and moving tar sands as if it's the wave of the future?

        And they are thinking that fracking is the best way to dig under one of the largest cities in the world so the billion dollar 1% ers can put more money in their private accounts!


      •  he has dropped "clean coal" (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        on the cusp

        fracking is his biggest weakness. but you should read what climate scientists have been writing since his climate speech. this was a paradigmatic change.

        The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

        by Laurence Lewis on Sat Jul 06, 2013 at 10:29:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  nonsense (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          shaharazade, unfangus, Panacea Paola

          On his recent Africa trip he proposed American funding for a dramatic increase in oil and gas extraction/burning.

          That was barely a week after his "paradigmatic" speech on climate change.

          Fake Left, Drive Right . . . not my idea of a Democrat . . .

          by Deward Hastings on Sun Jul 07, 2013 at 08:05:49 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I read it instead (4+ / 0-)

          of listening to him speak. I found it to basically say adapt. I also thought he made it clear that gas and oil and nukes we're the way forward as it is economically unfeasible to stop extracting grease. More drill baby frack. But is it? I suppose if you define economic as the free market grease based unsustainable growth for the owners of the place. 'The world as we find' said Axelrod.

          People need at this point to create a world that isn't burning up the planet and killing people all to keep the earth destroyers and looters profitable and in power.. Goldman Sachs and their ilk rules the world and our MIC fueled on dirty energy are their enforcers. This is not the way it has to be, people have imagination, creativity and ingenuity. They are visionary. The dinosaurs wrecking the world would have to go, and that would upset the order we're told is inevitable and too big to fail.

          His 2006 speech at the Hamilton launching made it quite clear that his ideology and vision is nothing new. Just another 'inevitable' god awful NWO of oligarchical collectivists who's wet dream of global dominance is killing the planet. Not to mention the fact that it doesn't pay enough for ordinary people to live on.      

        •  We ***hope*** it's (4+ / 0-)

          a paradigmatic change.  We still have to see what he actually does.  I've been Charlie Brown to Lucy a few too many times with him to take his word for it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site