Skip to main content

View Diary: President Obama's Original Sin (68 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I support the President exactly because he (8+ / 0-)

    has the world view that he does.  I'll use his admonition:  respect, empower, include.

    Its called a mutual mindset by some.  I also learned some things about how other people respond in my sixty years.  A lot came in the last fifteen or so after working through the nature of domestic violence and how not to ever let it happen to me again.

    Being cruelly disempowered at a critical time and by critical people in ones life, the theory goes, leads to seeing life as one long power struggle.  Unless one has a person in ones life that can validate the unfairness of the abuse, one can grow up with the constant need to make sure one is never the underdog again. For someone effected by this scenario there is no such thing as equality, mutuality.

    I learned that if I approached someone who had this power over mindset as an equal, they would immediately try to put me down.  I learned about this issue in my Studying the nature of abuse also termed bullying explained so much and helped me understand many types of interactions.

    The President is engaging the world as a mutual person and that is driving some people on the Left absolutely crazy.  They are thinking perhaps that the bullying of others is all about him not being a bully.  It doesn't really work that way.

    If we try to imagine a world where we can deal with one another fairly and mutually, we need to seek out leaders that are capable of those basic attitudes.

    I don't want the President to change AT ALL.  He is one of the most inspiring representatives of how one can have an equality testimony and at the same time live life with courage.  The President sacrifices himself but never anyone else to his cause.  God bless him.

    •  You have to be kidding? (7+ / 0-)

      Not sure if this is sarcastic.  He is a capitulator.  He is ALREADY saying "I will bargain IF ONLY you will pass the CR and debt limit rise."

      He is quite simply the most incompetent President in my 63 years of life.  There have been worse Presidents as far as policy goals (by far). But unfortunately they KNEW how to play the game of politics.

      He does start nice foreign wars and keep the economy stalled though.

    •  You seem to discount human Evil. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ray Pensador
      If we try to imagine a world where we can deal with one another fairly and mutually...
      You seem to have ignored Ray's central thesis in this diary, that

      There is no point in treating bad-faith actors fairly.

      One thing that I disagree with Ray on is giving bad-faith actors the benefit of the doubt. As you should know from your experience with the abused, "benefit of the doubt" is where abusers make hay.

      There are red flags (that are often obvious, but only after you know what to look for) that can alert you to a bad-faith actor (or as I prefer, Evil actor) before they can even have the opportunity to do damage to you, your organization, or your nation.

      I would contend that some individuals are fundamentally Evil, and that they will resist any attempt at "redemption", no matter the origin. (I hate using religious terms here, because my definition of Evil is secular, not spiritual. But those terms work, so...) I believe that there is a tipping point for some, and once that tipping point is passed, self-reinforcing mechanisms are in place that insulate against "moral health". Some people, such as serial killers, may be born beyond that tipping point, as evidenced by small children born into healthy families who immediately display a marked tendency toward cruelty, such as torturing and killing small animals.

      We will never successfully deal with the innately cruel, selfish, and duplicitous in a "mutual" manner. To attempt to do so is to invite misery into our lives, unnecessarily.

      You deal with Evil people by excluding them from your life once you recognize them, and if they refuse exclusion, by crushing them as Ray has described. In domestic situations this may involve restraining orders, incarceration, or even more drastic alternatives if in imminent danger.

      Importantly though, one must be able to distinguish between opponents and bad-faith enemies. Opponents can be negotiated with, and can be dealt with in the good-faith, mutual manner that you described. Opponents, because they are good-faith actors, can sometimes become allies, often very loyal allies.

      Not so for bad-faith enemies. One of the incessant complaints of current Democrats, especially ones who are older, is that the Republicans used to be good-faith opponents. Chris Matthews is hawking his book on this very topic right now. But Newt, right-wing talk radio, and FOXNews changed all that.

      The new core of the Republican party is composed of bad-faith actors, and President Obama should have never been naive enough to negotiate with that group. Hell, they act in bad faith within their own party! And the President should view them as a mortal enemy not just to himself and the Democratic party, but to our democracy.

      The best thing that can happen to the Republican party is that it be killed. Dead. We were on the cusp of doing so in '09, but Democratic corruption threw them a lifeline. If Obama and the Dems hold firm, and give the R's nothing in this current crisis, the Republican party will destroy itself.

      From that self-destruction will emerge at least three spin-off parties, and only one of them will be the "Evil seed". That will allow the good-faith Republicans to purge the bad-faith actors from their ranks, and begin to build a far less toxic coalition to counterbalance the Democrats. (This is what happened to both Japan and Germany at the end of WWII. The Evil at the top was excised, and the good-faith elements of the populace were allowed to become dominant and flourish.)

      If Obama blinks however, and does not go for the throat and destroy the Republican party as we know it, the Evil element of the Republican party will be empowered and emboldened, and they will have successfully consumed and taken full control of the that party.

      And that could be the end of American Democracy as we know it, and as it was intended to function.

      Finally, note my signature.


      "Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession." - Barrett Brown

      by 3rdOption on Sun Oct 06, 2013 at 11:06:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bad-faith actors and external existential threats. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ray Pensador

        One more point.

        At the political level, you can tell the bad-faith actors by how they respond to an external existential threat to all parties.

        After 9/11, Democrats acted in good-faith. They worked with President Bush and Republicans to address an external existential threat. (The wisdom of some of those actions has been litigated elsewhere.) No one can say that the Democrats took advantage of 9/11 to undercut W or the Republicans.

        Now, what happens when the US, under President Obama, comes under threat, in any fashion, from an external source? Politics, with the bad-faith Republicans, no longer ends at the border. They choose any international issue that is bad for the US as an immediate opportunity to attack the President.

        Look at what they did with Benghazi. They were issuing formal statements attacking President Obama before even the State Department knew what was happening. Before we even knew that our ambassador was dead!

        This was shameful. And it was as clear a tell as any good-faith actor needs to confirm that they are up against a bad-faith enemy. That

        Compromise is impossible, and this bad-faith enemy must be exposed to the public, and then destroyed.


        "Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession." - Barrett Brown

        by 3rdOption on Sun Oct 06, 2013 at 11:22:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Another brilliant analysis. Let me clarify (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        3rdOption

        something.  It's not necessarily that I give bad faith actors the benefit of the doubt; it's that I have a process I follow before determining somebody is a bad faith actor, because once that determination is made, I then proceed to the path of ruthless destruction of same (if the opportunity presents itself).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site