Skip to main content

View Diary: This "Compromise" Equals Capitulation: A Call to Action to Save the Democratic Party Platform (22 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  To expand on the press conference (6+ / 0-)

    Obama is technically right that this country was founded on compromise; the problem is that Obama does not know what the word really means. There was no compromise when it came to our founders wanting representation in our parliament, via no taxation without representation. Sure they had their differences, most notably over slavery and the differences between the Articles of Confederation and what is known as the Constitution hammered out in the Federalist papers which would also play out as catalysis to the Civil War including slavery. They didn’t "need to understand that we have to keep subsidizing the East India Company and King George III had a point , too" and that we would get to independence someday but we must compromise for now.

    NO, they were totally united against that corporate East India co tax cut. They were for religious freedom and against taxation without representation even with their all differences against the British Crown. There were plenty of bad compromises like the 3/5 rule, among others that were set to be hammered out in the future in order to come together and form a nation of free 13 colonies to start.

    They knew many things would need to be ratified later down the road, but the founding of the nation in order to do so had many uncompromising principled ideals stated in the Declaration of Independence which didn’t sound a lot like compromise so that really is not the same kind of compromise our president thinks progressives do not like today, besides the obvious ones progressives via the Abolitionists, the suffragists fought to right over the years in a no surrender uncompromising way to start and didn’t stop until a real step up the ladder was taken and that there was a ladder for more steps to be taken in the future. Yet that was strangely not mentioned.

    The President talked about FDR and HCR decrying public option activists and using the flawed example of SS. I’ll tell him what I tell a lot of kossacks, SS did not start out as a pseudo regulated 401k, as it was a federal program with a foundation to build on. Private monopolized insurance reform is not.

    FDR also was a jackhammer, even in a wheelchair as he tried and threatened to pack the court in order for parts of the New Deal that was blocked even though those in his own cabinet left him on that, he didn’t succeed technically in that battle, but he won the war and changed the trajectory of the SCOTUS so the new Deal was able to pass. You don’t get much more non-compromising than that. So I won’t be lectured on FDR either.

    Barack Obama is able to be president, because of JFK, and then LBJ with the backing of the civil rights movement didn’t surrender to Everett Dirksen’s first deal put forth which would have ruined the effectiveness of the CRA of 1964 and only compromised when what they were trying to accomplish fitted the main goal. This was also made possible many years earlier, though in defeat, by Harry Truman going to bat for civil rights and unions, and against war profiteers which also made a big difference. LBJ and Truman did not settle for non mutual fake compromise.

    Neither did FDR’s cousin Teddy Roosevelt, whom FDR was inspired by in his early days as a state senator in NY (another funny story is Chicago state Senator Barack Obama would really hate what president Obama just said), who coined the term bully pulpit, because it actually made a difference when he and other progressives like Senator Robert LaFollete fought to bust up the monopolies of the Gilded Age. There were no non mutual fake compromises, but mutual compromises when there were not clear victories and busting up Standard Oil and J.P Morgan’s Northern Securities Company were real victories for consumers, unlike weak Health Insurance reform and weak financial reform.

    Some of my friends won’t like to hear this (and I do mean my friends,) but this proves being president matters and that it’s not accurate to say the president is not at fault at all. It denies history.

    After all this was supposed to be a change election. That’s how it was advertised, if not we deserved to hear a less manipulating slogan.

    Pro Life??? Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers!- George Carlin

    by priceman on Wed Dec 08, 2010 at 11:33:01 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site