Skip to main content

View Diary: I support both President Obama and Senator Sanders (72 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You Become the Thing You Hate (5+ / 0-)

    when you adopt it's positions, not when you fight it.

    I am not willing to accept that trickle down economics has positive aspects, or contains "some good ideas". It's wrong, and immoral. Hell, I think we could even describe it as evil. So, if an ideaology, or it's impact, is evil, then compromising with it is becoming complict with that evil.

    Take another example - the Iraq war. Would it have been OK, if we only bombed a few cities and occupied half the country? That would have been a compromise with the neo-cons, right?

    Standing up for ideals you believe in is not wanting to hasten armageddon. At some point you have to fight for what is right, otherwise, well, just let 'em have Czechoslovakia, then they will leave Poland alone.

    •  you become the thing you hate (5+ / 0-)

      when you do what the thing you hate does

      if you hate the republicans for undermining democracy in this country then you cannot undermine democracy in your efforts to stop them doing it

      if you hate the republicans for shoving everything they want down the throats of the minority voters in this country whenever they are in the majority then you cannot do the same thing when you are in the majority

      it's not just the policy differences that matter between the left and the right.  it's the philosophical differences as well.

      at least to me it is.

      Obama is a robot sent from the future. but was he sent here to save us or to TERMINATE us?!!

      by bluefaction on Fri Dec 10, 2010 at 08:05:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What I Hate About the Republicans (3+ / 0-)

        is, indeed, their policies and philosophy.

        But I fully expect them to implement those policies if the electorate is foolish enough to put them in the majority. Will I scream that their policies are wrong and work to stop their implementation? Yes. Will I complain that they are not compromising when they are in the majority? No.

        Policies are the result of philosophy. Political philosophy, economic philosophy, moral philosophy. They are not seperate from it.

        I believe a progressive, or democratic philosphy, incorporates economic and social justice, peace before war. I do not believe "being nice and gentlemanly to the opposition, and giving their opinions due consideration, compromising even when we know teh results will be hrmfuk" is part of that philosophy.

        •  So do you think being a hard ass will (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mwm341, laker

          get better results?  I believe in a lot of things.  I have my own philosophy.  But I control what I can control.  Sometimes I think that people are searching for that one hero to singlehandedly do what only the masses can accomplish.

          When the masses start to show up, then let me know.

          "I'm measuring everything the Democrats and President Obama do, not against what I WANT, but against the status quo." --RASalvatore 9/16/10

          by smoothnmellow on Fri Dec 10, 2010 at 08:25:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ask Obama. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Situational Lefty

            He gets results when he's a hardass all the time.  When he wanted to reconfirm Bernake, he was a hard ass and got results.  When he wanted to pass Bob Dole's health plan, he was a hard ass and got results.  He wants to pass the Republican Tax Cut wish list, he becomes a hard ass.

            But it's about damn time you folks look past the unartful expressions and adopting them as punchlines to diminish other people's arguments.  If you think what people have been saying is only as deep as calling for 'being a hard ass,' you simply haven't been paying attention.

            Please go read the Lakoff diary.

          •  Additionally, (0+ / 0-)

            Good luck expanding what we can control with the President and you folks trying to crush every effort to expand our ability to gain further control.

            We are the one's trying to expand the conversation here, and while we may not always do so in tones you imply are the only way to persuade, Progressive attitudes will never take hold with the masses.

      •  Would ... (0+ / 0-)

        unconditionally supporting party leaders qualify as 'something the thing I hate does?'  

        Let me guess, you're going give me a rare exception on a singular issue and imply that somehow invalidates my point, just like you did above with 'Scott Brown on DADT.'  I'm going to take the only two that come to my mind, Harriet Myers and TARP.

        And just for the record, what you discuss is not really philosophy, and I don't particularly hate the player when it comes to that, I hate the game. And the fact that my side refuses to resort to those tactics when they have the chances that still fit into the rules and without perverting democracy.  Sorry, not going to let you get away with the frame of nothing else could be done within the context of adhering to democratic principles.  

        There is such a thing as tyranny of the minority, as we have all seen.  In fact, I would have liked to see a little bit of that on my side as well.  Nuclear Option would have suited me just fine, thank you very much.  Hell, we would've gotten Roberts and Alito anyway, but gotten rid of that pesky filibuster.  Imagine the possibilities of breaking the back of that anti-democratic son-of-a-bitch.

        What IS a 'philosophical difference' is the very principals that we were just called "sanctimonious" for adhering to.  For instance, if you hate Republicans for furthering voodoo economics and legitimizing war crimes, then you can not champion voodoo economics and legitimization of war crimes when in the majority.  

    •  I'm not talking about adopting positions (0+ / 0-)

      I'm speaking of our attitudes in working towards those positions.  I have no qualms with what Bernie Sanders did tonight, but the problem is that he is only ONE person.

      You can scream fire at this deal all you want, but if no one in the theater is willing to listen to you, what does it get you to fight it out alone?

      Maybe it makes you feel good like you have done something, but at the end of the day, what have you accomplished?

      I'm not asking you or anyone else to accept any trickle down theories -- I know that shyt doesn't work, but it also doesn't work to get all worked up over a bad bill because the Democrats who had the majority in Congress failed to act to repeal the law when they had the time and when standing on principles would have actually acomplished something.  

      In conclusion, the problem with your premise is 2 fold -- the Dems waited too late and not enough Americans care to listen.

      "I'm measuring everything the Democrats and President Obama do, not against what I WANT, but against the status quo." --RASalvatore 9/16/10

      by smoothnmellow on Fri Dec 10, 2010 at 08:21:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  At the end of today, what does this tax bill (0+ / 0-)

        accomplish.  

        Look, I congratulate on your side capturing the term "pragmatism" but there can be a difference of opinion on what is pragmatic.  Furthermore, if this is what is pragmatic, if this is the best that can be had, than this administration needs to completely change what it is trying to accomplish.  It needs to stop any attempt at policy, and start to work on Lakoff  24/7/365.  The massive amount of ransom paid isn't worth the minute of 'freedom' our hostage takers are granting us.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site