Skip to main content

One of the things that I am finding very frustrating (and perhaps the significance is lost on me), but there seems to be a tendency by Democrats to take any statement made by Republicans that contradicts with current GOP ideology as validation of the Democratic position (in a broad sense).  Its as if Democrats are hapless children looking for validation from a stern parent.

Case in point?  Today, Salon has a short piece from Alex Seitz-Wald alleging that a GOP intel "expert" has debunked the myth being advanced in GOP quarters that President's Obama's failure to attend in-person daily intelligence briefings is putting the country at risk.  Personally, I found a number of problems with this piece.  To me, the substance of the article doesn't match up with the title (I don't know that the "expert's" opinion actually debunked the GOP myth).  But guess what? Who cares? Last week, Dana Milbank at WaPo dispelled the myth by explaining that President Obama actually reads his intel briefing binder and responds with pointed questions to his intel advisors (as was done in the Clinton Administration).  Milbank goes on to point out that the in-person meetings were started because President Bush II wanted to read less (I know, a complete shocker).

My point?  Democrats/Progressives/Those on the Left don't need to chase crumbs left by the GOP and the extreme right wing.  Yes, lies and untruths should be disputed and debunked, but truth telling is different than trying to turn GOP statements into some form of approval, irrespective of how vauge, opague or just irrelevant.  Again, maybe its just me...but, I find that whole process "naseauting" (to borrow a line from Mayor Cory Booker).

Note:  In fairness to Seitz-Wald, this is a common practice, so I am not picking on him alone.  His piece just happened to be the most recent one that I read.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  When I encounter dipshits online (0+ / 0-)

    Outside of Kos, who advance Republican goals, standards, and  requirements for approval, I eviscerate them and leave them clutching their entrails, blinking in confusion.

    You are absolutely correct, and when you see this garbage outside of the MSM's playground, in a venue you can address it, I suggest you do so as harshly, as rudely, as uncompromisingly as possible.  Don't just tsk-tsk.  Kick 'em in the nuts and make them cry for mommy.

  •  The GOP are liars. Everybody knows that. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    happymisanthropy, MKSinSA

    That's the lead in a comment I just posted on the aca.
    It works in any situation. Just go from there.
    Everybody knows it's true.

    You can't make this stuff up.

    by David54 on Mon Sep 17, 2012 at 12:29:52 PM PDT

  •  Saw this tweet today & resent it (0+ / 0-)
  •  As I suggested some time ago (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kurt

    in this diary:

    If we were to put an end to the notion that Obama is a leftist, the political battlefield might appear to be over a different set of concepts than those which promote the idea of "Right versus Left."  Rather, we might see, as did the UK social thinker Anthony Giddens in his book Beyond Right and Left, that in this era the "Left" has turned defensive, and thus we might have a notion that political life, here in the US especially, has become about different versions of preservation of the status quo, through appeals to differing historical notions of what America is about.  
    The question, then, about Democrat versus Republican, is one of whether or not we want to preserve the status quo while maintaining the fiction that government exists to do something for society, or while ignoring this fiction altogether.  It's a cultural distinction, meant to allow people the opportunity to engage in yelling matches  without really changing the behavior of government.

    If the Republicans disappeared, the game would be up, and we'd have to face up to the fact that "progressives" really have no support in government because the role of government in this era, Democratic or Republican, is to keep the status quo going.  The discussion about the "debt ceiling" last year should have tipped you off about that.

    We may not need the Republicans.  But the political class does.

    "Democratic and Republican politicians keep each other in business.." - Scott Tucker

    by Cassiodorus on Mon Sep 17, 2012 at 01:44:31 PM PDT

    •  How Right You Are (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cassiodorus, kurt

      Sometimes, I feel like the entire political class is engaged in one big charade...In many respects, if you really want to be cynical, you cld argue that much of what's happening is a diversion...meant to keep the citizenry focused on anything but the fact that the overwhelming majority of us are running in circles...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site