“Experience hath shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.” – Thomas Jefferson
I'm going to attempt to keep this diary as simple as I can.
I've had enough. The baseless strawman attacks against progressives who dare to levy legitimate criticisms against specific Obama administration policies has reached the epidemic stage here at DK. These strawmen take many forms, but I'll limit myself to addressing the one which seems to be the most common.
STRAWMAN: CRITICS OF OBAMA BELIEVE OBAMA = BUSH
No. They don't. This simplistic assertion is inflammatory and wrong. I have yet to see a single progressive who believes in this blanket statement. Those who make this charge are ignoring context. There are many progressives who believe Obama = Bush ON SEVERAL SPECIFIC ISSUES AND POLICIES. The distinction is of the utmost importance. Some examples:
The Criminal NSA Eavesdropping Program
The Unconstitutional Detention Without Charges Policy
The Counter-Productive War Crimes: Targeting of Civilians
The Unconstitutional Cover-Up Of Bush-Era War Crimes
The list goes on. The main point here is that these are legitimate, fact-based criticisms, which simply point out that the Obama administration, in THESE CASES, is either continuing egregious Bush-era policies or is expanding upon them. This is not the same as claiming Obama = Bush.
So, before leveling that ridiculous charge against a fellow progressive, remember that it's a strawman argument. If you want to debate that SPECIFIC ISSUE in which someone is comparing Obama's policies to Bush's policies, you are free to do so, but lose the strawman. It's tiresome.
I’ll close with a quote found on a NY Times political blog by someone calling himself ‘concerned citizen’:
“It is well and good to understand realpolitik. It is also well and good, however, to insist that one’s nation live up to its own stated principles. It is the hypocrisy of our nation to which any real patriot ought to vociferously object. We Americans ought to be holding our leadership to the highest possible standards that our own culture and political history have enshrined in our most cherished documents — the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.
When our “leadership” has blatantly violated these standards of behavior both domestically and internationally, it is our duty as citizens to object, to protest, to take political action, to vote, to educate, to lift the veil of ignorance and obfuscation, to criticize, to raise the uncomfortable issues that no one wants to discuss.
Yes, we have much that is admirable in this nation. Those who genuinely love these principles must never quietly acquiesce in their destruction. Those who see democracy under corporate assault must say so. Those who see families being destroyed by an economic system that requires two parents to work fulltime while their children become “latchkey kids” are less likely to fall in love with corporate economics.
When our nation commits dastardly acts against life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in other nations it is the American citizen’s duty and responsibility to dissent, to criticize, to deplore, to protest against the defilement of our most sacred principles. It is our duty as citizens to upbraid those who perpetrate these offenses.
It is not patriotic to wrap oneself in the flag and trumpet “America, Love it or Leave it”. It is not patriotic to stick one’s head in the sand when our country does morally and legally indefensible deeds at home or abroad. True citizens must always dissent and object to these things. The price of liberty is constant vigilance.”
BONUS STRAWMAN #2: PROGRESSIVES WANTED TO SPIKE THE HEALTH CARE BILL DUE TO A LACK OF A PUBLIC OPTION
This strawman is also simple-minded and tiresome. Once again, there is nuance and context missing from such a lazy charge. For many, the lack of a Public Option was THE LAST STRAW in a series of givebacks, which chipped away at the strength of the bill over many months time. It began with single-payer being taken off the table before the fight even began, then we had the excise tax, the backroom deal with big Pharma, etc. It was never simply the lack of a Public Option. So, before leveling that charge, remember it's a simplistic strawman. There's nothing wrong with arguing on the merits of specific legislation, or even on the best tactics and strategy moving forward, but the moment we resort to strawman arguments, the debate is over before it begins.
UPDATED - STRAWMAN #3: DEFENDING OBAMA AUTOMATICALLY MAKES SOMEONE A MINDLESS OBAMA-BOT On the flip side, we see the "Obama-bot" charge leveled quite often in response to someone defending a specific Obama policy. We need to stick to the specific policies, tactics and strategies and avoid the labels, which only serve to inflame.