EDIT: THIS INTERPRETATION IS INCORRECT, but I AM LEAVING IT UP, to make a point. Follow me below the fold.
There is a diary that's been published that claims about Obama's SOTU "This speech was not about what Congress will or won't pass in 2011. It was about who independents will vote for in 2012."
How does he know this? Why cant it be BOTH? Surely a politician wants to get elected, but what makes him think he is unconcerned about getting his agenda passed?
Did he provide any scientific evidence or statistics for his claim? No, he just stated some pundits' opinions that the speech was popular, then assumed that because he is popular it must mean he is only concerned about popularity and not legislation. How did he make this leap?
This sort of diary actively works against a progressive agenda. All it does is spread cynicism. Since its baseless, its counterproductive.
When Obama does try to pass progressive agenda, that cynicism becomes his enemy.
That doesn't mean that I am against criticism of Obama, but only when it is substantial and based on evidence. A wonderful diary posted by someone who graded Obama with a C, provided some great evidence of the failure of Obama's Race to the Top.
Once someone smeared Obama's healthcare bill as "The baucus bill" and said some mean things about it. This is ridiculous. By saying this, the person implies that the ENTIRE bill is conservative like Baucus. But that is NOT TRUE. The bill has progressive elements such as the end of preexisting conditions. This is why I say, ATTACK THE SPECIFIC POINTS of the bill that are flawed not the bill as a whole. In other words, attack the fact that Obama did not include the public option and fight for it, but dont smear the bill when it includes progressive elements. This is the recipe for our failure
Let me be clear that I think its a good idea to criticize Obama. But a lot of it isnt factual. How does this make us any different from Freepers?
A sample of some of the comments making baseless, pointless comments which have appeared. You guys need to try harder
"oh dear"
"uhm"
"why is it ok for you to make baseless assertions about why a diary is written"
Notice that the commentator did not point out exactly what baseless assertions I made. Ironically this is the whole point of the diary, to give specifics, and this guy doesnt do it.
Update:
Ha. Only Granny Helen made any significant point. Everyone else is trolling. One fool claims that "basketball is baseless"
You guys have no respect for someone who is studying to be an MD. You guys need to get off your high horses and respond to my argument rather than trolling and insulting me.
This is seriously pathetic.
UPDATE: So I havent deleted a WORD, to make a point. I made a bad interpretation of someone's diary. Instead of telling me what mistake I made, most of comments were vague, unrelated to the topic, etc. This is insulting to someone who wrote a diary in order to have a conversation. Ignoring me is one thing, but to post unrelated nonsense is an insult. One which I found to be unmerited because NOONE told me what mistake I made.
In response I said that I was an MD student. This is not to show that I am smarter than anyone. Ive never made that claim. Instead all I demanded was respect for my argument to be heard. I make mistakes. But I am intelligent enough to understand them if someone tells me what they are.
I already said all this, but I am repeating it, because people think that I believe I know more than others. I do not, but I deserve the right to know when I made a mistake.