Skip to main content

View Diary: If you think sequester will be bad, wait until they gut Social Security (195 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Voting the lesser of two evils looks like this. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    red rabbit, Panama Pete

    The lesser of two evil arguments was a central argument for the election of the President.  Does it have merit?  Sure it does.  Even Chomsky said that voting for the lesser of two evils is acceptable.  

    But many people now seem to think that Obama's victory meant that he was diametrically opposed to Rommey, and was in fact the anti-Rommey in terms in policies.  

    Rommey would have done his best to privatize social security; Obama will work to cut it, but keep it intact.  While obviously Obama's way is the better of two bad choices, it still is not a good choice.

    But yes, your point is a good one.  The black leftist Glen Ford made it awhile a good that ironically it was the right wing crazies who were stopping Obama's "grand bargain" out of pure hatred for the president.

    Maybe gop Obama-hatred can benefit the left.  Obama needs House Dems to pass his cuts as the crazies will not vote for anything with Obama's name.   Essentially Obama needs Dem votes to pass his gop-bill.  If House Dems refuse, then they can leverage that resistance to have Obama remove any odious cuts.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site