Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama signs the Monsanto Protection Act (224 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It Could Be Years Before We Have a Progressive (13+ / 0-)

    option for President. Til then the best we can do is vote for the least conservative.

    Incidentally this is the point in the election cycle when we're most free to try to find or help build better candidacies, so if anyone has a better idea for 2016 than Hillary Clinton, now is the proper time for critique and for finding those better Democrats.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 03:17:30 PM PDT

    •  The reason that is true... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lucy2009, HarpboyAK

      ...is because people keep voting for people like Obama.

      Stop doing that! You do have choices. You simply don't take advantage of them because you're afraid to.

    •  One other thing... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chi

      While you're correct that we need to find a better candidate that Clinton (or Cuomo), we must also start focusing on next year's primaries. The course of our country is actually decided in the primaries.

      Unfortunately, the establishment candidates have already sewn up the vast majority of precinct captains, so it's going to be a tough battle. Even more unfortunately, a lot of people will not fight that battle because they're afraid it will weaken the "inevitiable" winner. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy that is leading to our demise.

    •  Sherrod Brown. (7+ / 0-)

      I'm sure, though, that he won't pass the purity test, either, because no one can.

      How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

      by BenderRodriguez on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 03:42:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's not a purity test. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lucy2009

        It's about issues and principles, not about personalities. If someone votes to raise the minimum wage a little bit but then endorses presidential omnipotence in the decision about whether or not to kill a dissenter (without review by the judiciary), the minimum wage dwindles to unimportance.

        I like most of Sherrod Brown's positions on banking. But he supports presidential omnipotence with the effect of crippling the Bill of Rights.

        Without those rights, nothing else matters.

      •  I don't look forward to the primary. (12+ / 0-)

        People who want True Progressivism tended to fall in love with Kucinich, who is a basket case unto himself, or Edwards, who would have turned the words "Democratic Party" into an epithet once "I cheated on my dying wife" dominated the daily press briefings.

        I don't think that people recognize just how corruption and scandal-free the Obama administration is - I have always thought that, long-term, he will be remembered for that.  The few things that have happened (e.g. when he stepped into the trap laid by that evil Breitbart video - and yes, when a person lies to ruin an innocent party's career, it's evil) have been quickly corrected with mea culpas that have been seen as sincere.  Really, the best that my Republican colleagues have been able to throw at him is guilt-by-association with his former church in Chicago, and that was pretty weak tea.  Or there's our fruitcake fringe, writing breathless diaries about Monsanto, like Obama could actually veto this bill over this issue.

        But I guess the absence of an issue isn't news.  You're not going to open up the NY Times tomorrow morning and see a front-page headline, "No government-stopping scandal today either!  Regular reporting on the lack of scandals will continue weekly!"

        So it's going to be hard to improve on that, to find a candidate so clean that they could polish the formal china with their dirty laundry.  And it's not like the GOP, where the faux-libertarians coalesce around the House of Paul and the theocrats around rednecks like Huckabee - we need a new generation and that new generation isn't quite in view yet.

        But it's dangerous to run all the way to the left and pick the most progressive candidate without first looking at their experiences, media savvy and of course ethical fortitude with a critical eye.  It's challenging enough to continue a Democratic presidency after two terms; we can't afford to make it even harder for ourselves by borrowing trouble.

        I suspect this diarist would disagree.  And I don't much care, seeing as the diarist thinks that a must-pass appropriations bill is a "Monsanto Protection Act."  If we're going to be in government we have to actually govern, we can't afford to behave like children and stomp our feet when a budget bill the size of Montana has an obnoxious provision in it.  The line-item veto is unconstitutional, and it's unconstitutional for a reason.

        "The first drawback of anger is that it destroys your inner peace; the second is that it distorts your view of reality. If you come to understand that anger is really unhelpful, you can begin to distance yourself from anger." - The Dalai Lama

        by auron renouille on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 04:20:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So what? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Brown Thrasher

          Clinton cheated on his wife, in lurid ways, in the freaking Oval Office.  His wife who may very well be the next President.  Why the heck do people give a crap about Edwards' infidelities, while still idolizing old NAFTA Bill?

          •  Um, did I idolize NAFTA? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Brown Thrasher, Miss Blue, kefauver

            Not sure why you threw that one at me, I didn't even mention it.  That's one thing that we need to be mindful of, if the party picks a Clinton - there's a lot of baggage.  If you think that was me trying to support the Clintons, it's not - it's me dreading the primary because, as of this afternoon, I don't see an obvious candidate.

            And I do give a care about Clinton's misuse of the Oval Office - for two years, instead of governing, we had a soap opera.  The number of wasted opportunities as he pontificated about the precise meaning of sexual intercourse are incalculable.  He should have summoned a small amount of courage and owned up to it so that he could have tried to move on, or at least had a chance of holding the moral high ground vis-a-vis Congress.

            "The first drawback of anger is that it destroys your inner peace; the second is that it distorts your view of reality. If you come to understand that anger is really unhelpful, you can begin to distance yourself from anger." - The Dalai Lama

            by auron renouille on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 05:49:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Quit trying to steal my Senator. (3+ / 0-)

        Look, we've got some really good people in the Senate, and they need to stay there.  We can do more with strong progressives in Congress and a mediocre president than we can by stripping the best talent from the Senate and shoving it into the WH.  If we can take back the House and Senate and keep our key players on top of various committees, things are sewn up - we just need a President who won't veto things, not one who is 'leading'.  A fantastic leader in the WH means little, though, if he never gets to sign anything worthwhile because everything sent to him has been drafted by lobbyists or 'moderates'.  If Sherrod takes lead seat on the Banking committee, we might finally start to see some worthwhile changes.

    •  DLC won... NT (0+ / 0-)

      "We need a revolution away from the plutocracy that runs Government."

      by hangingchad on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 05:51:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site