Skip to main content

View Diary: All Three GOP Manufactured Scandals Falling Apart (160 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Fine. But what are you doing on (12+ / 0-)

    a site that is about electing more and better Democrats? You may not be an Obama Democrat, but if you think he is the worst president ever, worse than right-wing Republicans who start wars based on outright lies, you do not belong here.

    •  That's a bit far (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Don midwest, Egg, Victor Ward

      Regardless of the merit of Don's opinion, it doesn't follow that he prefers Republicans to Democrats. Or that he would object to "new and better Democrats."

      Nothing human is alien to me.

      by WB Reeves on Sat May 18, 2013 at 09:32:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, he just prefers George W Bush (0+ / 0-)

        (and Reagan, and Nixon, and Hoover, and Harding) to Obama. That is wholly inconsistent with being a Democrat.

        •  That doesn't follow either (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          4kedtongue, Victor Ward

          Pretty sure Don doesn't believe in voting for the "lesser evil."

          Look, if Don wants to affirm your interpretation then I wont argue your point. But criticism, even hyperbolic denunciation, of the President isn't sufficient grounds for your charge.

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Sat May 18, 2013 at 09:51:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  This entire community was founded (4+ / 0-)

            by opponents of the Bush administration. If there is one thing that ties us all together it is a hatred of all things Bush and Cheney. Arguing that Bush was not the worst president, by itself, flags one as out of the mainstream here. And choosing, of all presidents, Barack Obama, to be that president who is worse than Bush, to me means the person is not only out of his element here, but probably out of his element virtually anywhere.

            If you think the Dkos community can and should have a "Obama is worse than Bush" wing, then all I'm saying is that I humbly disagree. Entirely.

    •  Or, at least, you don't exist in the same (9+ / 0-)

      Reality level that I'm on. This list is horseshit of a pretty high order. OWS failing to revoutionize the country is Obama's fault? Talks about overreach. Wars are, by the way, ending though perhaps not quickly enough. Very glib and factually challenged.

      However, let me also remind folks that the bar is kind of low all around. There's something about being president that seems to bring out the worst, as well as the best, in a chief executive.

      Let me give you a list of things that have happened under past 20th century DEMOCRATIC administrations that are face worse than anything happening, or (mostly) alleged to have happened,today, all within the lifetimes of people still on this earth. With the possible exception of Wilson, I would have gladly voted for any of them and volunteered for all of them in their elections.}

      Getting America involved in a pointless war while openly imprisoning dissidents because of their opposition to that war. (Wilson)

      Imprisoning an entire ethnic group, well over 100,000 people, without charge, provocation or any good reason at all because of racism and to quell mass hysteria (FDR)

      Significantly escalating a war to prevent the loss of an election at the ultimate cost of hundreds of thousands of lives (Johnson, admitted as much in released tapes of conversations with advisers).

      I'm leaving out the very arguable US war crimes of world war II (Dresden, fire bombing of Tokyo, and, most controversially, Hiroshima and Nagasaki) and the fact that many progressives believe Harry Truman essentially started the Cold War, which they believe could have been avoided. (I haven't looked into that one in a while.)

      If you want to get into all of Obama's sins of omission such as "furthering the oligarchy" (he didn't invent it, but I certainly agree he's not doing nearly enough to even slow its spread, much less stop it -- I'm sure some will argue he's perfecting it,though), then you've got to throw in Kennedy's foot dragging on civil rights, tacitly allowing the crime of Jim Crow to continue unabated. That's pretty horrible.

      I'm sure there are countless others because presidents have never, ever led on reform issues -- even Lincoln and FDR were basically pushed into what they did by enormous national crises far more urgent at least in terms of politics and public and private perception than anything we're seeing right. (Yes, I know, climate change and quite possibly the shift in money and power that's gone on might be just as serious, but the fact that it's not perceived that way can't be laid entirely at Mr. Obama's feet, though some always will find a way.)

      People who even flirt with the idea that Obama is "the worst president ever" are simply letting hyperbole take control of their brain and fry it beyond the level capable of the harshest psychotropic drugs known to humanity. That, or they just haven't learned much American history.

      I really think part of the issue is that Obama borrowed so many rhetorical flourishes from famous activists that they essentialy expected him to be the first activist/president, which might be an interesting thing to try some day but is an awful, awful lot to hope for.

      Now residing in Van Nuys, but "LaBobsterofVanNuys" isn't funny and besides, Van Nuys is really part of Los Angeles

      by LABobsterofAnaheim on Sat May 18, 2013 at 09:44:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I've a nickname for this phenomenon: (3+ / 0-)

        "Laundry List Liberal" -- the game is to put as many items on the list, regardless of the merits of each item, and then just try to overwhelm the debate with pure quantity.

        And yes, we can find plenty of "rox" fans who use the same technique from the opposite trench. Doesn't matter which side of the fight it comes from, it's a bullshit rhetorical tactic.


        I really think part of the issue is that Obama borrowed so many rhetorical flourishes from famous activists that they essentialy expected him to be the first activist/president...
        In this way, Obama is complicit in his own backlash. The "Hope" slogan may have been so simple that it got him elected, but it was also so empty -- such a Rorschach blot -- that apparently too many hard-core liberals chose to fill it with their ultimate utopian fantasies.

        In the end, the whole debate point is utterly useless and futile. The intellectual construction is completely backwards: rather than summing up each president's successes and failures and drawing an evaluative conclusion (a stupid enough endeavor in and of itself), laundry list liberals instead start with the premise that Obama must be horrible, and then find as many items as they can to add to the list of "proof". The result, almost invariably, is the kind of overreach you have noted here, where the failure of a spontaneous street protest is added to the list of indictment.

        Epistemic closure is killing the GOP. I would hate to see it kill the progressive movement as well. Whether it will kill Daily Kos remains to be seen, but as things stand now, it wouldn't amount to much of a loss.

        Non futuis apud Boston

        by kenlac on Sat May 18, 2013 at 10:08:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes! Absolutely agree. (0+ / 0-)

          The term "laundry list liberal" now duly added to my lexicon even I had to look up "epistemic closure" again (I'm getting rusty on my blog speak!). And, yeah, the oversimplistic list device is definitely been used by both sides. Lilly Ledbetter was nice, but it's hardly a game changer!

          Now residing in Van Nuys, but "LaBobsterofVanNuys" isn't funny and besides, Van Nuys is really part of Los Angeles

          by LABobsterofAnaheim on Sat May 18, 2013 at 10:24:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Obama can no longer be elected. (0+ / 0-)

      And you do not get to decide who belongs here.

       If the mission of this website is to elect more and better democrats when the fuck will it start and/or where the fuck is the proof you have accomplished anything?

      Besides Obama does not agree with your take on the wars, don't forget that. It was not only the tellers of the lies, but also "pragmatic" Dems who nodded on cue who got us where we are.

      Obama is perhaps showing us he is not the best example of how a good democrat acts and governs, once she/he is elected. ACA will prove it again, when we can finally compare the 10% with pre-existing conditions and students who benefit, with the 90% of us who still can't fucking afford to go to the doctor because HCOs (or get our hours reduced to make it easier for the company to comply with the new rules).

      Voting for better people to change a corrupt system is like voting for rain in the desert. Nice idea, but not effective. The results speak for themselves.

      •  The "Obama is worse than Bush" (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        GAS, TheDuckManCometh

        wing of this site I guess has its adherents. I ain't one of them. And I wish them safe travels as they are driven out of here by a community who views such a stand as idiotic.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site