Skip to main content

View Diary: It Should Never Have Come to This (76 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  More believable than some proposals I've seen (3+ / 0-)

    but in 2009 they were still in massive emergency recovery mode. I don't know if it would have worked but we'll never know now.

    Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? . . . and respect the dignity of every human being.

    by Wee Mama on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 08:45:32 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  If you win by getting the most votes, (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Free Jazz at High Noon, kurt

      and most of the voters want something

      and not only do they want it, it's actually good for them, and for the nation as a whole...

      Instead we got an immediate sign that hope and change were just slogans as the widely-known advocates of precisely the thing which destroyed jobs were his picks as advisers.

      How many of the eligible voters said, 'screw this,' right away; and then to see it repeated over and over. A Jobs Commission with the guy who has exported more jobs to China than anyone else, which doesn't meet for a year before it just dies. After having made no major recommendations the four times they met. Protecting the bankers, pushing another murderous Trade Agreement...

      Don't see how the plan is to get people to vote for our Party when the Party doesn't seem eager to vote for the voters.

      Actual Democrats: the surest, quickest, route to More Democrats. And actually addressing our various emergencies.

      by Jim P on Tue Sep 17, 2013 at 09:15:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Here, I think, is where we probably disagree and (0+ / 0-)

        may not be able to find common ground. I don't believe that "hope and change were just slogans" as far as Obama was concerned. His whole life up to that point was consistent with genuinely wanting what was good for other people and with a willingness to put his own efforts into forwarding that. His choice of advisors may have been wrong; there may have been advisors (perhaps Robert Reich?) who could have given different advice that was also practical in the context of that annus horribilis. But to me errors on Obama's part in chosing advisors is more likely explained by his relative inexperience, his previous successes at getting real work done with Republicans (weapons control with Lugar, transparency with Coburn), and his general tendency to try to find and work with the best in others.

        There may have been alternatives that could have worked in that horrible time - I don't believe that Obama willfully and intentionally chose to do something that he knew would have a worse outcome for people in general. Hanlon's corollary (never attribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance or incompetence) has proven true too many times in my own life for me not to use it in general.

        Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? . . . and respect the dignity of every human being.

        by Wee Mama on Wed Sep 18, 2013 at 05:16:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree that Obama was naive when he first took (0+ / 0-)

          office. However, you would think that after extending his hand for the 99th time to Republicans to try and work together, and having his hand bitten 99 times, he MIGHT have learned his lesson. But he hasn't.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (177)
  • Community (71)
  • Civil Rights (50)
  • Baltimore (44)
  • Elections (39)
  • Culture (38)
  • Bernie Sanders (36)
  • Economy (33)
  • Texas (32)
  • Law (31)
  • 2016 (28)
  • Labor (27)
  • Environment (27)
  • Hillary Clinton (26)
  • Education (23)
  • Rescued (22)
  • Freddie Gray (21)
  • Politics (21)
  • Barack Obama (21)
  • Media (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site