many kossacks have been towards President Obama recently. I sometimes wonder if President Clinton faced less harsh criticism/nastiness. What do you think?
Here is a sample of some of the nastiness in this link, courtesy of our respected fellow kossack weatherdude.
http://www.dailykos.com/...
Why is there a certain wing of this blog that sees the bad in EVERYTHING President Obama may or may not be doing? Why does that wing NEVER acknowledge/legitimize the views of those who take a "giving the benefit of the doubt" side or positive side of situations? It would be appreciated if they showed some respect towards their fellow kossacks who disagree. Also, why do they base some of their arguments and diaries on speculations/rumors and hate it when they get their mistakes pointed out?
President Obama has acknowledged he made mistakes in his first term in terms of governing and messaging. There is no sugarcoating he should have done some things better. Also, we absolutely need to push and expect the BEST from him. I have no doubts or disagreement about that.
However, what I do not comprehend is why the constant one-sided nastiness/hatred of President Obama and disrespect of those who do not hold those views are so prevalent in this blog?
For example, this deal is NOTHING like past deals. Ed Schultz endorsed the deal. Also, Bernie Sanders voted for it (in years past he voted no in almost every deal that came up).
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid made it unscathed. Many bloggers deeply feared Social Security was going to be axed in this particular lame duck session. That did not happen and they were thus wrong. Yet, these bloggers are still really trashing President Obama as if it did happen.
I wonder if President Bill Clinton faced any of this progressive nastiness, even though he did a lot more nasty things for progressives and society than did President Obama.
It is also interesting to me that President Obama's approval ratings among liberals and Democrats are 85-90% in polls consistently. You would think they would be lower but they are not.