Hmm... I kind of find myself agreeing with Ace's last post here. It all relates back to my first campaign boss and what he called his Grand Unified Theory of American Politics: "We like winners and don't like wussies. Act like a winner."
Now I can't go so far as to say any "give and take" is wrong. Negotiating has its place - politics isn't as simple as a price range, but is instead more like a prioritized list of demands. Conceding one demand in order to get support for the other, more important, demands can be an acceptable practice. My problem with Obama (and Democrats in general) is that they don't act confident while making these negotiations with Republicans, even when they are the ones in power, and even when the polls show the American people support their agenda (despite Fox News' assertions otherwise). Part of the problem is that the Democratic Party currently represents a much wider range of political philosophies than the Republican party, so I get that it's not so simple as saying all the Democrats should vote for the Democratic agenda. Nonetheless, when you have the presidency and a majority in chambers, you need to act - as a party - like you have that power. Yes, the filibuster rule is totally broken, and it's absurd that Republican obstructionism has forced a de facto requirement of 60 votes in the senate to pass most bills, but a party with as much power as the Democrats had should embrace that fight and highlight that obstructionism. Instead, they mentioned it infrequently and without urgency, making it look like they were complaining instead of shedding light on abusive practices of the opposition. Even now, as Obama says he's "itching for a fight" with Republicans, he and the Democrats are failing to make an issue out of Republican obstructionism of the 9/11 first responders bill. A party that embraces power and uses it effectively could cause real embarrassment for the Republicans over that issue. Yet - and I feel this must be said - for all these criticisms, I must return to the simple fact that none of these complaints signal that I would be any happier with a President McCain or Republican controlled Congress. I'd rather be perpetually frustrated by the Democrats lacking assertiveness for an agenda I mostly agree with than be impressed by the Republicans effectively implementing an agenda that I am largely opposed to. |
Quote:
He was the the leading force behind the constitutional amendment to lower the voting age to 18. He fought for it through 10 sessions of Congress, horse trading each time until he finally had the votes. As I pointed out earlier, Reagan compromised (caved?) on raising taxes. And yes, despite ace's blindspot to the truth, the framers of the Constitution, those from the north, compromised core beliefs on slavery in order to form the union. There would have been no union w/o that compromise. Quote:
And the fact that the bigger tent of the Democratic party makes it much more challenging. Extreme ideologues (on either end) are great for political debate, but rarely achieve their political objectives....without compromise. |
I'm not talking about the British, ace, I'm talking about the building of America. You know, after the British.
And I doubt much of that required compromising on core values. Few people do that with regard to these things. It's the practical stuff that people compromise on; it's the methods, the pathway to achieving your goals (you know, based on your core values). I assume many Americans share the same core values anyway. They tend to differ on the details. |
I don't know how the next two years are going to go, but there could be a serious contender for the democratic nomination from the left. An anti-war, higher taxes, healthier and safer lives type of person.
Well, the vote to raise the debt ceiling in the next house should be really interesting... |
Realistically, I don't think there's much risk for challenge from the left. Keep in mind, people were seriously discussing a challenge from the right before Reagan's eventual reelection landslide.
|
I think a far right challenger to the republican nominee is more likely than a lefty challenger to Obama.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also, I am curious - you seem to suggest that being an extremist is a bad thing, is that your view? I am very much an extremist on somethings, and I don't see it as a problem or an insult. I like living in a world where there are extremists, I think it adds color or texture to life. Do you really want a bland world of nothing but middle of the road conformists on every issue? Is there any aspect in your life where you see yourself as an extremist? Even if you give me a flip response, consider it food for thought. ---------- Post added at 05:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:25 PM ---------- Quote:
|
ace, what about the socialism ingrained in American society despite the Red Scare? What about liberalism despite conservative politics? Is conservatism just ceremonial? What about a market that is regulated rather than purely free? Why isn't America a purely capitalist society? Why are there two political parties?
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Despite the core differences, very little would be accomplished if there were no compromise. The compromise is in the details, methods, practices, and pathways to reach certain goals or preferred conditions.
I've already pointed this out, ace, but I'm unsure whether you understand this. |
it's curious to read ace's latest moving-around-of-words...at a time when the markety basis for conservative ideology has been imploded by reality and the right has opted for a reality-optional approach that enables them to maintain consistency at the level of statements (realilty be damned)----all very unwittingly implosion of empire stuff, frankly----it's not terribly coincidental that you'd see attempts to impute "substance" to the rhetorical form "value" and then see people like ace repeating--unwittingly no doubt, given the reality-optional thing---the moves of any number of western european neo-fascist political groups in grouping these make-believe substantives around white christian "core values" and using them to try to draw us/them lines.
it's all of a piece with making the choice to preserve fictions about the world in place of the world and to anchor them in place with a version of conservative identity politics. because in situations like this, what comes to be at stake is a matter of identity. and there's a high-priced ideological system that's been reinforcing this whole reality-optional space for some time. after all, there's this: 40 Percent Of Americans Still Believe In Creationism and this: Fox News Viewers Are The Most Misinformed: Study which comes out of this: Voters Say Election Full of Misleading and False Information - World Public Opinion which outlines a pretty clear preference for fiction over reality that is specific to conservatives. |
Quote:
ace....i dont doubt that from your narrow black and white perspective on politics, that is exactly how you see it...by twisting and turning part of what I wrote and ignoring or dodging and weaving around other parts. So the bottom line for you.....Obama demonstrated weakness of character or lack of conviction by compromising on taxes and Reagan demonstrated strength of character and conviction by compromising on taxes. :thumbsup: IMO, both demonstrated that in real world politics in Washington, compromise is the more acceptable (in terms of legislative results) response than extremism. |
Quote:
And then there is this from a CBS/NY Times poll, re: those self-identified as supporters of Tea Party movement: Quote:
The overlap of buying into misinformation between Fox News viewers and Tea Party supporters is no coincidence. |
We live in the Age of Truthiness.
|
Not as good as Calvin Coolidge, but better than Joseph Stalin.
|
I predict that Obama will continue to blame big business for not being able to compete with the Chinese.
Of course, China doesn't have a president who created a hotline to the ABA so employees don't have to go to any trouble to sue their employers. |
Quote:
Big business in America would flourish if only it would adopt more Chinese strategies. |
Quote:
So the people won't benefit. Society in general won't benefit. Who will? I'm guessing the folks who will employ sweatshop labor. So that's nice for them, I guess. They get a healthy windfall, and only at the expense of most of the rest of society. Good plan, Chamber of Commerce. Obama should spend less time pandering to these assholes. |
Oh, Marv. It's always so nice when you decide to stop by to troll us. It's like a breath of fresh air wafting over the decaying sewage plant from an unexpected direction.
It's one thing when you're used to the smell, but something completely different when it comes by surprise. Maybe if you'd stick around we'd get used to you, but now I'm just thinking about buying some caulk. |
Marv with another drive-by troll attack. So predictable
|
i'd like to cockpunch obama.
i voted for him. unless a real progressive or olympia (sp) snowe runs i will vote for him again. i rather him break 90% of his promises than vote for someone whose issues i have no desire to support. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:52 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project