General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsYes, I've had it all along. Do you still have ours?
I got this letter from the President today. I gotta admit, I'm a little bit offended.
(Note: before the predictable "you're always criticizing the President" responses arrive, please understand this. Yes, in safe havens like DU and County Party meetings, I criticize the President, and the Party, and work to improve the performance of both.
But when dealing with folks outside my Democratic/Progressive/Liberal circle I absolutely support the President and the Party. Hopefully DU members can appreciate that distinction.)
Control-Z
(15,682 posts)CU members? Is that a typo for DU? Or does it mean something else?
Scuba
(53,475 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)and take you at your word.
Do you recognize the distinction between being critical of the President and the party and working to improve the performance.
Here's my take: When one develops a persuasive and sound argument/strategy/tactic, you don't have to be critical, you just have to be convincing.
It's the difference between being "Pro" something versus "Anti" something.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)It's hard to be pro "stop killing innocent people with drones" or pro "don't appoint people like Tim Geithner to run our economy".
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)"stop killing innocent people with drones => what is your sound and persuasive plan to affect the goal of rooting out those non-innocent people that the drones are intended for?
Don't appoint people like TG to run our economy => What is your case FOR that someone better to run the economy?
See ... working to improve is most often independent of the criticism that we spend so much time and energy on.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... understand that killing innocents with drones is both morally wrong and harmful to the long-term interests of the American people.
As a mere simple man, I'm not capable of developing "sound and persuasive plans" to achieve any "rooting out" goals. I only know that murdering these innocents is making things worse. Ergo sum, in your world of much, much wiser people, I should shut the fuck up.
Thanks for helping me understand my place.
By the way, is "non-innocent" a new term meant to describe a status somewhere between "innocent" and "guilty"? Is it OK to kill "non innocents"?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)if you would choose sarcasm to deflect/avoid the ridiculous notion that criticism of the President or the party is anywhere near as effective a means for improving performance than actually coming up with, and convincing others of, a plan that actually deals with the problem.
And yes ... in the real world, with real world consequences, it's okay to kill "non-innocents."
Scuba
(53,475 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)well ...
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)We can't stop droning innocent people because we MUST kill the non-innocent people.
False dilemma. We do not need to be killing anyone.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)ACA? Yeah. TPP? No.
randome
(34,845 posts)If you thought Obama was going to do everything you wanted -and nothing you disapproved of- then you were naive.
Are you saying you don't have Obama's back? Or is the point of this OP simply to remind everyone that he isn't perfect?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)No and Yes.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)I'll settle for someone who would have been considered a "DEMOCRAT" back in the 80s.
PhilSays
(55 posts)And will support everyone you endorse after leaving the White House.