HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » steve2470 » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: Sat Oct 16, 2004, 01:04 PM
Number of posts: 37,427

Journal Archives

my view is a bit different than yours

1- Under "normal circumstances", yes, of course he should have upheld his oaths.

2- By disobeying his oaths, he has benefited the country long-term by forcing the public to confront the secrecy debate but destroyed his own life, to the point where he may be captured, arrested, tried, convicted and even put to death. He will never be able to rest, knowing the CIA is after him, perhaps. The chance of getting a Presidential pardon is slim to none. Sizable numbers of the American public will always hate him. If he's lucky, he may eventually come to be regarded as Ellsberg-like, but Ellsberg did not flee the country to Hong Kong, Russia and possibly Cuba, Venezuela and Ecuador.

3- He should have pursued the same path Thomas Drake did. Drake did it perfectly, yet Drake's life has been destroyed to a large extent. Last time I read, he has been reduced to working at an Apple store for survival. Hopefully Drake is much happier now than he was years ago burdened with what he knew.

4- I'm not thrilled that he didn't stop at talking solely about the USA and ventured into talking about Great Britain and China.

In a perverse and non-traditional way, he has had honor. He has sacrificed himself for the greater good of the country. I'm not sure I would have done the same. I'm not sure I would have even gone Drake's route, because even that was extremely difficult.


signed, loyal Democrat since 1976

This is my take on things

1- The membership, both posting and lurking, ranges from true neo-Nazis (usually lurking) to Communist to hard-core right wing Libertarian to anarchist to Democrats (from all points of the spectrum in the party) to Republicans (both posting and lurking) to paid and unpaid trolls. No, I have no idea who anyone is, apart from their self-identification.

2- Out of that spectrum, predictably, some sub-groups are seldom, if ever, going to approve of President Obama's behavior and policies. Some more than others. Only a true believer is going to 100% approve of PBO and his policies and post that way. The rest of us like PBO to varying degrees and approve of his policies to varying degrees.

3- You have the vocal posting minority, both for and against. The rest of us are lurkers or post when we feel like it and when we have time. I'm in the "when I feel like it" group.

4- It is human nature, I think, to find fault and express that more readily, than to approve and express that. Maybe I'm jaundiced, but that's how I see it. Perhaps in other countries and cultures it is not that way. I've always lived in the USA, so my perspective is very biased.

Do I think PBO is perfect in every way ? No. Do I agree with 100% of his policies, both stated and acted upon ? No. Am I a very loyal Democrat since 1976 ? Yes. Do I think PBO is doing the best he can, under extremely difficult circumstances ? Yes. Do I think he is a fundamentally decent, kind and intelligent man ? Yes I do.

I'm part of what (ugh) Nixon called, "Silent Majority". I'll speak up when I feel like it. I'm not a debater by heart and I get my feelings hurt too easily. I've seen posters tell people like me to leave this site. I won't. I love this place and the good-hearted people here are a treat.

Just remember, not everyone who posts is a) a Democrat in real life and b) well-intentioned.

Go to Page: 1