Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Loyalty?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
BL611 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 12:21 PM
Original message
Loyalty?
Sorry James Carville or anyone else. Whatever happened to loyalty to the American people? Whatever happened to the idea of a public servant being loyal to that which he/she believes is in the best interest of their nation, not who hired them to do what?

It's simply preposterous for me to believe that those who serve in our nations government have feel they have some duty to those who have helped out their personal careers that overrides their duty to the United States. No loyalty before conscience IS NOT a good value in a leader, have we not learned that from Bush?

Should Bill Clinton have deferred in '92 to anybody that had helped him earlier in his career? Please. Sorry this is just ridiculous. NOBODY HAS ANY OBLIGATION TO SUPPORT ANY CANDIDATE IF THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THEY ARE THE BEST PERSON FOR THE JOB, period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. Carville confuses loyalty with cronyism
Unfortunately many in DC who have been there too long also get those confused.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. Spot-on distinction! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
panader0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. The kind of loyalty Carville talks about is the kind bush demands
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemVet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
3. Loyalty is one thing, going back on your word is another.
Hell, we don't want our President to to have the trait of "loyalty," do we?

We don't want our President to keep his word, do we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alphafemale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. This is America. People don't swear Loyalty oaths to Queens. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
4. I think Carville just wanted to make Richardson's endorsement as
painfull as possible - so the next person to jump ship and endorse Obama would think twice. Obviously Hillary couldn't threaten Richardson when he called her to say he was endorsing Obama. Carville was just being the surrogate in a tough campaign.

I don't think anybody really cares what Carville thinks. He is so obvious. It will not really matter or work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. Very insightful -- I think you've nailed it. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. Agree. This was not indentured servitude, Richardson served
the Clinton Administration admirably. He owes them nothing but he owes the country his best judgment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
90-percent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
6. Loyalty
Lest we forget, LOYALTY is the trait most highly valued by GWB.

The country need somebody who's highest principals go well beyond mere loyalty.

-90% Jimmy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
7. As I have said, we need to dump this dynasty.
They can take their rich donors (at least, the ones who have loyalty to the Clintons' and not the party) with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
9. Thank you!
Although Bill Richardson was a direct report to President Clinton, he was employed by the American people.

And his loyalty remains firmly in the camp of the American people.

Good post, BL611.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 20th 2024, 06:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC