The President knows what he is doing

[usregimechange]

With as much as we do not know about Kagan, the President does not have such a disability. Frankly, I think he deserves a small bit of trust after Sotomayor.

[saltpoint]

1. Agree. Recommended.

[gateley]

2. I agree, too. And I was thinking earlier that Sotomayor is probably thrilled

Kagan will soon be there with her (we hope).

[Oregone]

3. I think we should just try our president and support every decision he makes

He knows more than us. He is the smartest dude in the room.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grvpyepkD2o

[usregimechange]

4. That isn't what I said

[Oregone]

5. Kinda, sorta

"The president knows what he is doing. With as much as we do not know about Kagan, the President does not have such a disability"


Its an assumption based on faith (not known fact) that a man knows something you dont that makes their decisions authoritarian and to be, you guessed it, "trusted". You are very well making a leader/trust argument based on "secret knowledge" (thing not known to others that you assume/believe the leader knows). If you can make this argument in an isolated case on faith, it is scalable enough to be made in every aspect of the President's decision making.

[usregimechange]

22. Clearly I was referring to his judgment on judicial selections not life in general and a "small"

bit of trust is nothing close to your distortion in terms of the level of trust.

[treestar]

31. It would make more sense than just trusting your judgment

Why, just because you don't like kagan, should we all follow your preference?

[Oregone]

37. I said nothing about not liking Kagan

I just don't like the reasoning used. Thats all. Who said I have another preference?

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tblue]

18. Yeah, no kidding. What is that?

Just toss out a broad-brush insult, see how far that gets ya. I think most posters here are incredibly well-read and informed. That's what brings me here.

[HughMoran]

30. Deleted Message seems like a very influential poster

I wonder how they say so much using so few words?

:D

[lillypaddle]

73. Good one

:rofl:

[clydefrand]

16. Do you dislike DUers? You sound like it.

[Bluebear]

17. Now he says we are as worthwhile as teabaggers.

And still he exists.

[Merlot]

9. We can evaluate his present decisions based on his past decisions

and the success and or failure of them. If people are satisfied with Sotomayor, then there's a good chance Kagan will also be a good choice.

Doesn't mean we have to support his opinions on everything (nuclear power, off shore drilling... etc.)

Mature minds can handle the contradiction.

[depakid]

14. I don't find that to be a rational point of view

The two have very different backgrounds, views and approaches to issues.

One does not equate with the other (as history has often shown).

[Merlot]

26. I"m not comparing the two, I'm talking about his record of decison making.

personal attacks instead of political debate...hmmmm what does that sound like?

[depakid]

29. Hardly an attack- and quite frankly, the record's mixed on "decision making"

In any event, I liken the argument to be akin to a chef and restaurant:

If you liked his butternut squash ravioli, then you'll like his calamari.

[HughMoran]

11. Unnecessarily vicious snark

I know that's who you are, but it does get tiring.

[Oregone]

12. But honestly

I never tire of it

[HughMoran]

13. lol

I'll give you that :D

[spoony]

36. It's a very real, very chilling attitude.

I don't know what was in the link, but what was described is the reasoning I'm seeing. "Just trust him." "He knows what he's doing."

[HughMoran]

38. Anybody who says that is in line to work for Hitler

Mindless marching trolls who can't think for themselves, right?

[spoony]

48. Lol, awful lot of Nazi rhetoric from someone who was just scolding a poster

about unnecessary snark. I guess it's all right when you do it, eh?

[HughMoran]

58. Well, I am being rather playful about it

I think it's wise to not judge an entire persons career based on a statement they made in a confirmation hearing. People often say things to get past the door and into the job that they may not be firm believers of.

[Oregone]

39. Brittney Spears on trusting George Bush during Iraq War

Just a funny quote from a trusting idiot

[HughMoran]

41. Of course anybody who trusts the Presidents judgement is no smarter than Brittany Spears

People like that should be rounded up and shot, don't you think?

[Oregone]

43. Its not about intelligence, but rather sound reasoning

Its ok to use your noggin.


Im sure many blind trust followers are smarter than that idiot but just as unreasonable and illogical at times

[HughMoran]

45. Yes!

And reflexive opposition seems equally stupid to those observing from a distance.

[Oregone]

46. I wouldn't know

But I do oppose blind trust. I haven't weighed in on this at all specifically.

[HughMoran]

50. I oppose blind trust and blind reflexive opposition

If you "wouldn't know" about reflexive mindless opposition to anything/everything Obama does, then you may have some blinders that need adjustment.

[Oregone]

52. I am talking personally, being that is how I perceived the comment (being aimed at me)

I do not reflexively oppose everything Obama does at all. I try and understand and critique much of it (almost no policy is *perfect*). I haven't even started on this Supreme Court issue (how reflexive is that?).

That aside, I do understand some people are like this, so I don't have my blinders on completely. Ive seen posts from Free Republic.

[HughMoran]

57. & I wasn't specifically aiming at you

I was enjoying an opportunity to discuss this topic of 'reflexive' reactions, though I do think we all fly off the handle at times (yes, even you.)

[Oregone]

66. Discuss? But I reflexively classify all your comments as snark

That all makes sense now. :)

[HughMoran]

69. lol

It does all get rather circular after a while. :D

BTW, the O/P does have a point - Obama alone makes this decision and once it's made, nothing we say matters one bit. When we voted for him we entrusted him to make these decisions for us.

[usregimechange]

61. No one suggested blind trust but a little trust based on history in one subject area

[spoony]

35. Yep, thank goodness we elected him,

now we don't have to use our brains at all.

[Warren DeMontague]

53. Thanks for posting that snarky youtube link. Now the hungry will all be fed

and the homeless will all be sheltered.

:eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes:

Oh, one more, just in case you missed it-

:eyes:


Just think, if all that energy youtube uses streaming videos of Britney Spears saying dumb-ass shit into youtube was, instead, streaming hot meals into the mouths of the hungry?

Shouldn't we solve ALL OUR PROBLEMS HERE ON EARTH, first, before waste time and energy making smart-assed remarks or linking to video clips for "entertainment" purposes?


But why am I bothering to even say this to you? You're not wasting time grousing about Obama in this thread, you're working in a soup kitchen and nailing together shelters for the homeless in the rain. Undoubtedly.

[Oregone]

67. +1

I seriously hope your response was based on stealing my own snarky "all the people..." comments. That would be priceless

[Warren DeMontague]

68. No one can accuse me of not paying attention.

You don't take yourself too seriously, you can't be all bad. :thumbsup:



So -in all sincerity- is there a reason we're not supposed to like Kagan? Is there a track record there? All I could find is some fighting with John Roberts, which inclines me to like her more.

[Oregone]

70. "is there a reason we're not supposed to like Kagan"

Not that I can provide you. Im not really well versed on her or the other alternatives. Ive been taking a snooze and making a bunch of cannabutter lately.

[Dream Girl]

54. He's smarter than you anyway...

[Oregone]

59. Sweet, since its a contest and all

Might as well check my brain in at the door then

[HughMoran]

6. Clearly a person of such stature would be more open in a private interview

...than in her public pronouncements - which we do know that she's been cautious about for a long time.

[MadMaddie]

7. It is possible with 3 strong women on the court it could change

the make up of the court. This would be disturbing to Republicans which is all right with me.

Sotomeyor has held her own and she needs someone as strong as she is.

I still am reading on Keagan and I have gathered that she is knowledgable and has a strong personality.

[HughMoran]

15. Hen peck those men!!

:rofl:

I hope that's not politically incorrect to say :D

[MadMaddie]

20. To "Peck" with it....

I couldn't have said it better myself. :fistbump:

[Hekate]

72. Not PC? It's only us chickens here. bwaaawk & lol. Imagine how pleased Justice Ginsberg would be!

:fistbump:

[Pirate Smile]

19. I agree.

[girl gone mad]

21. Sure.. just like with Geithner, Summers, Rubin and Bernanke.

So just sit down and shit up and let these brilliant minds make all your decisions for you.

:eyes:

[HughMoran]

23. snarl?

Is that an argumentative technique?

[QC]

24. Let's not forget Duncan, Vilsack, and Salazar. n/t

[HughMoran]

25. OMG! They're all Nazi anuses!!!

Oh noes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[usregimechange]

27. What courts do they serve on?

[girl gone mad]

71. Do you really not know who they are, or did you just miss my point?

[treestar]

33. Would you have stupid minds in those positions?

[HughMoran]

40. They are required to pass a 'progressive' purity test

And yes, intelligence is irrelevant, so long as they mindlessly spout progressive talking points.

[alarimer]

28. Yes, he knows he is selling progressives out.

I dare say that was the plan all along and, for some reason, we decided to believe him. Never again.

[usregimechange]

32. What do you think of Sotomayor?

[saltpoint]

34. I love her.

Great choice.

Good judgment on the part of Barack Obama in choosing her. He's known Elena Kagan a while now. I think he sees a good choice with her as well.

[Lorien]

44. Amen. There's a huge knife in our backs and half the people here are screaming

for dozens more. Obama is a corporate sellout, and his court pick-from what we DO know about her-appears to reflect his (true) beliefs.

[Bluebear]

47. Chilling:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8303524

[Mari333]

60. he certainly thinks he has their vote doesnt he

he will be surprised.

[Odin2005]

42. I should trust a proven CORPORATIST why?

WTF is with this authoritarian "We must obey Leader, we are stupid and He knows best" crap? That's not Progressive!

[Blue-Jay]

49. You'd be better off just never trusting anyone for any reason ever.

[Odin2005]

51. No, I just don't trust corporatists.

Why should that imply I don't trust anyone?

[emilyg]

55. +1

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BzaDem]

62. Maybe because he's not a corporatist, despite how many times you repeat it? n/t

[usregimechange]

64. +1

[William Z. Foster]

63. I think he does

I always thought he did.

[salguine]

65. "I think he deserves a small bit of trust after Sotomayor". Well,

after the Wall Street bailout, abandoning his pledge of "transparency", giving the finger to the gay community (again), the credit card fiasco, mandated forced slavery to insurance cartels, failure to close Gitmo, continuation of warrantless wiretapping and continued suspension of Habeas Corpus, you go ahead and give him a small bit of trust. I'm not giving him any more.