2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumCNN (Borger): Democrats and President Obama Are "Villains" and "Disgraceful" - False Equivalency!
The best part about her commentary is that while Democrats, particularly President Obama, can best show leadership by leading, which appears to mean sacrificing political capital, which is code for embracing Republican ideals! Yet, notice that Borger makes no such demand of Republicans. They are given a free pass on the compromise department. Instead, she takes Democrats to task for not being willing to cut Medicare and Social Security when for better or worse, Democrats were willing to consider such proposals if Republicans seriously considered raising taxes by $1.6 trillion, rather than $600 billion. Also, no mention is made of Boehner's stupid Plan B, as well as the his second abandonment of talks because he did not have the support of his caucus.
The major problem we will have is the media continuous efforts to portray a false equivalency between Democrats and Republicans where Republicans active efforts to threaten default are accepted as the norm and the actions of Democrats are seen as morally equivalent. They are not.
And so Washington begat the next hurdle: the debt ceiling, playing at a theater near you in February. All villains, no heroes.
It's hard to say whether it's more disgraceful or more depressing. Take your pick.
Sure, there's plenty of blame to go around. I get it: Republicans are divided, engaged in outright civil war. The no-tax diehards kept the House speaker from cutting any real and meaningful deal. Then again, liberal Democrats wouldn't touch Medicare and Social Security. They almost flipped out when the president suggested he might be willing to change the way benefits are calculated.
And then there's the president himself. Sometimes it feels like his debate is mostly internal: between the transformational president he wants to be and the transactional president he has become. He can blame everyone else, and he would be partly right. But there's more: Leaders, especially second-term presidents, are supposed to lead. Sacrifice political capital for principled vision. Sacrifice political expediency for belief. Sacrifice some short-term popularity for the long view.
One of the 99
(2,280 posts)shill since her days at CBS.
Botany
(70,504 posts)..... Sam Alito and making his wife break down in tears. She is a symptom
of the problem.
bluerum
(6,109 posts)usurped the presidency. It's insane. They are simply power hungy pigs.
TomCADem
(17,387 posts)...and it uses false equivalency to appear to be objective. However, if everyone is at fault, then no one is at fault.
CBHagman
(16,984 posts)Now that Bill Clinton's out of office, the GOP is shameless in invoking him, but the response he got during his two terms was a different matter.
jillan
(39,451 posts)Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)Cosmocat
(14,564 posts)version 174 ...
bemildred
(90,061 posts)"Obama is supposed to lead" implying Obama has not lead, which is ridiculous, laughable.
"liberal Democrats wouldn't touch Medicare and Social Security", a lie, we won't touch benefits, compensation for the Medicorps we will be glad to look at, the FICA cap we will be happy to look at, negotiated pricing for drugs we will be happy to look at.
TomCADem
(17,387 posts)...for President Obama is supposed to push right wing perogatives over the objections of liberals and Democrats. Yet, this same standard of "leadership" is never applied to Republicans. The media never demands that Republicans show courage and stand up to the craziest elements of their caucus as a "sign of leadership."