Skip to main content

Let's Play a Game Called: "What's the Difference"

What's the difference between Obama asking Warren to speak at the inauguration and Obama promising to sit down with foreign leaders without preconditions?


Is there a difference between two situations, one which we (apparently) support as a group and one which we (apparently) do not support as a group.

The first is sitting down with foreign leaders without preconditions. We are willing to do this, to talk to foreign leaders who do not have our best interests at heart, to open dialog and perhaps change their minds.

The second is allowing someone to speak at the inauguration who is anti-GLBTQ rights. We are not willing to do this, because "we shouldn't bargain with civil rights" and "he's a bigot who shouldn't be given a voice". Apply this logic to the first statement and we have the Bush doctrine, one where we have no dialog and no chance of changing their minds.

Hmm...

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Thought

Simple people see things in simple ways with simple solutions. Complex people see things in complex ways and with complex solutions. Neither are inherently wrong or right. They just are.
Post a Comment
Read more

My Last

 My previous post was found as a blank page in draft form this evening.  I found the existence of it to be rather poetic.  So I published it blank as is over a year later.  Seems fitting to be honest.
Post a Comment
Read more

Reagan, Deregulation, and the Fruit It Now Bears

President Reagan had an idea about how the world should run. He deregulated Big Business. That is, he removed the restrictions put in place that kept companies from cheating. He removed, primarily economic oversight. He said that it was unAmerican that in this capitalist society that such oversight, such restrictions should exist. To him, these concepts flew in the face of that illusive, figmentary idea we like to call freedom. He wanted Big Business to have the freedom to do what it will and believed that in doing so, said companies would check themselves. They would check themselves because it was in their best economic interest to do so. Yet, what he didn't realize is that what was in the best interest of Corporate America could be unknown to Corporate America itself! That Big Business could be akin to a compulsive gambler who as they fall further and further into the hole panic and begin making riskier and riskier bets, thus then subjecting themselves to even more debt ...
2 comments
Read more