~ firefly-dreaming a virtual home to learn (or teach!) alternative methods of solving problems we find facing us each day. By sharing ideas & knowledge on living with less stress, more joy & embracing tolerance & compassion we are working towards building a sustainable future for all living beings.
I want to start by thanking RiaD for offering to let me cross-post this DK diary roundup here. She also offered to put this on the front page, but I think it's just a tad soon to be doing that. I'd like to establish a schedule and prove my reliability, first.
For those who don't know (that would be pretty much all of you), A Perfect Conversation is a group I started on Daily Kos. To quote the Profile page:
A group to republish diaries that I hope:
a. challenge the DK conventional wisdom;
b. provide information which may lead to new ideas;
c. push for action that is innovative or not just playing defense;
I do not always agree with the diaries I republish, but the point here is not about agreement. It's about challenging ourselves to rethink our political philosophies, activities, and issue positions. Perhaps we'll come back to the same conclusions we already have but with a better understanding of why we have them. Other times, we may decide to change our positions.
The group name comes from the first line in the song Cool James by Harvey Danger. "Can I have this: a perfect conversation?" (I've also read lyrics sites that claim it's "Cannot have this: a perfect conversation." I think the ambiguity between these transcriptions suits the group given it's purpose.)
Currently, I schedule these diaries to post on Daily Kos at 11:45PM Central every night. I'll start posting them here, as well, though there will likely be a delay.
I've modified the format slightly for tonight to put my ramblings from the original diary in the extended section. Usually, that will go up top, and the lists and video will be all you find in the extended.
And with introductions complete, please enjoy tonight's offerings!
So Obama made another deal in which he gave up more than Republicans initially asked for. If you can't tell by that one sentence where I stand in regards to Obama and his actions, you probably don't pay much attention to political discourse on this site (or anywhere, for that matter).
But my purpose in stating my position is not to get into pie fights, but rather to point out that it is based upon a frame, and that it is that frame that makes it possible for you to know at a glance which position I hold.
Specifically, the frame is three words. "Obama gave up." That's the frame, and it is powerful. When we think of giving up, we think of weakness and even death. Quitters give up. Losers give up. Giving up means to stop what you are doing. To surrender. Giving up is a let down, and we don't like being let down.
Giving up is a negative frame. That is, it's designed to make something look bad. By associating Obama with giving up, we cast Obama in that negative light. We make Obama look bad.
But it puts me in a bit of a conundrum. You see, I recognize that tearing down Obama doesn't do much of anything to help our cause. But at the same time, I cannot in good conscience ignore or downplay his actions when I believe they are detrimental to our cause. I cannot be unquestioningly partisan. It would violate one of my core principles of being doubtful. I align myself with Democrats because of electoral realities, not political philosophies. Or more to the point, I can't figure out what the Democratic party's political philosophy is when comparing their rhetoric to their actions.
So the question I pose tonight is this: what framing do we use to criticize Obama in a way that is positive? How do we make him appear good while still expressing our disfavor of his actions? And how about Democratic party? Bonus points if you can think of a way to do so that also helps Obama and the Democratic party change their tactics.
The way I read this is as a two-tiered flat tax. 0% if you're making under $34K, and 15% if you make over that. Seems oversimplistic to me, but maybe I'm missing something?
I'm reminded of the story of the frog and boiling water. The frog acts to preserve itself when put in boiling water, but does nothing when the water is slowly heated until it dies. The Republicans would be the boiling water and the Democrats would be the slowly heated water.
Action is scary. It implies that there is not only something to gain, but also something to lose. It seems we often focus more on what can be lost over what can be gained, and this prevents us from envisioning new ways to take action. How can we counter this mindset?
A full list of all diaries republished to A Perfect Conversation can always be found here. Feel free to check it out at any time.
