Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaydelart
Let's not make it sound like Bush had it easy.
Bush was bombarded with criticism and ridicule for the majority of his term.
Nicely played. I can relate to that argument, but I don't buy the way you've implemented it.
Again, a lot of negativity had been thrown Bush's way, despite the positive results that came from some of his decisions. So, according to your argument, Bush was treated somewhat unfairly also.
In the end, I'm not sure that's the right route to take.
That's almost a method of labeling all negativity unjustified or useless, and I'm sure you don't believe that. Criticism and negativity can be based on valid reasoning.
The President is in service of the people -- not the other way around. In this respect, criticism is an indication of a healthy democracy; it exemplifies the nature in the right of Freedom of Speech.
I'd also like to remind you that simply giving your own ideas can lead to criticism, especially when these ideas contradict or oppose that of the leader. In addition, not all suggestions are going to be logical and adequate.
I'm not excusing excessive negativity, but the difference between productive criticism and irrational pessimism should be clarified.
On a more personal note, I disagree with your "none of us have the stones to step up" statement. To put it simply: you don't know.
|
I agree with you and half the arguments or discussions around here proved to be productive i would not get as annoyed as i do. I believe as well healthy criticism is a sign of a healthy democracy. I patted Bush on the back when deserved it and i bashed when he deserved it. I will do the same to Obama but i am willing to give him some time in office before i start launching hellfire rockets his way the same way i handled Bush's term.