Shades of Gray

[Stinky The Clown]

I have seen many, many posts where criticism of the president is instantly equated to hating him.

That's a stupid notion, on its very face.

One can be in complete disagreement with him and still like him. Still be glad he is in office. Conversely, one can agree with his totally, and wish he were never born.

Those black or white extremes are unlikely, to be sure. But they are absolutely possible.

I dare say that everyone who posts (in good faith) on this forum is a middle range shade of gray.

[Oregone]

1. Clearly, I can tell by your tone, you'd rather of had McCain win

[pipi_k]

2. I sometimes wonder how people deal with that concept

in their personal relationships.

Is it possible to disagree with someone and still like him or her?

Is it possible to have a violent argument with someone and still love him or her?


I say yes, but maybe people who think any criticism of Obama = hate don't operate that way. Maybe they're afraid of having, or expressing, different opinions, or even anger.


For myself, there are people whose politics I have agreed with nearly 100% but whom I think are rather hateful and nasty otherwise.

Lots of people just are not comfortable with shades of gray.

I personally like Obama, and voted for him. I'm not always going to be happy with what he does. That's life... ;)

[el_bryanto]

5. I think it depends to what extent your argument is related to morality and/or betrayal

For example if one of my friends sold me out to get ahead of me in his career, I imagine we'd have a pretty bad argument, one that our friendship might well not survive.

By the same token if you supported Obama believing he was going to fix these problems, you might well feel betrayed at how he is acting now that he is in power. It's not just the disagreement; it's the feeling of betrayal that creates that rage, I think.

Bryant

[question everything]

3. There is a difference between disagreeing wih his policies

or with the way he implements his ideas, including hiring his aids, and between wishing that he did not win, or planning on someone else in 2012, which I have seen too many posts, with gazillion recommendations.

He has been in office less than eight months, why working on removing him, already?

And, less we forget, some say that Ted Kennedy running against his own president contributed to the defeat in 1980 and ushering the reign of Reagan for which we are still paying, and will for generations.

And for the record, I support everything that he has done so far; I am not an expert in the ways of Washington to pass judgment. With a hindsight - always 20/20 - I wish that the White House had a stronger initiative, since it is clear that what we have in Congress are 535 individuals who worry more about their re-election and the headlines in their local papers than with the future of the country.

Yes, this included Ted Kennedy who should have stepped down months ago before the trust and support of the President had taken a tumble and by now we would not have to worry about having 60 votes.

And, yes, this includes Byrd and Specter.

[Lilith Velkor]

4. In good faith.

That leaves out about half the posters here.

You'd think they'd be happy having the run of GD:P but I guess it gets boring having so few people left to attack.

Sucks to be a sore winner. :nopity: