(no subject)

[lollardfish]

minnehaha B. pointed this article out to me. Clinton or Obama - Manager or Visionary. I think it does a really balanced job in laying out the alternatives with which we are faced. I'm choosing visionary, but I can't fault the choice in manager, and I'd be happy to have either.

Comments

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

Why not? A president sets agenda. They focus on some things. If they ignore HUGE MASSIVE PROBLEMS because they are inconvenient or hard, isn't that just as significant?

[mizzlaurajean.livejournal.com]

It's easy to poke at all the things an administration didn't do. And I imagine it is damn hard to get done what they do. Look at how damned hard they worked to get everyone health care. And they failed after years of good effort. It's hard to say it's just as significant when you don't know why they chose not to address those HUGE MASSIVE PROBLEMS.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

I think their agenda was pretty clear in all ways: Go get more money for the Democratic party. Ride the wave of prosperity and try to achieve incremental change. I think you absolutely can judge politicians by both their actions and their inactions.

Bill Clinton, "The era of big government is over." That's Ronald Reagan talking.

Hopefully H. Clinton will be different, but there's no real reason to trust that she will. Faith that she will, belief and hope that she will, sure. But her past doesn't show that to me.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

So what did the administration do that you liked?