Our Democratic Presidential Candidates Should Apologize About "French Fries"

"Freedom Fries" is an inignificant piece of the puzzle (0.00 / 0)

It's the blatant disregard of and disrespect of our allies throughout this administration, the fallout from their lack of support for the invasion of Iraq being the principle part.  We need a President who will establish that the way this Administration has acted on the international stage is not how we're accustomed to doing business in this country, and who will make a commitment to regaining the trust and respect of our friends around the world.

We must get back to the point where our allies genuinely like us, not just support us in general, and where Americans are genuinely welcome around the world--you'll never convince me that Americans having to say they're Canadian when traveling in France isn't a failing of our foreign policy.

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 20:35:47 PM CDT

State the obvious, (0.00 / 0)

You went from Jefferson to this post. Do you just enjoy the sound of your keyboard clicking?

Jim, please accept my apology on behalf of those that take ourselves, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to seriously here on BH.

SGS is Jack Mitchell of Lowell, MA. The symbolism of the "sleeping giant" is based on my HOPE for America.

---

by: Sleeping Giant Stirs @ Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 21:39:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just A Little Tired... (0.00 / 0)

No, I'm just a little tired of political hypocrisy, of which so many of us are guilty. 

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 22:31:16 PM CDT

Not you, sir. (0.00 / 0)

I fully appreciate and concur with your sentiment.

I agree with Doug too. I just thought he was redundant and a little flip.

Having served beside the French Foreign Legion near As Samawah, Iraq in 1991, the French are alright in my book.

SGS is Jack Mitchell of Lowell, MA. The symbolism of the "sleeping giant" is based on my HOPE for America.

---

by: Sleeping Giant Stirs @ Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 23:13:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

hypocrisy (4.00 / 1)

Of all the vices, hypocrisy has always bothered me the most. Frankly, even trying make a distinction from being a political hypocrite and a hypocrite bothers me. I have seen my share of hypocrites in NH politics over the years and it still really bothers me when an individual creates a false political persona for electoral gain and public affection. There are some very public examples such as both Jeb Bradley and John Stephen but it is not limited to those two. I especially detest those who claim that they are above "partisianship" or that they are "not political" or constantly pontificate on others traits as being offensive or distateful when in reality the accuser's behavior is much worse. I have found that those who are the most willing to condemn others are the biggest hypocrites themselves.

Have you written a letter to the editor today? Have you donated today? Have you put up signs? Have you made calls? Have you talked to your neighbors?

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Sat Nov 03, 2007 at 03:33:09 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I admit (0.00 / 0)

to confusion and/or changing views at times based on receiving new information; information which proved I had assumed too much, known too little. Hypocrisy is something else again. Ray's right, a false persona for political gain is the most egregious form.

Next time, there may be no next time.

---

by: Jon Bresler @ Sat Nov 03, 2007 at 12:08:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ray, you know as well as anyone that having your personal side be a part of your public identity can hurt you in politics (0.00 / 0)

It's as simple as the fact that you're not the same person to people who don't know you.  That is BS, I agree, but it's no more or less than anybody in any context does.  There are always going to be things you'd say to your best friend that you wouldn't say in public because the public wouldn't take it the way it was intended.

That said, I agree with your point about hypocrisy and claiming to be above partisanship or non-political.

Politics involved in government may be, in theory, unfortunate, but it's not necessarily unethical, and trying to avoid it wholesale is simply an inefficient way to function.  However, far more often, public officials say they're above partisanship and in fact are the most partisan of all.  I seem to remember a recent President claiming to be a uniter, not a divider.

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sat Nov 03, 2007 at 15:08:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ray's Absolutely Correct... (0.00 / 0)

Ray's absolutely correct ... and we've seen examples of that time and time again, among Democrats and Republicans alike.  I think our reliance on polls that tell us "to do nothing" so we don't irritate voters, and the over-reliance on focus groups and consultants has an impact.  We want to retain our power, don't we

I'm far from perfect, but I realize I'm only on top of this planet for another few years, at best, and I'm not going to become Governor -- I never wanted to -- and I don't want "leadership" roles like a chairship of a committee.  Keep the office space, the stationary, and the parking spot for someone else.  So, I can afford to be a little less interested in retaining that "power," or kissing up to powers-who-be, and instead try to challenge us to do more good things while I'm around.

But I do want to see us do things we should:  Like support universial single-payer health care, which the NH House voted to do but the State Senate, for some reason, refused.  Or fight artificial trans-fats in our school menus, which the NH House voted to do, but the State Senate, for some reason, refused.  Or fight for full disclosure of monies contributed to political candidates, which the NH House did, but which the State Senate did not.

Yes, hypocrisy knows no limit.  "Loyalty" to issues and ideals and one's conscience is more important than "loyalty" to a political party or to getting elected just to hold power and keep those out-of-state trips to conferences.

I've got lots of hypocrisy myself, such as being an early supporter of a presidential candidate who accepts money from lobbyists and questionable political action committees and can't tell us when or how to get out of Iraq.  My hypocrisy there is based on at least wanting to have a President who can get elected and who will be good and will eventually get us out of Iraq.  And I'm hypocritical in allowing myself this Fall to be talked out of putting in legislation for full marriage equality with the word "marriage," just because it would put our Democrats in an uncomfortable position.  Fortunately I didn't allow myself to be talked out of at least doing Civil Unions last year. 

And I was hypocritical by supporting a Constitutional Amendment last June to essentially avoid our obligations to fund education on a statewide basis -- an obligation I've believed in for decades -- just because I want to move the issue forward once and for all, and not give the Repubilcan Party a weapon in November, 2008.  Oh, I am hypocritical.

But all that hypocrisy, whether by myself or others, is part of the process of the "sausage-making" of politics, and I can accept winning or losing on those issues, or compromising my own beliefs, as long as I have a chance to voice my own views and do a few good things along the way.  It must be hard for others to accept someone who does that -- who wants nothing in return, no titles, no awards to hang on my wall, no parking spots, no offices, but to just be involved in the process. 

What we should all realize is that if we expect others to follow us, we have to lead by persuading others rather than just berate them or insisting they follow and shut up.  Democracy, even in the NH Democratic Party, means involving others with differing points of view about what to do -- and allowing each of us our own hypocrisy. 

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Sat Nov 03, 2007 at 08:25:15 AM CDT

Hypocrisy vs Compromise (4.00 / 1)

I wouldn't call you a hypocrite for supporting Senator Clinton although she doesn't match all your ideals. That is compromise on your part, not hypocrisy. To me hypocrisy is saying one thing, or representing yourself a certain way, then doing another. It's like the endless conga line of Republican Reps/Senators, etc. who vote for anti-gay legislation while paying for call boys on the sly. THAT'S hypocrisy. Or saying you're "Right to Life" and then vote against funding to make those potential children's lives easier, like educating them and providing them with healthcare and quality daycare. THAT'S hypocrisy. I also see it as hypocritical to be "Right to Life" and support the death penalty(or being "against government" and supporting this. Isn't that the ultimate government intrusion?)

Hypocrisy is form without the content.

Sometimes compromise is necessary. In compromise, we may have to give up some of what we want for the greater good. The trick is not compromising oneself. A tightrope walk, to be sure.

BTW, I've been lucky enough to spend a lot of time in France and I love the French people and their culture/history. They're extremely friendly and gracious, even to Americans, when you at least try speaking their language.

---

by: Jennifer Daler @ Sat Nov 03, 2007 at 08:46:56 AM CDT

"when you at least try speaking their language." (0.00 / 0)

It's really not that much to ask of people to be able to ask, in French, whether one speaks English, as opposed to just assuming--it goes a long way.

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sat Nov 03, 2007 at 15:11:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]