So, because they do bad stuff, he can’t commend them on the good things they are doing? I didn’t realize praise always has to be a zero sum game.
1 Like
I see what you were getting at,@IrasDad. I had assumed that you were talking about the retail workers. I take it all back.
I simply stated it’s difficult to separate the two and the president could have used another example of a company’s energy efficiency. Walmart was a poor choice.
Isn’t that special.
EDIT: (only kidding).
1 Like
I agree, chammy, and “click bait” was my first thought when I saw the story.
I think darcy and others like him think the president should do nothing but keep attacking his political opponents, rather than try to build common ground with powerful entities and try to turn opponents into at least partial allies-- even though that’s exactly what his background as a community organizer taught him to do.
It’s that black-and-white thinking that prevents some from overcoming differences.
Jesus, what is it with you two! Walmart was a poor choice, a political choice most likely, but considering all the companies that spend their capital on energy efficiency, Walmart was a poor choice. Sam Walton practiced corporate socialism not unlike many other corporations but Walmart has a justified reputation as one of the worst companies to work for. Could the president have found another company, like Costo, that has a excellent reputation? You know, LABOR FRIENDLY. It has nothing to do with black and white thinking.
I disagree and think it’s a good choice for precisely those reasons. Citing Wal-Mart, rather than a more labor-friendly firm such as Costco, avoids criticisms of a “love-fest,” positions Obama as a reasonable person willing to laud good practices wherever they may be, and has the potential advantage of forcing his opponents to re-examine their opposition to Obama as an ideological liberal.
I agree that it is a political decision to chose them to cite – and has the benefit of splitting his more moderate opponents from the extremists.
Slave owners did some good things too, which is an imperfect comparison, but I think the President could have found a better example if he wanted to.
What we have here is a failure to communicate. The Far Right whatever President Obama does is going to denigrate his achievements and also the flubs that he commits. We on the left are doing much the same thing here, we are denigrating his choice of a company to tout for their vision of energy efficiency. But why do we have to do this? Why do we have to commit the same offence as the Far Right? Isn’t it enough that President Obama has to be prepared to suffer the slings and arrows of discontent from the Far Right? Do we now have to do this to him also?