New Rule...Otherwise, STFU.

[kpete]

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2013

New Rule
Any pundit who advocates war for supposed humanitarian reasons must be able to point to 5 recent occasions when they advocated for achieving humanitarian goals using non-killing methods.

Otherwise, STFU.
by Atrios at 17:22
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2013/09/new-rule.html

[Peacetrain]

1. I have a new rule to propose!!

Can we please put stop with the STFU threads

I know everyone is feeling pretty raw right now.. but sheesh..

Edit to add.. when someone tells a whole group to STFU.. just go into the thread and serve the STFU right back.. that is why we have discussion threads..

[GeorgeGist]

2. +1

[Bluenorthwest]

3. Show me a post that tells a whole group to STFU.

You use the plural, as if you see lots of them, so show me what's bugging you so.
I happen to agree with the OP.

[KittyWampus]

5. telling ANYONE to stfu is authoritarianism to the extreme. I am sure you don't get

the irony.

[bvar22]

6. No. When a Hijacking Partisan is spamming Talking Point nonsense

...and disrupting the adults trying to have a discussion,
I think STFU is appropriate.

[ljm2002]

7. Okay then...

...no more complaining if someone calls you an authoritarian:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3539143

...which is a link to your post entitled "stfu, stooge."

[Bluenorthwest]

10. And there you have it.

Unreal.

[bvar22]

14. OUCH!!!

Sometimes the mirror is painful learning experience.

[Oilwellian]

18. ROFL...THANK YOU!

OMG, that is so fucking RICH!

[RetroLounge]

24. LOL!

RL

[Bluenorthwest]

8. I asked a question which was not answered and instead I got an insult.

Very typical of the 'we insult because we have no way to explain the bullshit we make up' club.
That poster has no examples of these 'posts' that she claims give her the vapors because they do not exist. If they did, she or thee could easily demonstrate. Entire groups being told to shut the fuck up? What groups? Where?
Bluster and a surly attitude do not replace facts or links. The 'make up shit and insult others' club needs to learn that lesson, by any means necessary. Clowntime needs to end.

[Divernan]

19. You've just proclaimed YOURSELF, KittyWampus,an authoritarian to the extreme,

Now THAT is irony! In fact I would dare to go so far as to call that EXTREME irony!

Here we have it, folks! Straight from the Kitty's mouth, so to speak! She may just alert on herself for calling herself an extreme authoritarian!

The thread? "Former British PM Tony Blair calls for attack on Syria"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023539080
The date and time: Mon Aug 26, 2013, 07:41 PM

jakeXT (4,216 posts)

In an OP DUer jakeXT, posted the following, all a direct quote from the Independent.:

Former British PM Tony Blair calls for attack on Syria
Allowing the enduring controversy over the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 to hold back military intervention in Syria could help produce a "nightmare scenario" for the West in the Middle East, Tony Blair warned.

The ex-prime minister who took the decision for British troops to join the US-led action, who is now the Middle East peace envoy for the US, Russia, the EU and the United Nations, said it was vital to "take sides" against the Assad regime and in other regional disputes.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/former-british-pm-tony-blair-calls-for-attack-on-syria-29529387.html

Kitty's thoughtful and erudite response?

KittyWampus (45,088 posts)

5. stfu, stooge.

[cui bono]

22. So you agree the BOG is authoritarian to the extreme.

Good.

[bhikkhu]

9. DU site search for STFU - 21,000 results

[Bluenorthwest]

11. I'm sure the term is used, but 'threads' recently in which 'entire groups are told to stfu'

was the assertion, not that people on DU have typed 'STFU'. You do comprehend the difference, don't you?

[bhikkhu]

15. Do your own search if you want

but I don't think the term is especially useful whether used for an individual or a group.

[Bluenorthwest]

17. The poster I was addressing claimed to have seen so many threads telling 'entire groups'

to stfu that she was at her wit's end. I asked to see proof that such threads addressing entire groups in such a manner do in fact exist. That proof was not forthcoming, but I did not expect it to be because the poster was just making up things up.
I got insulted, snarked at but no one could support the assertion I questioned. I will have to assume it was in fact utter toasted bullshit dripping off the poster' fingers.

[Peacetrain]

51. Oh for the love of Mike .. stop getting so mad at everyone else observations

The day before there were 2 ops.. not posts ops telling one side or the other to STFU..it adds nothing to the discussion.. and if you cannot handle my saying that STFU adds nothing to a discussion, then that is your Business Style. You can certainly research Thursday or Friday yourself to find them. Everyone gets aggravated at one time or another and tells someone to STFU.. Come to think of it I am having that feeling right now.


EDIT TO ADD: I do not live in DU.. so I go hours, days, months , and some times a couple of years without posting.. to answer a question..

[Demit]

54. You have 479 posts in the last 90 days

And more than 12,000 since you signed up in 2008. If you sometimes go a couple of years without posting, you sure make up for it later.

Just an observation.

[Peacetrain]

56. You are more than welcome to ask Skinner

my posting calendar.. Yep I have been posting in the last couple of months..but before that.. I think I had three or four in a couple of years.. I am not always in here.. so if I do not respond right away.. does not mean I am ignoring anyone's posts.. sometimes I am just not online..

Not an observation.. just a fact

[cui bono]

4. Tell it to the BOG.

They actually MAKE you STFU, just for posting facts!

[great white snark]

12. What? Not enough forums to post your "facts" in?

The BOG is a group and this forum has rules about posting in groups.

[Bluenorthwest]

13. Is that what it is, a group? I can think of a few far more accurate and specific words

but if you like 'group' go with that. Whatever helps.

[sheshe2]

29. If you do not like the group and it's rules,

Then trash us, so you do not ever have to read another word we say there.

If you have a problem with said "Group", then take it to Skinner in ATA. Several people have, go read the responses.

[Bluenorthwest]

50. The BOG drags it's dramatics all over the board, look at what I dealt with in this thread.

And who the hell are you to tell others what to do? If you don't care for my opinion about the BOG, don't read them. Use ignore your own damn self. I'm not here to follow your barked orders, just because you think you are superior to others.
Dishonest tactics will always get my wrath. Look at Kitty in this thread, hypocrisy on the half shell and utterly incapable of apology for that. Drags the drama all over DU, it will get answers. Deal with it. Clowntime is over.

[cui bono]

21. The BOG likes "facts", I like facts.

Doesn't change the fact that the BOG is a discriminatory and nasty group who cannot face facts and therefore bans anyone who posts facts that they are in denial about.

I can't help it if DU has bad policy that allows this sort of behavior.

[sheshe2]

26. If you do not like our group,

then trash us. You alone have that power. You know this, Skinner explained that in ATA.

The mission of the Barack Obama Group is to discuss information and news about the life, career, accomplishments, and presidency of Barack Obama; to provide a haven for those members of Democratic Underground who support the president and his policies; to discuss President Obama's policy positions, speeches, interviews, and other public appearances; to discuss President Obama's political campaigns; and to discuss the causes which President Obama has championed, including health care reform and ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Those who have a generally negative view of President Obama and his administration, support his defeat in the 2012 presidential election (in primaries or the general election), or who are generally supportive of those who do, are not welcome in the Barack Obama Group.

[cui bono]

30. Hiding something doesn't cure its ills. n/t

[sheshe2]

31. In that case you will just have to abide by the rules of the group.

We are here for 3 plus more years.

Cui, there are a lot of ills in this world. The BOG is not one of them.

[cui bono]

32. Yes, the BOG is one of them.

Living in a bubble and making believe there is no wrong in the WH is dangerous. Following a man and not your principles is dangerous. Defending policies and actions that are against our constitution and a threat to our democracy is dangerous. The fact that you guys won't even allow criticism and have banned so many people shows that you are doing just that.

As Bill Maher says, you are in the bubble. He's usually talking about other people but you're acting the same way.

And no, I don't have to abide by the rules of the group since I'm not allowed to. lol.

[sheshe2]

41. So,

We are living in a bubble when we post our support for~

1. ACA
2. Immigration Reform
3. VAWA
4.Voting Rights
5.LGBT Rights
6.Women's Rights
7.Equal Rights

and on and on and on.

You don't read what we post here. You just flat out hate us. You are the one that lives in a bubble. You rant about us yet have never taken the time to see what we post. You do not support any of the issues I just posted????

You don't like this President, fine. You have all of GD to post that. We have a Haven, that with eyes wide open support the progress that this President has made.

Take some time and read, cui. Read before you judge us, or just hate. That is your choice.

[cui bono]

46. First of all, prove to me that I've never read your posts. You can't because you are wrong.

That's quite an assumption you're making there. As a matter of fact I rec'd a post in there today or yesterday. Then I tried to reply and saw I was banned and that it was a BOG thread. But I do look in there from time to time. Mostly it's just a tabloid type fan club. You know as well as I do that people get banned for criticizing Obama after just one post.

And I have seen the posts that talk as if you guys are at war with the rest of DU. And the posts that are just plain nasty towards other DUers who are critical of Obama. Don't try to deny that doesn't happen, I've seen it.

Second, I was, in fact, banned from the group, as were many, many others, for one single post. There was nothing wrong with the post. And the person who banned me and replied - in such a courageous way since they knew I couldn't respond - was nasty and rude. So I am absolutely not judging without knowing something about the group.

As to you thinking just because you post support for 7 things, that doesn't mean you are living in reality. You deny facts that criticize Obama, you simply don't allow them to be posted at all, so yes, that is living in the bubble. Supporting certain issues doesn't change the fact that you won't accept that Obama can actually not be perfect.

You seem to want respect. You have to earn it and you don't get it by being a nasty, close minded, immature discriminating bunch that can't deal with reality.

[Scuba]

48. +1

[fascisthunter]

35. not a mistake

[sheshe2]

28. great white snark~

[great white snark]

52. Dearest sheshe2

[stevenleser]

38. That is pretty much the point of all safe haven groups here. If you disagree with the

prevailing opinion of those groups, you will get blocked.

If you dislike that, you need to take that up with Skinner and EarlG.

[sheshe2]

45. Good to see you Steven! nt

[cui bono]

47. Safe haven is quite different than avoiding reality.

I can see it if it were to escape bigotry or persecution, but to avoid dealing with reality and facts? That's just ridiculous.

[stevenleser]

53. Again, your objection should be directed toward the admins/owners of the site. Not BOGgers

I'm not the biggest fan of the way safe havens are set up either. But them's the rules here.

[cui bono]

55. I agree, the admins are responsible for the rules. But the BOGgers are responsible for how they act

within those rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

27. Thank you

[Uncle Joe]

16. I believe that would be an excellent rule, but I doubt the pundits will follow it.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.

[Cryptoad]

23. Where do you get certified to create new rules...??????

Is their a fee?
Is it available online?
is it valid world wide?
How long is it valid ?

[fascisthunter]

34. toadstools need not apply

[Cryptoad]

36. I didn't say I wanted to apply,,,,,,, geez

[fascisthunter]

37. just being informative

[Cryptoad]

39. No you are not

you still didn't answer any questions I had?

[fascisthunter]

40. hehee

fun

[Cryptoad]

42. aint it?

[fascisthunter]

43. it's all good... fungus amoung us

seriously, enjoy!

[Cryptoad]

44. seriously ,,,, i am

[stupidicus]

25. what I'd like to know, is how all those celebrating the result of the "credible threat"

are anything but war supporters, particularly given that the "credible threat" was warring in violation of the UN Charter if need be.

I can understand how one might find good results from the poisoned tree/undesirable means and methods acceptable even while deploring the poisoned fruit nature of that result, but I don't see how you can be approving of the method and means -- the "credible threat" of warring in this case -- without supporting that threatened, if for no other reason than it may inevitably have to graduate from credibility school into the real world as a fact.

[fascisthunter]

33. Well Done

but the message will afll on cemented deaf ears on DU. But not the occasional readers, nor the neighbors living next door.

[davidpdx]

49. Thank you for informing us of this new rule

God!