I will never, ever fucking ever understand supporting everything a president says and does.

[cali]

and there are lots of people who do just that. I think it's a very, very dangerous mindset rooted in personal loyalty, not any coherent political philosophy.

Supporting things that a democratic president does that you'd oppose if he/she were a republican, is an obvious example. Supporting falsehoods, excusing things like proposing a chained CPI or retaining tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, supporting bad "trade" deals, etc, etc.

I don't get it. I'll never get it. I've never felt that kind of abject fealty and adoration for a politician- not Wellstone or anyone else.

It's a sickness to devote yourself blindly to a politician.

And it goes way beyond DUers, so don't think this is just about DU

[ProSense]

1. "It's a sickness to devote yourself blindly to a politician. "

Angry? You woke up Monday morning and decided this needed to be said?

[Wind Dancer]

8. Do you agree or disagree?

Why make fun of a valid point, dare I ask?

[ProSense]

17. No, I don't

"Do you agree or disagree?"

...agree with ODS, but I suspect this latest episode was sparked by:

Paul Krugman Calls Barack Obama The Most Consequential President Since Reagan
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024432508

[rhett o rick]

188. So you try to shift the discussion to ODS and not answer the question about

whether you agree or disagree with blindly following a politician (or anyone for that matter). Blindly following others is usually a conservative trait. How do you feel?

[ProSense]

192. "shift the discussion to ODS"?

No friggin shift needed. LOL!

[rhett o rick]

203. I think the OP is referring to the BFBO syndrome. "Blindly Following Barack Obama." It's just an

excuse for self-righteous indignation. Oh that and the silly ROFL emoticon.

[ProSense]

209. "Blindly Following Barack Obama."

Those fools! Mock and ridicule them. They're part of the problem. Why don't they spend time condemning the President daily?

Who are they? I'll smack 'em down for 200 recs. I need that right now.

Friggin sheep.

[rhett o rick]

219. No no, they arent that terrible. But good for a bit of an amuse once in a while.

[ProSense]

223. I beg to differ

"No no, they arent that terrible. But good for a bit of an amuse once in a while."

These people are dangerous. EXTREMELY. This is why there needs to be frequent OPs calling them out these "BFBO."

Lives are at stake. The future of the country is jeopardy.

[rhett o rick]

229. Sadly lives are at stake, but those that wallow in the comfort of the status quo dont

care. At a shopping center that I frequent there is a lady living in a car. The car doesnt move, she doesnt have the keys but at least she is out of the cold. Wealth inequality is rapidly growing every day yet some are content with the status quo. I guess they got theirs.

And when they come for the whistle-blowers, these "status quo'ers" will applaud.

And when they come for the Occupy protestors, these "status quo'ers" will applaud.

And when they come for the "status quo'ers", they will be so shocked. Didnt their loyalty count for anything?

[ProSense]

231. Yes, the "BFBO"

"Sadly lives are at stake, but those that wallow in the comfort of the status quo dont"

...are supporting Obama's policies that will kill people. Damn them. Damn him.

[VanillaRhapsody]

333. Now where have I heard THAT before???

[grahamhgreen]

278. It's not about condemning, brainiacs, it's about

leading the President in the right direction, which is the opposite direction of the corporate war machine

[Mojorabbit]

213. + a gazillion. nt

[Katashi_itto]

365. Lol!!

[rhett o rick]

189. I dont think she will commit. It's easier to take pot-shots at other posters. nm

[ProSense]

194. "And it goes way beyond DUers, so don't think this is just about DU"

That's from the OP, and yeah: "It's easier to take pot-shots at other posters."

Really easy when it's all about creating straw men to knock them down.

These hi-five fests are hilarious.

[rhett o rick]

199. But yet you wont commit to whether or not you agree with blindly following a leader.

I think people should be their own person and think for themselves. What do you think?

[ProSense]

202. Please

"But yet you wont commit to whether or not you agree with blindly following a leader."

...just call me "sheep": http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024435795

Why can't people admit to ODS?

[rhett o rick]

205. Do you admit to BFBO? nm

[ProSense]

210. LOL!

Want me to? Need me to?

[rhett o rick]

221. Naw, it doesnt matter to me. BytheWay do you guys keep track of who uses the ROFL emoticon

the most?

[ProSense]

224. "you guys"

Who?

[busterbrown]

258. Oh for God’s sake.. Only uninformed idiots follow their political leaders blindly.

I don’t think anyone on DU believes Obama is infallible..But funny how the Right Wing is now trying to condemn all NSA Spying activities and blaming the administration for the current situation..

Right Wing... Aren’t they all into protecting America no matter what..Seems not so much when you have a Black Socialist Kenyan in power...

[VanillaRhapsody]

334. who says they're blind? YOU???

Last edited Tue Feb 4, 2014, 01:39 AM - Edit history (1)

How do YOU know they are not following a great leader because he sees the big picture and has earned their respect and loyalty?

Answer...YOU don't.

[rhett o rick]

339. I recommend you read, "The Authoritarians" by Bob Altemeyer. nm

[VanillaRhapsody]

342. No thanks....wasn't asking for suggestions...

So you must think there is NEVER a good leader...therefore NO leader is worthy of following because you abhor ALL authority!

I have had many discussions of this on this board...please see my sig line to get a glimpse of what I think!

I am not an idealist...I am a realist....and I take human nature into consideration.

[rhett o rick]

343. I think there are good leaders, in fact Pres Obama is a good leader, but no leader should

be blindly followed. I believe it is the duty of citizens to do more than vote and lead cheers.

We have lost our manufacturing leadership, our workforce has been decimated by trade agreements, our corporations have the highest profits of all time yet they dont share with their workers, our students are in debt to loan sharks, our vets sit on the streets begging for a sandwich, the middle class is dying, some Democrats are calling for cutting SS and Medicare, and yet some here feel that we should sit back and enjoy the status quo.

Elect H. Clinton-Sachs if you want to see the death of the middle class in your lifetime.

[VanillaRhapsody]

347. But who are YOU to decide WHEN a person is "blindly following" someone YOU even say is a good leader

you get to be the arbiter of that? Its up to you?

I vote for the Democrat.....so if Hillary wins the primary(or Joe Biden or any other Dem) then I vote for them...you got a problem with that? I am not wasting a vote on a "Ralph Nader" or god forbid a "LaRouche" and you know what else...even Elizabeth Warren has a D after her name....and after all you see all this "authoritarianism" going on....and you think Hillary would ****DESTROY THE MIDDLE CLASS****....then why are YOU even here on DU? As she is by far, far and away the Democratic front runner for it right now. Are you here thinking you are going to change that? Or hoping that she makes some major mistake along the way?

And THEN you think you are the guy or gal...with the gravitas to decide when OTHER Democrats are blindly following someone....nope...your not biased at all!

Just so you know....I have Republican women friends....who are questioning whether or not they could vote "against" Hillary.....THAT is what she has going for her....

[rhett o rick]

385. It's simple to tell if someone is a blind follower. And I think most blind followers are proud of

it.
Ask a supposedly politically liberal DU poster if they agree or disagree with indefinable detention as see what they say. If they say they strongly oppose the violation of our Constitution, then they are more apt to be a free thinker. But it they say, "You're a racist." Then they probably are a blind loyalist.

There are good Democrats and bad Democrats (Zell Miller). While all Democrats are better than all Republicans, We still need to get the bad Democrats out of our party.

Just so you know....I have Republican women friends....who are questioning whether or not they could vote "against" Hillary.....THAT is what she has going for her....

That's exactly what I am afraid of, a Democratic candidate that the Republicans will support. I want a Democratic candidate that scares the shit out of the Republicans.

[VanillaRhapsody]

386. a person who BARELY likes anything about the Democratic party in general

is not the right person to decide.....

And that is WHAT I am pointing out to you....you only vote for democrats because no one that suits you will run in another other party...you really don't like them AT ALL...So instead...you think you get to Vote for Democrats...then BASH anyone else who supports them...that's not exactly fair is it....

How about I just go vote for Republicans then go over to their sites and tell them THEY are just blindly following Republicans...does that make sense to you?

Somehow you think YOU are the better democrat...and I SAY HA! to that malarkey.

YOU only VOTE for them...you don't really support them...so your opinion of candidate blindness is severely flawwed.

So unless Bernie Sanders runs on a Socialist ticket you got NADA....you need to quit telling other DEMOCRATS that they are not Democratic enough...you are barely one yourself.

[rhett o rick]

387. I think a good Democrat is one with principles. One that decides issues on the basis of those

principles. Not those that rationalize that they are good Democrats because they never, ever question anything that any Democrat espouses.

I love the Democratic Party, I am an active member of the Democratic Party, and am working to drive the damn conservatives out of our party and back into their own party.

If you are afraid to state your principles, then you dont have any.

[lumpy]

266. Bottom line; I think most of us know who the sick poster is on this forum. Sick with negativity.

[JoePhilly]

13. Did you see the way Obama snapped that ball over Peyton's head!!

I'm guessing Cali is a serious Bronco's fan.

[Neoma]

55. My speech teacher is a huge Bronco's fan.

As in, he even has Bronco's car seat covers and an iphone cover case with broncos on it. I have a feeling tomorrow will be pretty damn mopey.

[Ishoutandscream2]

15. Always angry

The angriest person on DU.

[go west young man]

76. And sadly,

one of the loudest as well.

[merrily]

150. Lots of competition for the Angriest Poster on DU title.

[rhett o rick]

190. Compared to those happy as good soldiers at the status quo. nm

[Titonwan]

313. You are one of the last free thinkers here.

This joint was founded on such beliefs. Now I'm surrounded by groundless cheerleaders. I don't know why they rely on such hierarchy to function but I have never suffered such afflictions. I suppose media induced fear will cause such cognitive dissonance. It worked for Goebbels to good effect.
It has been many moons since I first joined this blog and found many humans that wanted more than what our masters choose for us but some here have become slaves to the politician instead of the ideals of what you believe in your heart to be right. I haven't spoke much through the years, but then again I'm not trying to thread jack each and every op that criticizes the president- valiantly defending the indefensible.
Exactly where does it stop? You can't hurt me by the 'delete my posts' option. It won't make my opinion any less valid. It's some of these high volume posts priests that think they know what's best for the rest of us.
In less than a month, I've gotten four of these warnings. One from a high odometer cheerleader that has adopted this 'power by volume' concept.
I guarantee you I will always speak my mind and I could give a rat's ass if it offends such delicate sensibilities. This is our life. Do with it as you will but don't expect me to climb in the cattle car with you.
I miss the original DU. They were against all injustice- not just the ones against our party. Life is too short for such nonsense. Be brave and know the damned truth as shitty as it may be. Peace.

[rhett o rick]

320. There are a lot of free thinkers here. They often get shouted down by "The Group".

I believe the Free Thinkers are a majority but The Group wields a lot of power because they stick together and use the alert system to push their world view.

In a democracy one of the major freedoms is to be able to stand up to your leaders. To hold them accountable. But for The Group, loyalty is more important than principles.

[Titonwan]

328. I know

I ride with a bunch of independents. Gangs are for authoritarian punks. I think for myself, thank ya kindly. I do admire people such as yourself. Take good care, amigos.
P.S. I've never used such bitch ass tactics as to ban or report someone. I choose to let them hang themselves with their own rope by public opinion.
I'm with you= The founding fathers wondered if things were skewered and they said so.
Now, it seems like I'm reading Tories accounts of why we show fealty to the King! Fuck that sideways.

[7962]

361. Criticize Obama, et. al., at your own peril!

You're instantly called every name in the book; teabagger, right winger, freeper, etc. And just because he happen to think something is right or wrong. Something maybe should be different. Happens to me around here a lot.
My filter has always been, how would I be thinking if Bush had said or done the same thing, whatever that may be? But it seems a lot of folks here just say, he's "our guy", I'm gonna back him. And its not just the President either.

[VanillaRhapsody]

335. this "joint" was founded on Democrats....you all don't get to decide what that is...

[Titonwan]

367. Two run on sentences of nonsense n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

374. says who?

only nonsense to those it was directed at of course...

[LanternWaste]

23. Much as you woke up Monday morning and decided this would be a good response.

Much as you woke up Monday morning and decided this would be a good response. Yet the implication is that the one is petulance and the other is not...?

[ProSense]

31. LOL! You mean I knew someone would post the OP?

Really?

[JNelson6563]

56. It's as bad as any slavish devotion, like say...

seeking out an posting as much negative stuff as possible. I can't imagine working so hard to do my best to make sure everyone is miserable.

Sadly the OP does not recognize unhealthy slavish devotion to anything but, apparently, some of her favorites sources of grief (real or perceived, doesn't matter).

Julie--starting to wonder if DU hasn't gotten a bit more unbalanced in recent years...

[freshwest]

292. Misery always needs company like a dog needs a bone. Be kind to those working things out... n/t

[Titonwan]

107. Why, you're one of those this op's for!

You're quite famous for defending the indefensible. There's optimism and then there's obsession.

[msanthrope]

111. 1-5 jury leave. nt

[ProSense]

112. Someone alerted on my comment?

[msanthrope]

119. You're going to love this one...someone was trying to teach you a lesson.

On Mon Feb 3, 2014, 10:11 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

"It's a sickness to devote yourself blindly to a politician. "
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4435530

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is the first of two alerts. This one because maybe it is a thread just to get stuff started. I am alerting Prosense as well. I am sick and tired of these two or three folks arguing int DU forums on a personal level. Admins I think these two need a break from being allowed to post in each others threads. This sick back and forth in public is nothing more than a soap opera enabled by DU itself.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Feb 3, 2014, 10:15 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "Ignore" is available, just a 'click' away.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I hope admin sees the alert here as an abuse of the jury system. To the alerter: perhaps you should use the ignore button and 'trash thread' with more regularity.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: That's what ignore buttons are for.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[merrily]

148. Someone complained that Cali and ProSense disagree with each other often?

Does that kind of thing happen often?

[Whisp]

136. I think she lost a footsball bet. n/t

[freshwest]

297. So the answer to this would be 'NO'?

[sheshe2]

312. Guess that's it, freshwest!

I think I found someone new to idolize! WOW!

[freshwest]

325. Me, too. The whole team was great! They never saw it coming. And check this out here:

LOL!! "Lessons for GOP from Seattle Seahawks" (from faux "news&quot

to freeplessinseattle:

'...Obama plays like Seattle...'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=352268

Oh, yeah, they skeert!

[sheshe2]

331. LOL!

Great link fresh.

They be skeert alright!

[freshwest]

338. Seattle's 'Legion of Boom' really got to them... n/t

[sheshe2]

340. Boeing’s Seahawks 747 traces a ’12′ over Washington

I love the #louder on the side!

http://blog.seattlepi.com/football/2014/01/30/boeings-seahawks-747-traces-a-12-over-washington/#20127101=1

Seahawks!

Seattle's 'Legion of Boom!'

[freshwest]

344. And it is the Legion of Doom to the GOP! WA has Medicaid expansion and ACA programs at work!

And we have a Democratic governor, two Democratic WOMEN senators, and all the rest to make life good.

Don't forget COSTCO with its great wages and training. And I so love that picture:



Yeah, it's rainy and dark some days, but we keep our spirits high looking to the future.

[sheshe2]

350. The future that Seattle has, looks bright to me.

You have a Democratic governor, two Democratic WOMEN senators, and COSTCO!

You also have Richard Sherman!









Brains, heart, skill, stamina and the will to succeed got them to the Superbowl and won the day. That is indeed why the Seahawks won. With strength and courage we can all succeed, freshwest!

[freshwest]

351. OMG!

We're gonna enjoy the trip!



We're gonna run all the way!

[sheshe2]

355. You got that right, freshwest!

Da do run run!

[freshwest]

356. Get yourself out in that snow and cool off! n/t

[roguevalley]

168. I agree with the OP. Its a blindness that afflicted the country with Bush/Cheney and every

other pug out there. to me its the same. dangerous

[ProSense]

179. Well, good for you.

"Its a blindness that afflicted the country with Bush/Cheney and every other pug out there. to me its the same. dangerous"

That is feel-good nonsense. Supporting Obama isn't going to destroy the country.

[roguevalley]

302. you either don't get what I am suggesting or you don't want to. When he's wrong, I don't support him

I don't close my eyes to the things he does that are wrong. If you do, then okay. I don't care but I don't give blind faith to anyone. I am old enough to see where that goes.

Feel good nonsense? Really?

[ProSense]

303. Yes, really. n/t

[Titonwan]

330. "That is feel-good nonsense"

No, what's nonsense if defending things that wouldn't get defended if the 'other side' did it. Your vast record of letters seems to me to be constant loyalty to party over ideals.
Sorry, I understood the whole foundation of this blog was to question authority- as when Gore lost to Supreme Court intervention. Now it seems like just nothing can be said about the failures of this presidency. Many of us are deeply disappointed. I can say you are not convincing, in the least.

[rug]

249. Healthy citizens remind themselves of this every day.

Others just roll around the floor.

[ProSense]

252. LOL!

"Healthy citizens remind themselves of this every day."

Yeah, the OP is a sign of a "healthy citizen." Oh to be that superior to those straw men.

[rug]

267. QED

[840high]

289. It needs to be said.

[ProSense]

290. Sure. It makes everyone saying it feel superior.

Whatever floats your boat.

[freshwest]

293. God, I miss Meta. This thread would be perfect there. Sigh. n/t

[bobduca]

332. And Lo Many boats were floated that day

[Douglas Carpenter]

2. If I were to think of the politician I personally admired most of any other - it would

be the late Sen. George McGovern. But never once did I ever feel even for a fleeting second feel that I was required to always change my position in order to make it conform to his position on every single issue. I think the late great Senator was wrong on a few issues. If he had become President - no doubt he would have been wrong on at least some decisions. So even in the case of a political figure who I adore as a saint - I never have and never would have felt that that they are always right and that I always am obliged to surrender my opinion making capabilities to theirs.

[asjr]

21. Very well stated.

[mountain grammy]

45. Well said, and, if I may say so, I think this reflects how most of us feel.

[1StrongBlackMan]

47. And I think that is everyone's position ...

with respect to all politicians ... including this President.

I think what the OP confuses is Democrats refusing to participate in the/her daily "President Obama Bad" rants (and stating so) with "supporting everything that this President say and does."

[Sheepshank]

134. Appears to be true......doesn't it! n/t

[cui bono]

160. No, it most certainly isn't. At least not based on what they argue.

There are people on here and elsewhere who defend Obama cutting SS, spying on Americans unconstitutionally, making secret deals with insurance companies and regarding TPP, appointing banksters to his admin, etc....

They would not have defended those actions if it were a republican or if they were sticking to their principles.

The OP is completely right. The evidence is all over DU.

[1StrongBlackMan]

173. A couple Questions ...

Would disputing the claim that President is "cutting SS", be defending President Obama on this issue?

Would arguing that the "spying on Americans" was/is within constitutional grounds (per the SOTUS), be defending President Obama on that issue?

Would arguing that "deals" had to be in order to get any semblance of healthcare reform, be defending President Obama on that issue?

Would arguing that someone's employment history is not a political/philosophic/ideological statement, as to disqualify someone in an area where one has expertise, be defending President Obama on that issue?

Because that is what I see in DU.

[cui bono]

184. Then you missed the posts where people have denied that Obama ever brought

up SS at all. Seriously. Even after they were provided with links to pressers.

Defending TPP? No way would anyone on here defend it if BushCo was doing it.

Spying on American citizens without a warrant? Really, how can you defend that? It is unconstitutional. You can argue the unconstitutional part, but defending the action is something no one here would have defended BushCo on. Obama expanded it.

Defending his wall street appointees? Blind loyalty. You can't blame that on anyone but Obama.

Also, it's about people who just can't seem to see that there's any valid criticism at all, when of course there is.

But as long as policy is discussed and the person is not defending something that they did or would have criticized a Republican for, that's great. But much of the time valid criticisms are taken personally and then it is responded to with name calling the criticizer as a "hater" or "ODS". I know you've seen it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

187. Apparently ...

We differ as to there being a difference in proposing the CCPI (as a strategy that has been explained, time and again, as to why it was done and the effect that it had on republicans) and actually cutting SS.

I have not seen anyone on this site defending TPP (except the one OP by Krugman where he postulated that it really "wasn't that big a deal&quot

The spying thing has not been adjudicated unconstitutional and is being pared back, while balancing national security and privacy interests. I do not have a problem with this ... and this has nothing to do with a defense of President Obama.

Defending his wall street appointees? Blind loyalty.

Not "Blind Loyalty" but rather, reality based assessment. To understand the ridiculousness of this crucible, please check the resume of one, Senator Elizabeth Warren. Again, taking and doing a job well is neither a statement of personal philosophy, nor ideology ... well ... for most of us.

Also, it's about people who just can't seem to see that there's any valid criticism at all, when of course there is.

Then, it is also about those that can't see that there's valid praise/acknowledgement for what President Obama has accomplished.

[sheshe2]

352. Now that was well done, 1StrongBlackman!

[reACTIONary]

319. +10 (nt)

[Th1onein]

183. I don't think the OP is confusing anything at all.

There are policies that Democrats should be against, but our Democratic president is rallying for. You know it, I know it; everyone knows it. There is no confusion.

[merrily]

232. Peversely, McGovern was used as the excuse to shift the Party right.

After his loss, the reforms he made when he was standard bearer of the party were reversed. And his massive loss was cited as evidence that the Party needed to move right. Reagan's massive re-election victory clinched the argument. And here we are.

[ancianita]

308. I believe that you are mistaking agreement with support. The latter isn't conditional on the former.

[VanillaRhapsody]

337. Nor do you have to give up your support because a few perpetual malcontents

have deemed him Satan incarnate!

[SidDithers]

3. ...

Sid

[cali]

5. the fact is that there are people who support the president blindly- just as there

were those that supported bushco blindly, etc. it's a certain mindset and denying that it exists, is like denying that it snows in Vermont in Feb.

[kelliekat44]

18. I think we all know it exists, so what is the point? Those who believe as you do don't follow anyon

blindly. Others do...so? I don't understand it either. What I don't understand are people who don't think people are entitled to their own thoughts and opinions about the President or anyone else. To make observations about certain truths, facts, or opinions doesn't mean a person blindly follows anyone. I may not agree with a position and still find it legitimate based on facts.

[1StrongBlackMan]

51. I don't think there are many, even a few ...

that "blindly support" anyone or anything. I think what the OP confuses is Democrats refusing to participate in the/her daily "President Obama Bad" rants (and stating so) with "supporting everything that this President say and does."

[cui bono]

162. The OP is not confused. The evidence of blind support is all over DU.

It has nothing to do with people refusing to participate in criticism and everything to do with people supporting/defending actions that are things that brought outrage when an R did them.

[kelliekat44]

241. I suggest that there is also BLIND OPPOSITION on the loose here as well. And really it is as

tiresome as Ted Cruz.

[A Simple Game]

60. I think the point is that people without their own moral compasses can allow

themselves to be manipulated. These people allow the Jim Jones and the Hitlers of the world to succeed. Think about it, if either had a (D) after his name, some here on DU would be shamelessly supporting him and his policies.

Did anyone on DU vocally support the NSA before President Obama? How much support for Afghanistan? Cutting Social Security by changing the cost of living computation? Yet support for each of these, plus many more, exist today on DU. Why?

[L0oniX]

63. If Hitler was a democract they would support him. OMG LMFAO sadly and possibly true

These people allow the Jim Jones and the Hitlers of the world to succeed. Think about it, if either had a (D) after his name, some here on DU would be shamelessly supporting him and his policies.

[treestar]

240. But Hitler would never be a Democrat, would he?

It's hard to believe so much resentment for supporting Democrats could belong to anyone but a Republican.

[jtuck004]

255. Hitler got a lot of his power by catering to the working people, nearly eliminating unemployment

improving access to health care, and lots of infrastructure spending. It was in the later years that all that turned into the big shitball it did.

So I wouldn't be so sure...

[Titonwan]

116. And that is precisely the point.

Very well done.

[kjones]

175. Bravo

As in, congratulations on calling people you disagree with manipulated and without morals,
and then continuing on to equate their actions with those that brought about Hitler.

[A Simple Game]

211. Sorry if you got the impression I disagreed with them. For the most part I agree with them.

But I will not agree 100% even my wife, why would I expect to agree 100% with someone that at best will be my leader for 8 years?

[L0oniX]

61. Even Canadians support our president blindly like every policy decision is manna from heaven.

[Rex]

69. That is strange, but know what you are talking about.

Not even their country or have to worry about policy decisions...but still parrot the people in the States that follow him blindly.

[Fiendish Thingy]

72. Not this Canadian

I moved from California to BC because Obama insisted on "looking forward" continuing the damaging policies of the Bush administration, rather than punishing BushCo's crimes.

[L0oniX]

73. I almost moved to BC when Bush got elected.

[riverbendviewgal]

399. Not blindly. please read my replies

see 59, 393 and 398 and also read

this pdf. It was submitted to NZ government in a submission against one Of President Obama's laws... I hate to say it. Because we Canadians do really like Obama but not in this case.

http://citizenshipsolutions.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Paying-Tribute-to-America.pdf

[L0oniX]

402. I like Obama but I do not like many of his policies and some of what he trys to do and not do.

[riverbendviewgal]

403. Same here.

I guess we are on the same page.

[Renew Deal]

4. Interesting. Did you support ANYTHING Bush did?

[joeglow3]

42. His support for AIDS research

you?

[Renew Deal]

92. Oddly quiet from the lecturer

[Puglover]

129. You bet I did!

One thing but wholeheartedly.

The No Call List.

I support probably 90 percent of what President Obama is for.

His fans that attack Democrats on this website? Not at all.

[baldguy]

307. And how do you feel about his critics who attack Democrats on this website?

[Puglover]

348. Critic or not

An attack is an attack. I'm not a fan of chewing each other up. It's a waste of time. However sadly the trenchs are dug rather deep.
Frankly sometimes I think people just dig fighting on the internet.

[sabrina 1]

353. How do you feel about people who attack Democratic ideals, such as

SS, who make excuses they would never have made for Bush had HE proposed the Chained CPI eg.

How do you feel about people who support the Droning of innocent men, women and children, a policy that OUTRAGED Democrats when Bush started it.

How do you feel about people who support the gross violations of our Constitutional Rights by the NSA and their Private Security Contractors, most of them Friends of Bush, the same policies that OUTRAGED Democrats when Bush was doing it?

How do you feel about people who are supporting the President pushing fast tracking the TPP and who attack those who oppose the Keystone Pipeline.

How do you feel about those who supported this president overturning a 30 year ban on Offshore Drilling, when during the Bush years they completely opposed it?

How do you feel about people who are supporting this president's extension of Bush's horrendous 'education' policies, the privatization of the Public Schools, moving public money into private hands?

How do you feel about those who have decided it is okay NOT to hold War Criminals, torturers, liars who led us into war, responsble for their massive crimes. Or about those who have decided it is okay to NOT Prosecute the Wall St Criminals who destroyed the lives of so many millions of people?

How do you feel about people who are outraged over the number of REPUBLICANS who are in this administration, appointed by the president when the voters THREW THEM OUT?

Do you seriously think that Democrats should be quiet about all these and much, much more, policies that are exactly WHY Democrats and Independents voted AGAINST?

It is stunning to see people actually blame the voters for what politicians do. All a Democratically elected public official has to do to avoid being criticized by those who elected him/her is to keep the promises they made to promote DEMOCRATIC principles, to appoint Democrats to positions of power, and definitely NOT continue the horrendous policies people railed against for the entire eight years of the Bush era.

[cui bono]

165. How does that speak to the point made in the OP?

[democratisphere]

6. Strongly agree with you on this point.

Brainwashed is the ONLY explanation.

[monmouth3]

7. Please name one, just one thing you support about Obama...

[yeoman6987]

40. Bush Accomplishment

Only one thing did I agree with President Bush on and that was the additional money to Africa for various drugs and immunizations. Other then that, can't think of any.

[1StrongBlackMan]

54. Wait for it ...

Wait for it ...

The likely response, if there is one, will be:

"Loyalty Oath Alert"

[freshwest]

294. Um, there are so many... I won't repeat them here. n/t

[SMC22307]

75. His administration's handling of Iran. At least so far.

"Fixing" Social Security and suggesting the Chained CPI - NO.

(I'm not Cali, but since you threw the question out there...)

[bvar22]

145. Cali was a staunch supporter of President Obama during the first few years of his term.

She was a DU leader of the "Geez...lets give this guy a CHANCE contingent."
I don't remember which particular indefensible betrayal of the Working Class was the Straw that Broke the Back of her support,
but I do remember her active support.
It is all in the archives if you care you do the research.




---bvar22
Cursed with a memory

[monmouth3]

146. I really don't care to tyvm...n/t

[JVS]

324. You shouldn't ask questions if you don't care to look for the answers

[Lydia Leftcoast]

269. Yes, for a long time, Cali was VERY supportive of the president

I, too, am unsure what changed her mind, but she is not a kneejerk basher.

[Enrique]

263. Syria for example

your implication is a very familiar false one. It's been made about me, and when I answer the question about the many things I do support Obama on, no one cares.

So I doubt you will care that you are wrong about Cali, but here it is anyway. I'm prepared for you to totally ignore it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023665900

[rhett o rick]

314. Do you have a point? If you do you hide it well. nm

[Skittles]

349. the point is

you either adore Obama and think he can do no wrong or you are an absolute hater. There is no middle ground, rhett o rick. GET WITH THE PROGRAM!!!

[rhett o rick]

383. I just have never been able to "get with the program." Maybe if they offered a different flavor of

kool-aid.

[Titonwan]

323. I'll tell ya a bunch.

I supported Barack when he promised to filibuster the new 'improved' FISA 'adjustment' (you know, where the Telcos got to write the 'retroactive immunity' laws which kept their asses from going to prison- including president Bush Jr.- but Obama said to 'look forward!' crap). Didn't happen.
Or supporting him claiming he'd close Guantanamo Bay torture center. Did not happen.
Or supporting him when he said the rule of law would come back here- while he continuously signed extensions on the NDAA (or the 'Patriot Act').
What about indefinite detentions or drone killing of American citizens without due process? Fail.
How about defending the super suppressive and secretive NSA storing of dossiers on every single person in this country? Sure, big brother is only looking out for us.
How about not one person involved in the crash of 2007 is not in prison? Why were the worst people appointed to economic policy? Jamie Dimon is laughin' his ass off on this one!
And this is my favorite- I supported him when he promised 'the most transparent government ever'- while prosecuting whistle blowers at rate not comparable to all former presidents combined. (thanks, Edward Snowden)
I supported this corporatist by leg work, money and time. Yes, I get to criticize. I'm not at all happy with being fooled.
And if you think I'd vote for more of the same, you are out of your ever lovin' mind.
Warren, Sanders or nothing at all. I'm not dyin' on false hopes.

[Skittles]

341. GM

his supreme court picks

his progress with equal rights for gay folk

I could go on but would it help to convince the non-swooners we are not "Obama haters? I suspect not.

[liberal N proud]

9. I never have hero's and never trust a politician

Support a politician that says they stand for what you believe, to get them elected, but never support them unconditionally.

Having hero's and unconditional support will lead to disappointment, resentment and anger.

Politicians have an agenda and it most surely does not align with your values 100%. If they do, you need to reevaluate your values.

[clarice]

109. +1.nt

[tridim]

10. Extreme ODS hangovers make you feel sick to your soul.

Congratulations, you've ID'ed your problem.

[jsr]

11. He's on the wrong side of many important issues.

[JoePhilly]

12. Still pissed about the endless war that Obama started in Syria I see.

Uncontrollable Free-Floating outrage can make for a tough Monday morning.

[freshwest]

295. The media was looking forward to a non-stop horror show. Peace is just sooo boring. n/t

[JoePhilly]

299. Some here were sure the endless war in Syria

would be the thing that destroyed Obama's legacy.

Oh well, the search continues.

[freshwest]

301. After a while... Never mind... n/t

[Progressive dog]

14. OK-I hope you feel better now.

[bluestate10]

318. Yep. That DU member does seem to have a problem with the President. I haven't

seen one decision that the poster approves of.

[Scuba]

16. I shall remain loyal to ideals, and politicians/parties that support those ideals.

[ananda]

19. As much as I deplored most of what Bush said and did ...

... I really liked the Title III program. Through Title III I was
able to do a lot of good for my students and to promote
good will among the teachers and staff for the ESL program.

It was also good for me financially. I gratefully accepted
everything Title III had to offer. I would never turn down
a program that helps teachers and students just because
it came out of an admin I didn't like or approve of.

The same with Obama and ACA. Just because I don't like
or approve of Obama's corporatism and caving to Reeps
doesn't mean I don't like everything he says and does.

[n2doc]

20. Don't expect to change any minds, though

The cult of Obama is strong. Just like the cult of Bush before him.

[RC]

91. I wonder how many are the same people?

Especially since Obama continued many of bu$h's policies and kept reaching out to and compromising up front on many issues, with the Republicans.

[Fumesucker]

22. It's been amusing watching the adoption of BDS as the chosen dismissive epithet of the claque

Some people don't even have enough originality to come up with their own denigrating term and have to recycle one from the Dubya misadministration.

It would have been more convincing if they had at least bothered to file the serial numbers off.

[ProSense]

25. Yeah, the OP is dripping

"Some people don't even have enough originality to come up with their own denigrating term and have to recycle one from the Dubya misadministration."

...with "originality."

All praises!!!

[Fumesucker]

28. BDS was lame when Republicans used it against the left

It's way more lame now that pragmatic moderate centrists are using the same construction for the very same purpose.

And it is funny as hell to watch.

[cui bono]

166. Several smarmy retorts from you in this thread and you've yet to say anything of substance.

Par for the course.

And clearly you recognize yourself in the OP or you wouldn't be responding this way.

[ProSense]

176. Is your post of "substance"?

Think about it.

LOL!

[JonLP24]

24. I support policy over individuals

Any other way doesn't make sense unless you don't have a mind of your own.

[840high]

291. ...

[INdemo]

26. What I hate is voting for a particular candidate

that promises things like never allowing Social Security to be on the bargaining table in budget talks or promising to keep student loan interest at a minimum, and the list goes on....
Then after being elected find that those promises were just what the voters wanted to hear and the candidate didn't really mean it. What I hate is voting for a so called Democrat and getting a corpracrat or a Republican lite.

[tridim]

29. Vaporware's non-existence makes me soooooo damn angry!!!!11

:shakesfistatclouds:

Obama is a real person with a real record, not the evil straw-man you have constructed in your head over the last 6 years. You and Cali have the same problem.

[INdemo]

360. No,that is not correct

Real Democrats are very rare these days. Todays Democrats think they have to fall in line with the Republicans for the corporate hand outs, in order to be elected, and that is the problem
I have voted straight Democratic ticket since I first voted in 1968 and Democratic candidates have certainly changed since then.

[INdemo]

404. I have been voting for Democrats since 1968

straight ticket every time...but then back then those Democrats were real liberal Democrats.
With todays politicians its really hard to tell the difference between a corpracrat and a Republicrat.
We at least could expect a Democratic President to appoint Democrats to his cabinet. But just how many of those members are former Wall Street insiders or Republicans.
And yes Im still pissed about the promises President Obama made about the budget issues ,and not allowing SS/Medicare to be part of negotiations, but it was him that first offered up these to be allowed in the budget negotiations

[hobbit709]

27. "Don’t follow leaders Watch the parkin’ meters"

[daleanime]

39. "offer me solutions....

offer me alternatives and I decline."

[marble falls]

30. It does happen other places but where it happens here it happems to an extreme!....

how was your Superball Sunday, Cali?

[Fawke Em]

32. I see one member of the "same avatar" brigade showed up

to your post early.

I'm still pondering why they all have the same avatar.

[ProSense]

34. "I'm still pondering why they all have the same avatar."

Cult?

[JoePhilly]

65. Hey!! ... How come nobody told me the cult has a special Avatar????

Do I not blindly support this President, as if I had a sickness, enough for some of you??

[randome]

67. You're still junior level cultist. Be patient.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers. It's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[JoePhilly]

74. Awe come one ... by the time ...

... you guys let me in ... Hillary will be President ... and I'll have to start all over!

[1StrongBlackMan]

115. So ignore 2014 ...

jump full in on Hillary 2016 ... Get a seat early!

[Fawke Em]

280. Well, yes. If you say so.

I forgot about the ROFL smiley.

[freshwest]

298. Gotta admit, that mystery thingie there looks odd. I can't figure it out... n/t

[rhett o rick]

207. And use the same signature ridicule ROFL emoticon. nm

[Fawke Em]

282. Ironically, I don't find that much ridicule.

If used too often, it just looks annoying.

[ProSense]

33. Here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024435795

[Rex]

35. Not just the POTUS, but any leader should always be questioned.

Don't worry the Founding Fathers felt the same way.

EDIT - wow you pissed off the head cheerleader!

[malaise]

36. On the other hand I will never understand those

who criticize everything this President does, particularly when the chief culprits thought he would lose the November 2012 election.

[Maedhros]

242. There are people who criticize A LOT of what Obama does,

but I don't think there is anyone who criticizes everything he does.

For example, I support his diplomatic approach vis-a-vis Iran, but I certainly criticize his imperial executive mindset, his pro-corporate policy stances, his anti-teacher education agenda, his criminalization of adversarial journalism, his claiming the authority to execute citizens without due process, his drone murder campaigns and his military escalation in Africa.

I'd say, if he wants less criticism he should stop doing heinous things.

[albino65]

37. waste of my time n/t

[Puglover]

130. Thanks for advising.

I'll alert the media.

[Crowman1979]

38. I would listen to Obama if he would stop compromising and giving in to backstabbers.

[obxhead]

41. Blind loyalty is simply stupid.

Support or oppose policy, not the person.

Blind support is a fascist ideology.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

43. I don't agree with everything Obama says or does

Last edited Mon Feb 3, 2014, 01:23 PM - Edit history (1)

but I believe that you can be critical of somebody and their ideas- some of which are never all that likely to become law anyway- without treating them like, I don't know, an "enemy" on par with the other side. Republicans hate President Obama (any Democrat, really) and have launched a total (political) war of annihilation against him and when you are dealing with an opposition like that, it's not hard to want to "circle the wagons" and defend our Democratic President from them, even if sometimes it seems like you're defending questionable policy ideas too- because you don't want to give the other side any more ammunition. I suppose that it's probably not a good habit to get caught up in but OTOH it's been so hard to get and keep Democrats in the WH and Congress during the past 30 years, so it's really hard for me to want to spend a bunch of time carping from the sidelines about all of their shortcomings (and occasional bad ideas) when they do hold the WH and/or Congress. I would prefer to focus more on the positive things they are trying to accomplish.

[HappyMe]

48. I agree.

[Sheepshank]

81. I would add that sometimes it's too difficult here to talk about

...policies I may disagree with.

Feels like I'm feeding the trolls. Also feels like the barrage of predictable Obama-hate comments and recs from those that NEVER can come up with a positive thought, is completely dissatisfying and doesn't actually promote any true and open discussion.

[treestar]

243. Good point

They call it "blind following" etc. when you just want to be realistic about what can be gotten. And let's face it, not everyone cares about every issue so passionately they'd rather see the Republicans win than vote for somebody and support them when they might see a thing or too differently.

And sometimes there is nothing wrong with trusting them. This total cynicism is as sick as any "blind following" they claim exists.

[davidpdx]

363. I agree

Thank god DU is not representative of the Democratic Party. The people on here are a small sliver of those who call themselves Democrats.

We need to continue to work hard to get stuff past. I have no problem with holding Obama's feet to the fire, but burning him at the stake is just plain overkill. He's not perfect.

I think some people just like to blow things out of proportion to hear their own voice.

[ProSense]

44. Focus:

Editorial: A bitter pill (Farm bill)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024435922

[Vattel]

46. It does provide some comic relief around here though.

Like when you said in another post, "On trade, Obama said he will work with Congress to pass fast-track authority . . .," and someone attacked you because in his speech Obama didn't use the expression "fast-track authority." Even when you pointed out that he used the expression, "trade promotion authority," which amounts to the same thing, there was no backing down. Part of this mindset seems to be to never concede a point no matter what.

[djean111]

52. Always looks like thread hi-jacking to me. Obvious as hell.

[Maedhros]

247. Thread Hijacking 101:

Seize upon a semantic error and argue, argue, argue.

[bobduca]

322. and its a pro at that

almost like it was it's job!

[Maedhros]

336. And when their argument is dismantled in one thread, they use the exact same one on the next thread,

and the next, and the next, and the next...

[arcane1]

121. Yep. If they can't bring themselves to say they disagree, then they simply deny

It can be painful to watch.

[LondonReign2]

169. She will NEVER admit when she is wrong

Nor will she answer if she supports TPP. Sad

[stupidicus]

49. well, that is a pair of shoes you never wanna don or walk a mile in

it leads to imprisonment in a bubble just like and impenetrable as the one rightwingnuts reside in.

Fortunately being an "extreme lefty" seems to serve pretty well as an inoculation against...

[ProSense]

50. How about

"I will never, ever fucking ever understand supporting everything a president says and does."

...98 to 99 percent of the time: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024435975

[JNelson6563]

53. I can't see you saying or doing anything positive, period.

Fucking ever. So rock on.

Julie--who knows the only person anyone always agrees with is in the mirror

[randome]

58. And even then you should get a second opinion! Mirrors can deceive!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Sheepshank]

78. your signature line is misleading

I understand it is intended to be positive and uplifiting, but it's about as wrong as you assume the mirror is for some people.

[Rex]

57. K&R for pissing off all the right people!

[riverbendviewgal]

59. I greatly admire President Obama

Except that he did not close Gatanamo, bailed the banks but not the people, and signed FATCA, the worst bill that no one knows about. It will not catch fat cat tax evaders but will hurt many ex pats living abroad for decades. Many who are living on 20k or less. The compliance filing is $1000 and more each year, even if you have no income For something $30 Turbo tax does in Canada for the earned Canada income. I do not blame Obama, I blame the ill informed Congress that put in the Job Bill.

What I hate to see is the huge disrespect given to him. I may not like all he did or does but he IS the president of the USA. I commend him for getting ACA, otherwise known as Obamacare.

I shudder to think of what the USA would be like if Romney had become president.

[RC]

114. Pretty sad when you have to compare to something far worse, to show we really don't have it so bad.

Things would be far better for all of us, if we got we got we voted for. But that didn't happen, twice in a row now.

[davidpdx]

366. I worry about FATCA as well

I am also an expat and am worried if I am able to save money again I may hit the limit. My income will be going up soon and it would take a year or two before I hit the threshold. It appears (and correct me if I'm wrong) real estate is not included. We bought a house in 2011 and I am listed as the co-owner. Before then I did have assets that would have triggered the threshold. My understanding is DA is working actively on a solution with some members of Congress. Hopefully they will get the law amended to help expats.

[riverbendviewgal]

388. a good website to get FATCA advice

are isaacbrocksociety.com and maplesandbox, com

What country do you live in. Both websites are viewed world wide but are based in Canada.

[davidpdx]

392. Thanks for those

I'm in South Korea.

[riverbendviewgal]

393. there are people all over the world

Get the websites. Lurk awhile or sign in , not your name but one you make up. You will that everyone is helpful and supportive. .

[riverbendviewgal]

398. I wanted to send t his PDF

Davidpdx

A toronto, canada lawyer submitted this to the New Zealand government. He also was teleconferencing at the committee governent meeting in his wee hours , NZ hours which are closer to yours.

Please read this pdf I hope you can download it. it is 18 pages but it really gives a good analysis of why FATCA is not good for the world.

http://citizenshipsolutions.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Paying-Tribute-to-America.pdf

Could you give me feed back on it. and what you think .. and post and pass it on The author has given permission.

We need to stand up all together. All people of the world and their countries.

This is critical.

feel free to post emails to me. I check daily. riverbendviewgal

[JI7]

62. i Don't watch the superbowl

[Dash87]

64. It's especially odd to assume a politician always has your well-being in mind, and attacking

anyone who disagrees. How do you know? Would they suddenly be different from every other politician in history, and have absolutely no chance of doing something that is not in your best interest?

It's silly. There's some people that treat political parties like sports teams. Their team can do no wrong, while they would be the first to throw a fit when the other side did it.

These type of people cannot be avoided in any political party. Their devotion is sincere but misguided. Most of the time, their parties just use them without any consideration, and anyone who has had enough is a "traitor."

[Rex]

66. Spot on!

The people that treat this like a game should be ashamed of themselves.

[gollygee]

68. I can't see criticizing every single thing he does either

I don't think he's perfect, but I think he's been a good president. I might very well criticize some things he does, but I am still very happy with other things.

I see a lot of people who are only criticizing, and act like those who see Obama as overall a good president support *every single thing* he does. Supporting Obama does not mean supporting every single thing he does, or devoting yourself blindly to him. It does also not equal abject fealty and/or adoration.

[Rex]

71. I would think the normal person would praise what they like and critique what they don't like.

That seems to be the time honored fashion among people that have critical thinking skills.

[PsychGrad]

304. Agree.

I have disagreed with him on some things, but all in all, I am very pleased with what he has been able to accomplish. Of course, I also weigh in all of the opposition and disrespect he has had to endure - he really has had to work twice as hard for half as much as any previous presidents. I'm honestly sad that he can't go another term - or maybe, at a different time in history, so that we could see what he really could get done. I have a lot of respect for him as a person. All the digging into his past and life that people did out of fear and not a single thing that would qualify as "scandal". He is pretty pristine really, and I think that's not because he's perfect, but because he is just genuinely a good person. He has a lot of plates to balance, and I give him leeway for that. I still disagree, and I have been disappointed with him on some things (mostly, that he won't play hardball more bc I KNOW he is capable of doing so and doing so well!). BUT, I still respect him, am still glad that I voted twice for him, and still believe that he is a genuinely good person who has a good heart and good intentions. Being President isn't easy, if it was, everybody would do it. In my life, he is the best President we've ever had, imo, with Bill Clinton being second. I don't "blindly follow" anyone, and am smart enough to research and read and know my positions well. But I do support those that do a job that I have no desire to do, and trust President Obama to know what he is doing, because I think he does.

[Sheepshank]

70. Pissing and complaining is equally as dangerous, and a sickness.

and has absolutely ZERO coherant political philiosphy (to coin your own phrase).

Here on DU (as in the big world), I fnd that the more each 'camp' derides the other, the more extreme the positions seem, for digging in their heels.

Your posts does absolutley nothing for unity and moving any agenda forward. They are tiresome and predictable.

Sure I find there are policies that I don't agree with, but I won't put that out here on DU. Your types of posts do not encourage honest dialogue. You types of posts encourage divisive extemism.

Don't you find it even a little bit curious that threads deriding anything Obama garners enormous amounts of recs, where posts pointing out even one tidbiit of a policy success is immediatly seized by the pissing crowd and derided? For your information, some others notice this trend and find it disingenious and rather trollish, and this then becomes the cause to no longer offer fuel for that dung heap.

[ProSense]

80. Look at what

the OP cites:

"excusing things like proposing a chained CPI or retaining tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, supporting bad "trade" deals, etc, etc."

Who supports chained CPI?

"retaining tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations"

Flies in the face of reality: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024391415

Who supports "bad 'trade' deals"? Also consider this recent post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024414324

It's like a post filled with straw men to get a high off the anger.

This kind of stuff sells though.

[Sheepshank]

84. "This kind of stuff sells though."

Clearly

[zeemike]

99. Let's see, who brought up CCPI and TPP?

And who suggested lowering the marginal rate for the rich?
Obama, but that don't mean he supports it right?...and to say so is a straw man?

Unbelievable.

[ProSense]

101. Who here supports those?

BS straw men.

[zeemike]

105. Who there (in the Democratic party) supports those?

That is the question, and that is what is important because they make the laws not we here at DU.

[tridim]

180. Can you please provide a link to the text of CCPI and TPP laws. Thanks!

[zeemike]

226. Well if they were laws it would not matter

Which Democrat supported them now would it?
It is support for it that will make it the law.

[tridim]

230. Supported what? A bill? Can you post the link to the bill?

How about a proposed bill? Even a proposal for a proposed bill would work.

[zeemike]

234. Then how do we know about it if no one brought it up?

Oh that is right the President did, and he all the time talks about things that will never be purposed or acted on...evem though his administration is negotiating in secret right now.
Not wanting to talk about it until it has passed is a poor strategy.

[bobduca]

375. but defending the TPP because its secret and not a bill yet

This is a genius BOG strategy!

See ? since you can't provide a link therefore tridim and Obama win the internets!

[zeemike]

378. Well I could give a link to the leaked parts.

But they would say it was stolen by traitors and was just a proposal not the final agreement...so once again they win.
Only after it is passed can we complain in the rules of that game.

[treestar]

246. Yep. Really hard to believe the real purpose is to divide Democrats

and help Republicans. It's just a clever way of doing it to avoid being TS'd.

[bobduca]

372. "Really hard to believe"

That's because its a paranoid delusion.

[ecstatic]

400. Nailed it. +1000 nt

[clarice]

77. Why the rancor over an intelligent, well thought out post? I agree Cali. nt

[ProSense]

82. There is nothing "intelligent" about the OP. It's divisiveness built on strawman BS. n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

86. Why am I not surprised to see you say this?

[ProSense]

87. It's true. n/t

[clarice]

88. Huh? nt

[clarice]

126. Explanation please. nt

[clarice]

380. Well ???? !!!!! nt.

[clarice]

90. Don't you mean that it is simply an opinion that differs from yours ? nt

[ProSense]

93. You mean,

"Don't you mean that it is simply an opinion that differs from yours ?"

...an "opinion" dripping with anger by attributing straw men opinion to others in order to hide behind the OP dislike of the President?

[clarice]

97. I wasn't aware that Cali was "against the President" nt

[ProSense]

98. You weren't? n/t

[clarice]

103. No. I haven't read all of Cali's posts. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

123. Just pick any one or two ...

of the/her (near) daily "Bad President Obama" OPs will suffice. Then try and find a single "Not Bad President Obama" OP. That ought to inform.

[bvar22]

151. Cali was a vocal supporter of President Obama during the first few years of his term.

She was a DU leader of the "Geez...lets give this guy a CHANCE contingent."
I don't remember which particular indefensible betrayal of the Working Class was the Straw that Broke the Back of her support,
but I do remember her active support.
It is all in the archives if you care you do the research.




---bvar22
Cursed with a memory

[clarice]

377. Thank you. nt

[laundry_queen]

405. I remember that too

a lot of the people who are quick to jump all over cali weren't even around here back then. I'm guessing they won't be flocking to the archives either. Such a shame.

[Rex]

118. A certain group here wants you to believe that.

They are desperate.

[clarice]

124. Why would they want to do that ??!! nt

[Rex]

125. No idea.

nt.

[clarice]

127. Just to be hurtful?. nt

[Rex]

139. I think it is more of a sport or game to them.

This is all just some sick game to them imo.

[TheKentuckian]

329. If you are cast from the Body then you were never really of the Body.

If you reject "the good news" at any point then you never knew it at all so if one was to drop out the BOG today they will have ALWAYS been a hater by morning.

[Egalitarian Thug]

239. OMFG I'm ROTFLMAO.

Strawmen!

[ProSense]

245. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024414902#post5

Unicorns.

[City Lights]

264. LOL!

You are such a hoot!

Laughing so hard I'm having a difficult time catching my breath!

[shenmue]

79. Yeah, it sucks that lots of people think the President has actually done good things

Don't you dare patronize me and say I blindly support him. I am not blind in any way.

[merrily]

217. That's not what the OP says.

[TwilightGardener]

83. For myself, it's not adoration or loyalty. It's the benefit of the doubt when there's a screw-up

or controversy. To use the NSA stuff as an example--it may be wrong, what they're doing, but I don't believe Obama himself is a sinister evil man who enjoys prying into your internet and phone business. My attitude is, he must have some reason why he can't let that metadata stuff go, but maybe he should--and that's about it. Republicans want to believe that everything he does is from some sort of nefarious America-hating place, which to me is laughable--but it's really weird to see progressives/Democrats do it sometimes.

[Maedhros]

256. Here's the thing:

In my criticisms of the NSA, I never even speak of the President. I level my criticism at the policy and the bad acts of the Agency. If I have to discuss the Administration, I refer to "the Administration" with the knowledge that many individuals may have been involved in the decision-making behind the policy.

The people to whom Cali is referring in the OP respond to my criticisms with some variation of vitriol, empty ridicule and accusations of Obama Hatred despite the fact that I don't even mention the President in my post. These are the people to whom politics is 100% emotional and 100% focused on personalities. They project their own personal, emotional loyalty issues on me and assume that because I criticize the NSA I am ipso facto criticizing the President, because that's how they think about politics (check out any of the threads on Christie, for example - chock full of attacks on Christie the person*).

* Not that I'm defending Christie's actions.

[PsychGrad]

305. THIS! Well said.

[freshwest]

396. Nailed it. n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

85. Thank you for saying this, cali

Didn't Obama himself say "Make me do it"?

And yet we're just supposed to roll over and accept it when he sells us out to the 1%?

I reserve the right to be pissed off, not because Romney would have been better but because Obama could have been so much better. I feel as if many of us voters (not me, I never quite trusted Obama) were subjected to a bait-and-switch. We wanted and needed a Robert Kennedy with Ronald Reagan's knack for PR (and to those who never paid attention to any real firebrand populists, Obama looked like the real deal), but we got a Tony Blair, in the sense that he bought into the whole conservative lie that the Democrats were "too liberal."

The problem is not really Obama himself. It's the whole power structure of the Democratic Party. They don't want anyone who upsets Big Money too much. They'll talk a good game at election time, but once they get into office, it's business as usual: let the banksters keep their obscene bonuses "because contracts are sacred" but let the auto companies break the contracts they made with their workers, who are just ordinary people without pinstripe suits and wing tips, after all. Take a hell of a long time to withdraw combat troops from Iraq (and still maintain a presence there) and keep finding new excuses to stay in Afghanistan and dropping hints that it would be a good idea to intervene in Syria.

Talk about health care for all and then force the Republicans' original corporate-welfare-for-insurance-companies proposal on America without even a public option, in an effort to appease the Republicans, who weren't going to vote for it anyway. You know what would have been easier for the public to understand, helpful to a lot of people, and hard for the Republicans to oppose? Gradually lowering the age of eligibility for Medicare. If they had started by lowering it five years every year, it would be at age 45 by now. But no, Obama had to appease not only the Republicans (who were going to fight anything he did anyway) but a small group (a SMALL group) of people in his own party.

If you agree with a policy just because Obama advocates it, even if you hated that same policy when Bush proposed it, you are not acting like the intelligent, rational human being that Democrats like to see themselves as. You're acting like the mirror image of the Republicans. Really. We scoff at Republicans who hate the ACA, even though it was proposed by the Heritage Foundation and first implemented on a statewide scale by their own golden boy Mitt Romney. But aren't some Democrats doing the same thing when they try to explain away the times that Obama has chosen to continue some of Bush's worst policies (e.g. renewal of the Patriot Act; he could have refused to sign it)?

[JEB]

110. Thanks for bringing up these excellent points.

Can't help but agree with you.

[tblue]

113. "They don't want anyone who upsets Big Money"

You said it all so beautifully, Lydia Leftcoast.

It's really very sad. If no one pushed him leftward, the only feedback he'd get would be from the right.

IOW, somebody's got to stand on core Democratic principles. If not us, then who?

By any chance, are you in the Bay Area?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

117. No, I'm in Minneapolis

With the weather we've been having, I WISH I were in the Bay Area.

[Puglover]

131. Oh God Lydia.

I have been at our home in Ecuador since 1/1 and have to come back to Minnie 2/9.
I am sitting out here on the porch watching hummingbirds feeling the warm breeze and trying hard to put it in my memory banks.



Hope you're doing okay. Like I told hubby yesterday. "At least it's not Nov 1. As nasty as it is we are on the downhill slope.

[RC]

120. A dose of reality not likely to be countered.

Excellent post.

[Titonwan]

128. Wow, LL!

This part captures it best--


"If you agree with a policy just because Obama advocates it, even if you hated that same policy when Bush proposed it, you are not acting like the intelligent, rational human being that Democrats like to see themselves as. You're acting like the mirror image of the Republicans. Really."

I used to think (and still hope) that Liberals had a different mindset, but after two center right Democratic presidents, I suppose they're too young to remember what a real Democratic president looks (or acts) like.
Imagine Bush Jr. doing the things Obama has? This place would be ON FIRE.

[BrotherIvan]

155. Reccing this post

I've been complaining on other threads about this whole meme of "it's not Obama's fault! Leave him alone." Now we're at, "the President is basically powerless to do anything at all."

But then we witness his deftness in getting things like Syria done and now the hammer he is putting down on the TPP, and we see, of course he can fight for what he wants. He just doesn't fight for what we want necessarily or what he promised in his campaigns.

It's rather obvious that some people didn't just vote for him, they fell in love. Much like the primal reaction a teenager will have when her idol is deprecated. It is so utterly strange, I've not seen anything like it; but I am entirely weary of it.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

157. I know some people who have met Obama in person

They say that he has an exceptionally charismatic personality.

That may be part of it.

[BrotherIvan]

163. No doubt he is very charismatic and photogenic

I believe a little bit of his "blank slate" and the freshness a somewhat unknown politician brought to the table is what allowed some people to write their own romance novel. It's really quite creepy, but as I said, equally tiresome.

[Phlem]

196. Selective history by many here.

Just like the R's.

Nice post.

-p

[Enthusiast]

89. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch.

[ProSense]

96. Wheee!

[LiberalLovinLug]

195. You're up to eight ROTFLs this thread.

Your usual fallback when you have nothing to stand on, and your authoritarian cohorts as well. Its what happens to some posters when they realize they don't have an answer, or just don't want to, or are afraid to, be honest and share their answer. You think that just trying to ridicule others, we should all interpret for ourselves what you believe. That kind of tactic of laughing instead of answering and taking ownership is a well used right wing guest tactic on the MSM. It works for wingnut supporters because they're stupid enough to be fooled that ....hey, if its THAT funny, he's got to have a point. Trouble is you are in a smarter crowd in here. (Liberals are statistically more well educated don'tchaknow).

So....
We can only assume you disagree with the OP?
And if that's the case then you should just admit that you DO have an "abject fealty and adoration for a politician", specifically this President. And that you do "support everything he says and does" no matter what. Is that correct? Because if you are ROTFL at anyone who doesn't agree with that kind of blind loyalty, then it kinda looks like you do. So at least own it.

[ProSense]

200. Wheeee!

[LiberalLovinLug]

204. Brilliant!

[rhett o rick]

317. The desperation is setting in. Wait until the Pres pardons Bush. Watch them jump thru

the hoops then.

[FarCenter]

94. Individuals matter because your vote is to delegate political power to them for a term

In a representative democracy, you usually cannot vote for specific policies and programs (except for referenda). Therefore, your only choice is to weigh up the various positions a candidate supports, the trustworthiness of the candidate, and the candidate's track record and to then either vote for the candidate or the other one.

Once elected, you can bitch about the politicians support for policies and programs that you don't agree with, or praise those that you do, but that is unlikely to affect the course of government. It is just digital noise. It is only useful to the extent that you can modify public opinion and the positions that a candidate might adopt in the next election.

Therefore, I don't see any harm in disagreeing with any elected politician -- the only effect is in going to be in future elections -- it doesn't affect anyone already in office.

Even stranger than total fealty to a politician if total fealty to political dynasties -- e.g. Kennedys, Bushes, etc. Political merit is not inheritable.

[crim son]

95. Agreed. Though that sort of personal loyalty

is rooted in something else, something that strikes me as simple-minded. Or do I mean single-minded? Same thing.

[Titonwan]

100. Blind loyalty is repugnant (thanx, cali!)

but that's what happens when you believe your leaders, regardless if they're telling the truth or not. And we have a press who happily play along with the farce.
Give me consistency every time. 'Question Authority' used to be a liberal thang. Now, not so much- just adoring party members, who defend any and everything their 'leader' says.
This isn't the Hell's Angels. I think on my own.

[Bobbie Jo]

102. I will never, ever fucking understand

the need for one to resort to gross exaggeration to incite ridicule, while claiming a "righteous" position for themselves.

it's a dishonest tactic, whether it comes from Faux News or your average DU'er.

[Sheepshank]

143. :)

pretty insulting and completely dishonest, on so many levels imho

[heaven05]

104. ALL politicians in our system of money politics

are bought and paid for by their contributors who are corporate sponsors, big money wheels like that billionaire PAC gearing up for hillary's run for POTUS and other rich and connected folks.. Our system is corrupted by money. Don't think our present POTUS didn't walk through the front door of 1600 owing many people. My little 25 dollar contributions in the end mean nothing in big money politics, really.

What counts in our system of money politics is access and influence coupled with MANY dollars/assets. Yeah we have the vote. But that is coming under increasing distrust, in my book, since the 2000 and 2004 fiascos and with the increasing use of paperless voting and voting registration law/rules manipulation by the RW 'authorities' and politicians.

Any person devoting themselves to any politician and their promises is a person asking to be disappointed. I believe only when a promise is delivered. Otherwise no. This POTUS has to kowtow to others with much more influence in running things in this world than a mere POTUS. You think the koch brothers care about our disdain, short of a revolution against their type? No. Bankers who have destroyed hundreds of thousand families and lives, I'm one of them getting foreclosed, get off scot free, barring the one or two sacrificial lambs thrown into the fire for public consumption. TPP is slowed not stopped until it can be slipped under our radar. It will pass. Who's going to stop them? No one, no not even us, the concerned.

Abject fealty? NEVER! Hope that a promise will be delivered upon, always. Hope springs eternal, you know? I'm a cynic, most times, have no doubt. It is sick to blindly devote ones self to any other human being. You will be disappointed. Yet if a person chooses to believe every words from a politician. So be it on them. I agree with you somewhat, but I don't condemn a POTUS completely. He/she is a tool of the system. And while I don't feel our current POTUS is a bushie type of POTUS, the type that just swung open the corruption doors to any and all rich and connected persons, I do feel he could have done more for us 99%ers. Healthcare aside and I do hope he doesn't capitulate on chained CPI and by the way the rich will always get what they want. Cali, I understand you and Prosense hating our present POTUS I just don't agree with every reason you two have for your hate. That's all. All politicians owe too much to too many to truly be what we want them to be. Representatives of the people.

[BeyondGeography]

106. Strawman Monday

I guess. Whatever floats your boat.

[arcane1]

108. Indeed.

I'm certainly not going to pretend I agree with something, just because they have a "D" next to their name.

Loyalty is for principles, not politicians.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

122. In a democracy, it is the peoples' responsibility to hold public servants accountable.

[Phlem]

201. huh

I only see a few members around here that do that. Of which they are left charred and crispy from all the FLAME.

-p

[sadoldgirl]

132. Well, I am rather new here.

Thus I don't understand the ground rules perhaps. If this kind of forum is only for the Democratic Party and not for democrats, then I gladly leave the site. I had hoped, however, that this was a place where we could discuss and analyze policies as well as politicians. My thinking is more in line with socialistic democrats; but may be these kind of people are not accepted here.

[randome]

135. I think DU is a big enough tent for all KINDS of discussion. And welcome!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Rules are made to be broken. Including this one.[/center][/font][hr]

[kjones]

133. I will never, ever fucking ever understand...

the desire to find problems in anything and everything a president says and does.

But it sure is a nice conversation ender to call people you don't agree with "sick"
(or alternatively, brainwash, etc, or worse).

[lumpy]

171. Some people are addicted to negativity; what is sick is when it slops over into other peoples lives

and thoughts.

[bravenak]

137. I will never understand hating on the president all day every day.

Some people are just obsessed with the man in a sick negative way.
I want to tell people like that that they are no great prize themselves. At least I can buy an American car next time. Without him around, I'd have to get another Nissan.

[Whisp]

138. It's not difficult to understand at all.

I like Obama, I like and respect him a lot.

He is sort of like extended family/friends to me and if someone you care about messes up a bit or does things you don't agree with, going screaming expletives and frothing in their faces or taking out an ad for everyone to see what a 'looser' he/she is, well, I don't do that sort of thing. But if someone does, I guess that's their way of dealing with things that don't go their way all the time.

It's basically that. Not at all hard to understand.

[stevenleser]

140. You might as well say you don't understand people who kick babies. You get no objections here.

Why are you pretending that there is another side at DU that disagrees with you on this?

[ProSense]

142. It's

"You might as well say you don't understand people who kick babies. You get no objections here."

...a pattern: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024436808

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024436808#post17

[GoneFishin]

141. I am not interested in an "opinion" which is, in fact, an algorithm. In that case I already know

what that opinion is preordained to be by applying the algorithm myself. No discussion required.

[hughee99]

144. Maybe some people just don't like to be called racists. n/t

[jeff47]

147. Well, you'd make an angry post if Obama said the sky was blue

So should we consider your blind hatred a sickness?

Like all humans, Obama has done both good and bad. Acknowledging the good does not mean blindly following a politician.

[merrily]

154. And if he said the sky is never blue, you'd make an argument about why that statement is right.

[jeff47]

156. Only in your fantasies.

It's much easier to claim someone is a sycophant instead of actually debating an issue. Like you did here.

Obama fucked up after the 2010 losses with the turn to austerity.
Obama should have already denied KeystoneXL.
Obama should have stopped with the olive branches to the Republicans long, long ago.

And so on.

When you can't come up with a coherent argument against a position, shouting "sycophant" is a very bad cop-out. You should actually have the debate. You won't necessarily change anyone's mind, but you might find out they have a point or two.

[merrily]

159. Only in my past experience, with your claims about the Genachowski and

Net Neutrality regulations.



Quite rare to see someone insist that losing a court case is better than doing something correctly in the first place. Or that losing a court case means Republicans can't do something in the future. '

I think someone who made that kind of argument for days should think twice before throwing around terms like "fantasies."

I'm going to leave it there because I have no interest in taking it further.

[jeff47]

170. Well, considering I've never typed the name Genachowski until now

you seem to not be talking about me.

Quite rare to see someone insist that losing a court case is better than doing something correctly in the first place.

Good thing I didn't claim that. I claimed that losing the case may not be as disastrous as some others are claiming.

- It moves us closer to declaring ISPs to be Common Carriers, since the FCC can't create new exceptions for them.
- Attempts to impose metering are going to run into problems with other rich companies. Netflix, Google, Sony, Microsoft, Activision, etc. would be pissed, and imposing metering only on "small players" means very little money - they're small. Those rich companies would be lobbying for Common Carrier if the ISPs tried it, and have the bucks to make it happen.

My argument was ISPs could screw us, but probably will be unable to do so for political reasons. You seemed to keep skipping over terms like "probably" to insist I am speaking in absolutes.

I'm going to leave it there because I have no interest in taking it further.

Of course not. Doing so might demonstrate you're making claims that aren't true.

[bvar22]

149. Unquestioning support of ANY President or Politician "is both base and servile."

"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole.

Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right.

Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. [font size=3]To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.[/font]"

Theodore Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star,
May 7, 1918

I agree with both Cali and President Teddy Roosevelt.
The health of a Political Party can be determined by gauging the amount of criticism & dissent within the Party itself.
I have been a Democrat too damned long to begin just going along with
whatever they say.

I find it remarkable that some on this site have the talent to pivot 180 degrees on policy overnight.
Never miss a beat.
Two of the most remarkable examples were the Beating of the War Drums for Syria,
and the necessity for a Public Option to "Keep them honest".

It was enough to give me whiplash when the unquestioning switched in mid stride from:
The Public Option was essential necessary to keep the Health Insurance Industry Honest ,
and was the path to Single Payer. The Public Option was the thing that offset the Mandate.

to:

the Public Option was no big deal.
Almost completely frivolous.
We're better off without it.

This major policy Flip/Flop was instantaneous, unquestioning, and without regret or reservation.
Reading DU that day was mind boggling,.... and a little frightening.

[Whisp]

152. JESUS CHRIST!

SUPERSTAR.

[merrily]

153. Agreed, but don't overlook the possibility of paid posters, or those

for whom posting pro-Administration is part of their job description.

We know they exist and I can think of no other plausible explanation for some of the more over the top posts.

[Cleita]

158. This

[Puglover]

212. I dunno I would think a paid

pro administration poster would want to post in a way that would sway people to think positive things about the administration.

Not post in a way to pit Democrat against Democrat.

Paid trolls is more like it.

IF there is such a thing that is.

[merrily]

216. Defending the administration is a way to sway people to think positive things about it.

Sorry, I am not getting your point.

[Puglover]

233. Let's see if I can be more clear.

I don't think that hiding behind President Obama or rather supposed adoration of everything he does and using that as a tool to accuse other Democrats that might have issues with some of his or this administrations policies of being less then loyal Democrats is productive at all.

And frankly I see that a lot on this website.

Make sense?

[merrily]

235. Yes, if you add the accusation bit. But,

no one said that paid posters were geniuses, either.

[woo me with science]

389. The goal of the propaganda is not to convince anyone of anything.

It's to divert, disrupt and discourage online discussion that might build motivation and real organization against what the corporatists are doing to this country. It is the equivalent of pepper spray at Occupy rallies, deployed online.

The goal of the propaganda assaults isn't to convince anyone of anything.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023359801

Their purpose is to thoroughly hijack, pollute and therefore eliminate public spaces where real discussion and organization can occur. Occupy is disbanded with clubs and pepper spray. Dissent and organization online are disrupted with surveillance and propaganda.

It is no accident that propaganda brigades post new threads on discussion boards far out of proportion to their presence in the community, and that they nearly *always* demand the last word in any interchange.

The goal is to disrupt the important public space for liberal thought, discussion, and organization that these boards offer, to drive people away, and to keep the participants busy instead batting off the corporate lies, insults, and talking points.

States that build surveillance machines also build propaganda machines:

The government figured out sockpuppet managment but not "persona management."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358242

The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4159454

Just do some Googling on astroturfing - big organizations have some sophisticated tools.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1208351

The influx will continue
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4216987

The influx is deliberate and unnatural
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367

[woo me with science]

390. +1 Transparent as hell.

[Autumn]

161. He does some good things, he's done some I don't like. Do I like him? No.

But then I don't have to like him, I don't know him personally and I've voted for him twice and I can't vote for him again. In January 2017 he joins every other President in what is called the "dust bin of history" . Only the policies remain.

[Enrique]

164. let Britney explain

SPEARS: Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.

[Phlem]

206. yeay Britney!

Hit me baby one more time!



I wonder how much time during a single day that she spends processing political information.

-p

[cui bono]

167. The best thing about this thread is you can tell who thinks they are doing this

by their responses.

Pretty amusing.

[stevenleser]

174. So all of those folks who respond to 'hater' accusations are haters?

Good to know

[cui bono]

177. Uh, no. I don't see "hater" anywhere except in your post. n/t

[stevenleser]

178. I didn't say there were hater accusation in this OP

Nice play at being deliberately obtuse though. It was almost convincing

[cui bono]

185. I responded directly to what you said. If that's not what you meant then perhaps you can clarify.

I'm not playing games.

[cui bono]

193. Wow. I asked you to clarify. If you can't do that, it's not on me. n/t

[stopbush]

172. Are you willing to accept that many on DU may well disagree with the president

on certain issues, but that those issues may not be the issues upon which you disagree with him?

If so, OK.

If not, then you've got a bad case of "my way or the highway" syndrome.

[NCTraveler]

181. I have never met anyone in real life who agrees with the President at all times.

I haven't seen anyone here do it also, yet that is more difficult to judge. I have even seen ProSense strongly disagree with the President. That is not meant to be a shot at ProSense. I just think ProSense is one of the Presidents strongest supporters yet I have seen her disagree.

[Whisp]

182. I love him, I love him, I love him

[sheshe2]

251. Good one Whisp!

[mstinamotorcity2]

186. I support the President!! Period.

It doesn't mean I agree with everything he does. Some of the things that happen, I believe because he wants them to. Tell me something, The Bush/Cheney Administration did a lot of shit in the open and way more shit in secret, how would we know??? Most of the things that they are mad about with President Obama wasn't even started in his Administration. Wouldn't it make sense if you wanted something gone and you couldn't get Republicans to stop it, you would let it be known so their could be an outrage from the people. Even if it meant that you would take the heat as President. We know TPP sounds Republican as Fuck. What if there are enough votes to pass it. The President doesn't like it. We all know if he's for it, something is up. He would never sell out the Country he loves. This I know. I hadn't heard of the TPP until he mentioned it. Now its getting quite a bit of attention. Which makes me believe he wants us to be mad enough to stop them.

[freshwest]

397. Same as Syria, and few other things... You figured it out. n/t

[rhett o rick]

197. I dont know if blind devotion is a sickness, but it's certainly the lazy way out for some.

Why think for yourself if you can simple nod your head as your lead leads. What is strange is that politically liberal DU posters would blindly follow. It's primarily a conservative trait.

Another reason for blind support is that it allows one to self-righteously bully others using the justification that they "support the president" and therefore that's the high ground and everyone that doesnt agree deserve the ridicule.

[merrily]

220. Lazy for some; profitable for some; comforting for some.

I was tons more comfortable when I believed with all my heart that Democrats were good and Republicans were bad and electing more Democrats was the solution to all political issues.

But, once the curtain has been pulled back, there is no forgetting what you saw behind the curtain.

[rhett o rick]

227. Some people must keep their realities very limited because they cant handle

too much reality. Jim Jones had a whole flock of them.

[merrily]

228. The Jones flock ultimately handled a lot of reality.

I'm sure the original illusions were comforting, though.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

270. It's similar to the "support the troops" meme

If you think that America's youth shouldn't be sent to die and be maimed and driven into mental illness for no good reason, then you don't "support the troops."

If you don't just say, "Yes, Mr. President, sir" to everything he decides (and you're not one of his staffers), then the claque tells you that you "don't support the president."

I've been on DU since 2001. My political positions have been on the left edge of the Democratic Party ever since the Reagan administration. I have a long and very accurate memory, since I was already an adult when Reagan was elected. And since the founding of the DLC, there been a faction of the Democratic Party that seems to think the party's main problem is that it's not conservative enough on economic and foreign policy issues, when actually the opposite is true.

[rhett o rick]

277. I prefer to call them the Lieberman Wing. They would endorse Chris Christie if he became

a DEmocrat.

[Puzzledtraveller]

198. It's not that they love and adore a office holder

that can be easily understood from the same perspective that we adore and love actors and musicians, personalities. What really disturbs me is their inability ti ever admit that they were, have been, or could ever be wrong about someone or anything. This is where the silence comes from, protecting their ego from reality.

[Phlem]

214. You know.

Just like when you deliberating with a Republican, they're always right at every turn, the possibility they, might be remotely wrong, Impossible.

-p

[fadedrose]

208. You're right, of course...

I don't know why it's like that with me somewhat, but it is. I think it's more like a mother who is able to forgive her kid anything, although disappointed, because she loves him.

Or the dog owner whose dog bit somebody and the dumb owner can't see the dog is maybe not so good as he thinks...

For whatever reasons I can't understand, and it has little to do with being a Democrat (don't like all of them at all, even when they do something good), I admire Obama's abilities, his brains, the way he talks, most of his speeches, the way he fathers his kids, and the way he performed a miracle by being elected while black.

The congress is to blame for a lot of what goes wrong, but he does tend to say stuff and do the opposite. I rationalize that there's pressure I don't know about.

I admire courage, common sense, and honesty, cali. You have these whether you like him or not. You're also a killer with your links

[sadoldgirl]

215. Why do we have to go to extremes?

Even in 2008 my first choice for president was not called Obama. President Obama was to me for purposes of the election the lesser of two evils. If you felt strongly that he might become another FDR, you did not check him out enough. If- under those circumstances- you are badly disappointed "Blame yourself". Yes, I voted twice for him, just as I did with Clinton, but each time without great expectations. The country is not yet ready for a strong move to the left, unfortunately.
Still, facts are facts, and I intend to stick to those rather than to affection or admiration for any politician. And if I have to look to the facts regarding Hillary's run for the office, then I cringe, even though I know that EW has hardly a chance. That does not mean that I hate Hillary, rather she would be more of the same old story.

[Phlem]

218. I know Cali

It's been apparent for a long time now. I just save my energy and move on. There's no getting through.

I agree with you and for your own health, take a day off DU, maybe 2. It works wonders and re-energizing.

As for me I've been using "ignore" to tune out the real extreme one's. I had my " I can't stand these nit wits anymore" moment a long time ago.

Take care of yourself my friend and come back energized!



-p

[stevenleser]

222. It not only is not apparent, it's flat wrong. It describes no one here or anywhere else. nt

[Fumesucker]

236. You have to pay very close attention indeed to tell some posters are ever critical

And yes, I know there are posters who are the inverse of that.

The thing is that calm and rational posts that try to bring us together aren't at all popular. If you don't put up the divisive broad brush title you don't get the outrage that drives so many clicks and a lot of the recs too.

I can put up a perfectly reasonable OP praising Obama that analyses the technique Obama used to defuse that sputtering maniac O"Reilly and shows how anyone can use it in daily conversation and get basically no interest from either side.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024437856

Why bother to put up anything substantive that people can use when it will be ignored in favor of some incendiary and divisive thread?

Also if you don't get fully on board one of the cliques your posts don't get so much adulation.

There are times I think Manny G isn't at all productive, check his snarky threads and you'll see I by no means rec everything he writes.

But I think he finds important issues sometimes and highlights them in a perverse way that a lot of us find both humorous and enlightening.

[bobduca]

395. linkbait-ification of DU?

It's a difficult issue, content vs. title.

http://www.contentrow.com/tools/link-bait-title-generator

[treestar]

248. If you have this kind of trouble with support of Democrats on this board

then maybe you should try Free Republic? It sounds as if support for Democrats is just as painful to you and the OP as it is for Republicans to handle.

[Phlem]

259. !

In the famous words of Jim Carrey, "alrighty then".

You have a good night princess.



-p

[Phentex]

225. I don't know anyone who does this...

I seriously do not see anyone here or elsewhere who supports this president 100%.

[Number23]

283. Neither does the OP. This is just to curry favor with a group of loud mouths here

[JDPriestly]

237. K&R.

[treestar]

238. I think it's a bit sicker to have so much resentment

for people supporting any politician that you can't stop talking about it - and wonder why you have to work so hard to get his supporters to say there are things they may not like. I don't care. I can't expect to agree with anyone 100%. I'm not letting Republicans get in if I can help it. And I'm not going to dwell on differences - if I have a lot in common with them, I'm all for them holding the office and will forget about the differences.

As to the TPP, you have no idea what you are talking about, you are just using it to slam the President. The President seems to me smarter than you, if he thinks it's OK, yeah, I'll blindly follow him rather than you and the other alarmists. The President is intelligent and sane and tries his best to deal with a lot of thorny problems and has no time to kvetch on the internet.

[Rex]

244. You are all for Republicans holding office if you have a lot in common with them?

Do tell.

[treestar]

250. I have nothing in common with Republicans

They will do things I do not like at all. Thus I don't want them in office. I have a lot more in common with Democrats. I am not egotistical enough to think the POTUS is going to do everything my way, but a Republican will surely do a lot I don't want.

[Rex]

253. Who realistically thinks the POTUS is going to do everything they want?

Sounds like narcissism. The extremes you go to in examples apply to nobody that I've ever met. You should work hard on getting the Congress you want elected so we can finally have the majority you keep saying will change everything.

[bvar22]

274. "I have nothing in common with Republicans",

and I had nothing in common with Republicans in the 60s , 70s, and 80s.
That is WHY I never voted for them, sent them money,
or supported Republican Policy.

I haven't changed,
so WHY should I support "Moderate Republican Policy" NOW?

[Phlem]

260. RIIIIGHT........

So I resented him twice during presidency. Uh huh.



Good luck with that.

-p

[SomethingFishy]

265. So you are saying that in spite of the epic failures of past trade agreements

and in spite of the fact that the TPP is being done pretty much in secret, you are willing to just take someones word that it's "an ok bill" and support it? Even though you have no idea what is in it?

And you are calling people who don't agree with your blind faith "sick".

Hookay.

[arely staircase]

254. we should all be sick in our souls at the sight of the man

he is so malevolent as to disturb me on a molecular level. He is the worst.

How is that?

[Egalitarian Thug]

257. Oh Noes! Someone didn't like having their nonsense call out, so they're going

to spam the board to get this thread off the page.

Here's a

[Phlem]

261. Nice!

-p

[Egalitarian Thug]

262. .

[City Lights]

268. I don't get it either, cali.

It was a sickness when Bush's blind followers supported every fucking thing he did and it's a sickness now.

[ProSense]

275. It's simple really

"It was a sickness when Bush's blind followers supported every fucking thing he did and it's a sickness now."

President Obama is a chronic liar (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024419298) and if it wasn't for the BFBO, he'd have no support at all.

Every post on DU would be calling out for being despicable.

Hope that helps.

[DeSwiss]

271. K&R

- One definition of insanity is where one does the same thing repeatedly, and yet somehow expects a different result to occur -- the way someone continually plays the same lotto number because its their ''lucky number.'' It's never paid-off, but its lucky nonetheless. It's the only lucky number they've ever played.

Moreover, we've been warned about this kind of sickness, this cultish adoration of personalities. It is the mindset of the unthinking. Of programmed behavior. Samuel Langhorne Clemens said it best:

[kestrel91316]

272. And I will never understand the people, like yourself, who complain bitterly about every

single thing our president does and says.

It's a sickness to hate a fellow Democrat so much.

[Phlem]

273. Hate? Aww, I've never heard that word before, ever!

You've missed quite a few posts in this thread if it's all about "hate" to you.

But by all means stay with the "hate" shtick, the "go to" word and first to be uttered, every time if that's what you prefer.



-p

[Drunken Irishman]

276. I will never understand those who spend every waking moment criticizing the President...

While rarely, if ever, offering any hint of praise when he does something good or right. And yes, this goes for both the left & right.

[Corruption Inc]

279. Rec'd, because it brought out all the conservatives and their name-calling

Ad-hom attacks are irresistible to them, just read all their personal insults directed at you and you can easily see they are repukes to the core.

Plus, you called them on their idol worship so they, of course, have to become abusive. They can't help it, they are mentally ill, I'm not kidding.

It's posts like yours that make it clear they are 2 DUs, one for democrats/liberals/progressives and one for repukes/abusers/disturbed/closed-minded propagandists.

[Sheepshank]

346. you really shouldn't be so obvious in your adoration of the OP

your ad hominem attacks make you appear extremely repuke'ish and a closed minded propagandist.

seriously, your post is a hoot...I got the irony of what you did there...did you?

[grahamhgreen]

281. It is our JOB to lead the Prez in a positive direction, away from Republican failures, towards FDR

solutions that are proven solutions to our countries problems.

He is surrounded by brainiacs that have sold their soul to the MIC, we are his heart.

[Number23]

284. And I will never, ever fucking ever care

No one on this earth supports everything ANYBODY does. I'm willing to bet that even the president doesn't support everything he does or that is done in his name.

This is probably the most face palm inducing thread I've seen here in a while. Why you feel the need for this type of divisive stupidity is the only issue here

[warrprayer]

285. Did someone criticize the Third Way??!

[Gothmog]

286. Dans ses écrits, un sage Italien Dit que le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.

The pursuit of the perfect is the enemy of the good. I am an admirer of President Obama and worked on his campaign both in 2008 and 2012. However, I do not think that he is perfect and I have not agreed with all of his decisions. I doubt that many posters on this board are in the category described in the OP. All of the Democrats who I know are all generally happy with President Obama but wish that he was able to accomplish more.

I live in a very red state and right now I am focused on getting Wendy Davis elected. I do not agree with all of Wendy's positions but I am going to work my rear end off to try to get her elected. Wendy is a Texas Democrat which means for example that she has some positions on gun rights that people on DU may not like. However, Wendy is a strong woman and she represents a great chance to turn my state blue.

Finally, I am hoping that the rumors that I am hearing from my county chair are correct and that Hillary Clinton is going to campaign for Wendy this summer. Hillary Clinton is not a perfect candidate but I think that she could win Texas under the right circumstances. Again, I am not going to let the search for a perfect candidate get in the way of supporting a candidate who can win in this very red state.

Again, I do not know of any Democrats or posters on DU who agree with all positions taken by any candidate. However, I am still going to support the best candidate possible which has been for me been the Democratic candidate in any race.

[Desert805]

287. Well...

I have never, ever fucking met anyone supporting everything any president says and does.

Even the most rabid Bushies I've come across disagreed with something or another he did.


But your outrage is fucking noted.

[840high]

288. Never fall in love

with a politician.

[blkmusclmachine]

296. Politicians LIE. Don't believe LIARS.

[Phlem]

321. No shit Huh!?

but for some, reason, that can not be comprehended.



-p

[frwrfpos]

300. recommend

[alarimer]

306. To me, the important fact is that they work for US, not the other way around.

They should do what WE want. And we have every right (and the responsibility) to hold their feet to the fire.

To me, politics is not about party loyalty (and this is where a lot of people go wrong); it's about choosing people who serve our interests the best. Once elected, their job is provisional, always based on how closely they serve those interests.

Of course, some people are natural followers who want the politicians to lead, when in fact it's the other way around. They are our servants, for lack of a better word.

[Phlem]

326. ^^^THIS^^^

Jackpot bud!

And that is the point! Skin, Race, Sexual Preferences, Height, Weight, Eye Color, Skin Color, ETC.......................................

It's:

"They should do what WE want."

Period, end of story.

Thanks alarimer!!



-p

This point is and should be Bi-Partisan!

[ancianita]

309. I don't think support means what you think it means. Support is often confused with agreement.

Look. One doesn't have to agree with Obama to support him. Support takes many forms, but agreement isn't necessarily one of them.

Support isn't blind. Support is a form of loyalty but not blind loyalty. Criticisms of this president are ongoing in DU. What most people support are long term policies and actions that do the greatest good for the greatest number. Understanding the obstructions and downright authoritarian moves of this Congress and how the president compromises, isn't a form of support. It's the process by which supporters are enabled to "hold his feet to the fire," as he once encouraged his supporters to do.

Support of this president, for all his missteps or flawed decisions, is more based on long term trust. One or even several bad decisions should not end support. Those actions should provoke criticism and debate, but not necessarily the removal of support. Support is the commitment to a larger political process and vision for the country. It should not simply be conflated with agreement over the actions of the president.

[pam4water]

310. America is composed of mostly fan girls these days.

[Doctor_J]

311. Supporting things like TPP, KXL, chained CPI for the SS, and other Republican ideas is bad

for the party and for the country. I am disappointed at how the once-liberal Krugman, one of our few media voices, has decided to abandon his principles for the sake of supporting every one of the president's initiatives. There has never been any hope with the republicans - they are evil and brainwashed. But when people who used to have a moral compass are supporting the same ideas they were against 10 years ago, we're in big trouble.

[bluestate10]

315. No one here does. But you seem to think many do, for some unknown reason.

I am a big supporter of the President, but I disagree vigorously with some of his decisions.

[frustrated_lefty]

316. Agreed.

Unfortunately, it appears we as a species haven't crawled all that far out of the primordial ooze.

[neverforget]

327. It's funny how some are so defensive over this post.

[bobduca]

373. I appreciate their reactions

[woo me with science]

391. They certainly reveal themselves, don't they.

They clearly know this song is about them...

[neverforget]

394. they most certainly do.

[dionysus]

345. cali, i don't think it's as prevalent as you think.

there's plenty I don't agree with the guy on, but I have no desire to bring it up on here, because we already have heaping piles of posts ranging from shades from disagreement to outright baseless bashing here daily. they're often the most commented on threads on DU!

[gopiscrap]

354. me too!

[TorchTheWitch]

357. politics as sport

Which is pretty much what DU is all about. And I'll never get it either. Since I don't spend my time talking politics or even thinking about it here or anywhere else in actual life, I have no idea how steeped people are into rah rah the R or the D. In my own real life nobody talks about politics unless it's to mention how much life sucks for average people anymore that's because of the government... at least for anyone old enough to remember life before Reagan.

Both the political R's and D's started this shit decades ago on purpose... they want the average people playing the game of R vs. D so most people don't realize how fucked up the political SYSTEM is in this country and that BOTH sides are screwing the average Joe and Jane blind.

[morningfog]

358. They are either simpletons or it is their job.

They either lack the capacity for critical thought or they are paid to promote the agenda.

[scheming daemons]

359. I will never understand how your Strawman posts get so many recs

...

[ProSense]

362. Because if you don't rec it you're a "moron," "simpleton," or "paid shill."

You're not one of the cool progressives who have the "capacity" or "intelligence" for critical thinking.

[Bobbie Jo]

368. Blind acrimony.

The bitter brigade will turn out in force for their daily serving of red meat. It doesn't seem to matter if it's wrapped in utter bullshit or served up with a side order of patent dishonesty, they will devour it whole without question.

"principled" my ass.

[rhett o rick]

369. Interesting is that cali takes a position and will espouse that position. The Group will criticize

and ridicule but not take a position other than supporting BO whether right or wrong.

Loyalty is not a substitute for principle.

[Bobbie Jo]

370. Horseshit.

Shovel it elsewhere.

[rhett o rick]

381. Ok, tell my The Group's position on the TPP? nm

[ProSense]

371. Case

"'principled' my ass."

...in point: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024441624

Lame excuses and crickets.

[rhett o rick]

382. Do you guys have a position on the TPP? nm

[Liberalynn]

364. My philosophy is simple I praise Presidents when I think they are right

then criticize when I think they are wrong. All while accepting I could be the one who is proven right or wrong in the end. It doesn't have to be 100 percent support or a 100 percent disagreement.

[cali]

376. kick for a certain someone.

[cali]

379. and this is a grand illustration

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024441624

[NaturalHigh]

384. Neither will I.

That's why I'm banned from the Barack Obama group here. I like Obama, but he's done plenty of things I disagree with.

[RedstDem]

401. I second that

truly weird isn't it...