General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis place in many ways has gone off the deep end. RE: Used car salesman
I am going to break a rule. I don't care if this post gets hidden. This needs to be said.
I checked in here from time to time during the Bush years. DU was mainstream progressive blog along the lines of Daily Kos. Since Obama was elected everything changed.
You can hardly come here without people bashing the President. Calling him a sellout for not getting a single payer system for healthcare (even though he never said he would do it on the campaign) Now the law is going into effect, a contest topic here is how the president is a sellout on healthcare. The fact the millions have access to care that they didn't have before doesn't seem to matter to ideological purists.
On Russia and Crimea. People are calling the President a hypocrite because of the Iraq war. The fact the President opposed the war is irrelevant.
To use the words of a frequent poster here the President is a POS used car salesman.
With "friends" like these who needs enemies.
Coventina
(27,064 posts)iandhr
(6,852 posts)Thank you
littlewolf
(3,813 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)people are too mean to the President?
That is hardly the biggest DU problem revealed by the whole used car salesman thing.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)That was an appalling post, even by that posters standards..
DanTex
(20,709 posts)REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
COMMENTS
The use of the term "racist" in a call-out post is not cool.
JURY RESULTS
A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Mar 27, 2014, 12:22 PM, and voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Will Pitt threw a big baby fit while misplacing blame for his otherwise legitimate concern. However, never have I seen him to be racist nor rightwing. The OP has an agenda as president and founder of the Cult of Obama. And this coming from a huge Obama fan. He is NOT perfect, but he is also not a "used car salesman" and the person that said he is, and I say again, NOT a RW racist.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I do believe this is a callout post, which is was verboten the last I checked. While nobody is called out by name, it is clearly directed at someone. I'm voting this down in the hope of nipping something in the bud before it escalates.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerter, you have got to be kidding me! ProSense hit the nail right on the head. I can't help it if you feel you belong to that group. There is no way on God's green earth I would vote to hide this and shame on you for even alerting. I don't normally sign my name to a jury verdict, but this one I will. I want you to know who I am. William769
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: It is a call out and the racist tagline pushes it over the edge. El_Bryanto
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Lame. If it walks like a duck... maybe the OP needs to know it's not appreciated when he calls out the Prez as a used car salesman.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)The jury system on here is complete and utter bullshit. Too many people can't put aside their biases and just look at if something is rude, over the top, etc...
And way too many people feel a need to insult alerters while they fail miserably at their task.
ProfessorGAC
(64,877 posts)Jurors don't agree with your POV so all DU'ers make bad jurors.
Absolutist rubbish
cui bono
(19,926 posts)You can do that in IRL, why not on DU?
I have both alerted and voted to hide posts that I agree with the sentiment but not the delivery. That's being objective, which is what jurors are supposed to be.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
G_j
(40,366 posts)brooklynboy49
(287 posts)I thought Juror #1 was spot on and am in full agreement with his or her views regarding the OP's agenda.
I also frequent the Yankees forum, and there's a poster there who's notorious for doing the same, never sees a problem with any Yankee player's performance, and if someone dares post an opinion critical of a Yankee's performance, that poster is called out as a "pretend Yankee fan". It's infuriating there, and it's infuriating here. This is a discussion board, not a cheerleaders board. When a Democrat's performance in office -- any Democrat's -- is questionable, members of this community have not only a right but a responsibility to express their misgivings regarding the same.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)that juror voted to leave the post alone, meaning to let the call-out OP implying Will is a racist to stand. The explanation given was all over the place, pretzel city, IMO, seemed like they were supporting a HIDE but no.
Supersedeas
(20,630 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)I hope they got a paper audit trail so we can verify the vote.
Supersedeas
(20,630 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"A jury let an OP intended to call out Pitt as a racist stand, and your complaint about DU is that people are too mean to the President?"
...I'll tell you what I told him. My point: It is a RW-style attack to pick a derogatory label and constantly repeat it. Why does anyone think that it should be acceptable? Why shouldn't it be denounced?
It's nothing more than despicable name calling. It cannot be justified.
The first time, the excuse was "lashing out" in the "heat of the moment."
Though, those attempts to justify the name calling were also ignored, and it continues.
Such despicable and gratuitous name calling should not be acceptable on DU.
I mean, all of a sudden some people are outraged that name calling that a lot of DUers find offensive is being labeled offensive.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Just like that other OP by someone else who conveniently left out half the quote to which you and s/her are calling out.
Talk about RW tactics.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Better?
bobduca
(1,763 posts)CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)then returned to jump back over it again.
uponit7771
(90,304 posts)alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)I used to be of the "i don't put anybody on ignore" school. Then I tried it with three particularly toxic posters. ta da. It worked so well I added a bunch more. I have no need to interact with people like that. they teach me nothing (since their positions are utterly predictable), and general toxicity just weighs down any journey toward actual interaction and knowledge. Put them on ignore and move on, the same as you would do with an unpleasant person IRL.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Informative and cheering on DNC candidates.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)I didn't have anyone on ignore, just didn't. Tried it out for a few particularly obnoxious DUers and Voila! It is better!
Still, there is less and less worth reading here these days, sadly. Been reading Kos more because of it. Lots less bullshit.
Julie
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)specifically because KOS keeps out the riff raff. AND I notice it hasn't seemed to hurt his bottom line as ONE pathetic poster recently seemed to say...that since "certain" posters bring traffic from their sites...then you have to put up with whatever they say....because....money. That the fact that the mission statement clearly says "support and elect Democrats" that is unimportant now because....money...
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)these web-sites have taken. Kos seems a bit more action-based and a lot of great writing. DU seems to be falling in quality and quantity. Lots of folks posting now (here) who wouldn't know a single thing about real world politics (like getting involved personally). That wasn't the case in the early days. I think that explains a lot about why and how DU has changed.
And as far as keeping riff raff out hurting Kos' bottom line, on the contrary, Kos has more influence and a longer reach than even the most ardent DUer can fantasize about.
Julie
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Yup...it is becoming just another site to "punch a Democrats" for some....and enough is enough....we have crucial Midterms to consider...
Laurian
(2,593 posts)There's certainly no shortage of such criticism elsewhere and while I can appreciate that we should not just accept all we are told, I'd prefer to find more constructive and encouraging words here.
3Stones
(85 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Slapping each other on the back, telling each other how clever they are that they can use the word 'fuck' in a sentence. Never thinking past the attention-getting subject line.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)After the 2006 election, this place used to bash Pelosi so much that I switched to a Pelosi icon to show some support.
But many people were pushing the whole "Democrats suck" message even before that. Many, many, many times I felt like I had to point out that a MAJORITY of Democrats, thanks to the leadership of Kucinich, voted AGAINST the IWR. And also that the Bush tax cuts of 2003 passed the Senate with ZERO Democratic votes, by a vote of 51-50.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/51
For some third partiers the Democratic Party will NEVER be far enough to the left.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)is that they actually believe they constitute a large percentage of Democrats. It's simply beyond their comprehension that this is a mostly moderate country so they'll continue to have hissy fits and post pathetic insults thinking they're clever. They're the same people who threaten to stay home on election day as if they wont be living in the same country as the rest of us. I'm sick to death of them.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)it is also a mostly DUPED country.
It is a country that gets distracted by reality TV and knows very little about most policy, and has a media that makes no attempt to educate them, and would, in fact, have to educate themselves first.
So I get outraged too when there is a national "debate" between
The Democratic Tax cut plan - which gives 50% of its benefits to the top 20%, and
The Republican Tax cut plan - which gives 70% of its benefits to the top 20%.
I mean, yes, certainly 50% IS better than 70%, but I try to scream from my little soapbox that there should be OTHER alternatives and that the Democratic Tax Cut plan actually sucks. It's kinda hard for me to NOT get outraged when my party and a bunch of supposedly liberal pundits start pushing a bunch of b.s.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)and am in large agreement when it comes to fiscal policy. I also have watched (for decades now) how hard it is to get stuff done. All the deals that need to be made to gather enough votes - it's truly maddening. We SHOULD have more alternatives but this is the system we have to work with and it's not going to change until enough people get voted in who want to change it - which has become even harder under citizens united. That's just the reality and it seems many here wish to ignore that reality because they don't like it. I find that counterproductive.
I've stopped getting any of my news (other than the truly breaking) from tv because of what you're talking about. The "crossfire" type debates don't help anyone and just let both sides spew talking points without getting into what the policy is all about and what it means for us and our country. So it's become a wasteland of people talking past each other.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)and my alternative tax cut proposals might not ever pass
but there is absolutely NOTHING that would prevent the Democratic Party from PROPOSING better alternatives and even fighting for better alternatives.
Instead they propose crap and then parade a bunch of b.s. propaganda about how their crap is actually really, really good.
It's kinda like Dennis Moore (KS-3) and Senator Jean Carnahan (Missouri). Both of them Democrats and running for re-election in 2002. Both running ads where they brag "they voted FOR the Bush tax cuts". Now here I am fighting those tax cuts, trying to inform the people about how bad they are. And those two are using their ad money, their campaign money, not to educate the public, but to embrace and promote that awful policy.
That's Democratic politicians embracing bad alternatives instead of fighting for good ones.
It's hard to NOT get mad, very mad at THEM.
okaawhatever
(9,457 posts)Last edited Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:18 AM - Edit history (1)
stirring up trouble. It's sad, but it's reality. These people bring absolutely nothing to DU and I hope the website owners will rethink what they want this site to represent. Political debate and information for Democrats and Democratic voting individuals or a mental playground for the small-minded. I vote for the former.
sunnystarr
(2,638 posts)okaawhatever
(9,457 posts)Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)It's time to quit beating that dead horse.
iandhr
(6,852 posts)Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)In fact, so do 109 others.
chillfactor
(7,573 posts)are as brainwashed as the original OP is.....you listen to FAUX NOISE I take it....
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Disagreeing with Obama =RW?
OK.
I disagreed with Clinton on NAFTA. Did that make me a republican?
Walk away
(9,494 posts)and he seems to make up a lot of anecdotal stuff to get people posting on his threads.
pnwmom
(108,959 posts)Maybe its jealous.
WhiteTara
(29,693 posts)Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)being thrown around here and the lack of equality in the use of the term "salesman"
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)when President, they would have gotten me banned, and yet still I think he's one of the better presidents of the past century.
TheSarcastinator
(854 posts)What a complete load of garbage.
randome
(34,845 posts)The same type of language used by RW racists was the intent, I think.
I agree it's a poor choice of words but, hey, so is 'piece of shit' and 'used car salesman'.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]
TheSarcastinator
(854 posts)anyone can read the Op. Nice try, though.
Marr
(20,317 posts)It's very tiresome, watching some people continually argue that the sky is not blue, 1+1 does not equal 2, and up is not really up if you tilt your head and run at an angle.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)and that parituclar OP uses Ted Nugent words.
It's sort of an Aristotle thing, if I remember correctly. What's this thing called?
Ted Nugent is a racist
Ted Nugent uses racist language
So and So uses language Ted Nugent uses
Therefore: Its quite possible So and So can be racist.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Just outrageous.
MADem
(135,425 posts)IIRC, it said that that's the kind of thing a racist would say.
It didn't say the specific phrase was racist. That's a distinction and a difference, IMO.
Here's the specific language of the thread title:
I wouldn't be at all surprised if a RW racist said that sort of thing--that would be one of the more milder, "made for TV" type slurs, but it wouldn't be a shock to hear that kind of insult at all coming from someone who didn't like POTUS because of his heritage. In fact, that's the kind of thing that would be expected.
Racists do often nibble round the edges. They don't come right out and hit ya with that "N" word, they denigrate from the side. They come in with this snide remark and that, and the purpose of the remarks is to create an impression of the person of color as someone who is "LESS THAN," who is "second rate," who doesn't quite measure up in terms of quality or intelligence or whatever measurement is under consideration....it's one of those "know it when you see it" type things. Dog whistling, if you will. It happens to people who aren't "the majority" in any culture, it even happens in foreign lands. The nail that sticks up must be hammered down--by letting that damn uppity nail KNOW it's "not as good" as the "mainstream." And make no mistake, that kind of language is what is often used to hammer that nail down but good, to keep that nail--be it out of the ordinary in terms of race, cultural heritage, orientation, or gender--in its place.
Again, the poster of that OP didn't call ANYONE here a "RW racist." She said that's the kind of thing she expected from one, and that she didn't expect to see that kind of thing here, on DU. I believe her exact phrase was It should not be acceptable on a site promoting Democrats.
dawg
(10,621 posts)Nor did we ever bash prominent Democrats like Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller. That sort of thing just never happened.
iandhr
(6,852 posts)..to Zell Millier and Joe Lieberman ? Thank you, you are making my point for me.
dawg
(10,621 posts)Sure, they both act like right-wing nut jobs today. But at the time, they were considered sensible centrists. Lieberman was our VP candidate in case you don't remember.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)"What makes Obama exempt from criticism and them not?"
I suspect a comprehensive answer to that question (that doesn't just cite DU rules) will not be forthcoming.
Cha
(296,889 posts)I'd call that "bashing" like MF.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)I wonder if that makes me racist
Marr
(20,317 posts)You ceased to view criticism of the president as healthy or even acceptable, because your guy got into the White House. The criticism of Obama offered for his comments on the Iraq invasion have been tame compared to those made of Bush and Cheney (rightfully) for similar remarks on the same topic.
frylock
(34,825 posts)sunnystarr
(2,638 posts)albino65
(484 posts)Racists are racists.
When your u-trou gets in a knot, you go ahead and post on DU.
Because Mr. Pitt is a long time poster here, he gets a pass on everything.
Ignore doesn't work. I have a few on ignore and they come back like a bad rash.
TheSarcastinator
(854 posts)It's not. Mr. Pitt doesn't get a pass on racism because he has been here a long time: his post very simply was not racist, no matter how many times you repeat the claim that it was.
Race baiting is powerful, though, and is often used to stifle dissent and dialogue. So by all means, carry on, brave internet warrior for freedumb.
albino65
(484 posts)I stand up, straighten myself, and go do something else. Maybe you should too.
frylock
(34,825 posts)what was racist about Pitt's post? nobody here gives two shits about your panties.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)taunts are how RW'ers communicate their contempt and utter scorn toward those they find unworthy of even a modicum of respect, just to let them know that they don't belong. They often used terms or phrases to confer some sort of subordinate status, and use them repeatedly until it seems sort of normal or acceptable.
"Used car salesman" certainly qualifies. RW'ers have been dog whistling taunts like this for decades.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Let me list some for ya
Used car salesman, yup that was used.
Dubya.
Presnit.
Emperor
Dictator.
Wanna be leader.
Baboon (even the cartoonist used that one)
So it is ok when the object is a Republican, but not when it is a Democrat? This is the kind of, yes, hypocrisy that is troubling. And to quote Former President Theodore Roosevelt, who had a clue about these matters...
To announce that there must be no criticism of the president... is morally treasonable to the American public.
frylock
(34,825 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Last edited Thu Mar 27, 2014, 06:09 PM - Edit history (2)
With emphasis on the word GRATUITOUS.
Obama has never approached the level of utter incompetence of GWB. Not even close.
When these taunts are thrown at a legitimately competent person, they aren't intended to be descriptive of their capabilities, it's only to take them down a notch or two and put them in their place.
Yeah, it's RW alright.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Yup, troubling.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)That's not even close to what I said.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and that is what we are seeing here.
As I said, I refrain myself anymore of big picture posts here, and that has all to do with swarms and faux outrages.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)ProfessorGAC
(64,877 posts).
frylock
(34,825 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)RW-style taunts are another.
frylock
(34,825 posts)some folks are more offended by that then a few fuck bombs posted on a website.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Still preferable to the petty insults, I suppose.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Who did that?
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)I read a lot of journals and search posting histories, it is a hobby.
The "dissolve congress" petition sounds like something a Ron Paul libertarian could get on board with.
Petition to dissolve congress
I have posted a petition on whitehouse.gov to dissolve congress. I don't expect this to actually happen, but it might get some attention. I need 150 signatures (I currently have 2) to make this searchable on whitehouse.gov. Then I need 100,000 signatures to actually provoke an answer from the White House. It might be an interesting exercise in political discourse.
You have to establish an account on whitehouse.gov
This is the URL of my petition:
Very Norquistesque imo.
albino65
(484 posts)It was a lark. Lighten up.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)enjoy your stay.
albino65 (203 posts)
152. yo doesn't mean shit to me.
It was a lark. Lighten up.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)The jury system will not help keep this a Democratic site. There cannot be any new rules or laws made specific for supporting democrats during the midterms because juries can just throw all that out the window if they choose, on any whim they choose based on who the poster is, what slant, what faction - the post itself being sometimes last on the list of decision making. I think we have seen that 'good faith' posting here has left the building a long time ago.
The RW/ers and the old embeds here have made way an opening for new baggers and wingers to just come right in, the water is fine.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)and no one is forced to read the words of posters they don't like.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)which was
because of the lax rules here in regards to supporting Democrats, where outright lies and incredible verbal abuse is thrown at the President on a regular basis by regular people -
I expect the influx of more RWers, baggers of both fire and tea and Fuck Ron Paulers will rise as the climate here is getting more and more to their liking and they will be protected for their hate speech as well.
I mean, if someone says 'shit on the President' here now, and I mean if it were new posters, not the known ones that take regular shits here - if new posters said that would you be able to tell if they were democrats or if they were republicans now on DU as DU is today? There once was a time where it was apparent which was which, now not so much. Or not much at all.
mrchips
(97 posts)....getting posts hidden is a badge of honor. Thank you for calling out the president bashers. When I took exception to a poster calling a wounded vet a tool in order to bash the president at the SOTU, I was pilloried. It seems to me that we are at war with a party that is racist, homophobic, misogynistic, and bigoted. The last thing we need to do is start attacking our own. Criticism is one thing, but the hatred is something else.
Auggie
(31,133 posts)Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)William769
(55,144 posts)Because some of the language being used is right out of their play book (although watered down to avoid being to obvious.
Flame away.
FSogol
(45,456 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)ODS, haters, you're either with us or against us, no criticism allowed, silly nonsensical word salad retorts that have no substance... sheesh, just like teabaggers!
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Confusing "criticism" with insults.
Maraya1969
(22,464 posts)steve2470
(37,457 posts)larkrake
(1,674 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)I get the feeling that some DUers would prefer Pres McCain, Pres Rand Paul, Pres RMoney or any goper president.
LordGlenconner
(1,348 posts)It wouldn't matter who it is. Warren, Sanders, whoever, they'd find something they disagree with eventually and move on to the next savior. Ideological purity demands it.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)flamingdem
(39,308 posts)And the majority still support him. So why is DU full of freeperesque threads and name calling against President Obama. Surely there is a better way to air ones disagreements.
frylock
(34,825 posts)TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)about Democrats and their policies--if attention is what one is seeking. Being negative, in a big splashy way, gets you views, and maybe passed around to other websites and blogs. That's what certain someones are after.
nobodyspecial
(2,286 posts)I guess we all have to earn a living.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)That explains the thread calling WP a racist being at the top of the Greatest Page.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Serious question amid the snark snark snark
MisterP
(23,730 posts)"We did not grab its resources for our own gain"
that's what's hypocritical
Schema Thing
(10,283 posts)Yeah, many of Bush & Co. friends got (even more) rich thru war profiteering, but "we" as a nation did not take Iraq's resources. As evidenced by the war costing us $2 trillion and rising.
karynnj
(59,498 posts)There were two huge forums - GD and GDP. Though the latter was supposed to be politics and then later related to the President, I think it really turned into two parallel groups each with their own culture. GD had many who were openly to the left of the Democratic party or who only approved of people to the left of Dennis Kuchinich. In addition, some were likely more libertarian than liberal.
As a person who supported John Kerry more than any other politician, I was FAR more comfortable in GDP - even posting articles that dealt with the SFRC or Kerry actions in GDP. At first, I would try to get some connection to the President to justify this. Eventually, I just stayed in GDP.
DU 3, while having a Politics 2014, does not really have two threads that were really general. Over time, many people - very comfortable on GDP have found DU not very friendly. I suspect this plus the Snowden accusations that moved some people against the President have led to the overall population being far more critical of all mainstream Democrats. This is self perpetuating because it makes more and more people frustrated with what it has become.
secondwind
(16,903 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)And some people don't want to hear of it...and don't want others to talk about it either.
Sticking our head in the sand makes us look stupid.
frylock
(34,825 posts)there was once a time when if a president attempted to rationalize the steaming shit pile of the Iraq war this place would be in unison condemning the comment. not so much anymore. moreover, the President opposed the war when he had no opportunity to vote on IWR. I haven't really seen anything in the last 6 years to indicate that he would vote no.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Not fictions such as:
Obama said go to the UN, and don't annex.
That is not rationalizing the Iraq war.
But hey, Al Gore said he invented the Internet, right? Everyone knows it's true....
frylock
(34,825 posts)everyone but Obama's most ardent supporters. seen it a hundred times.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Just about everyone on the planet claims he said he did.
Neither one is true.
frylock
(34,825 posts)better luck tomorrow.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Say, that colds are primarily spread via doorknobs.
Now, some folks might try to dig up the original material instead of just going with what "everyone knows".
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)The_Commonist
(2,518 posts)It's still, BY FAR, the best news aggregator on the internet.
But the discussions have gotten ridiculous. They always have been in many ways, but it's gotten amped up lately. Day in and day out, people who would probably love sharing a drink together bitching and moaning and bitching and moaning at each other. I will freely admit that I am guilty of this.
However, as others have pointed out, it's really just a small number of posters who are causing the bulk of the ridiculousness. For the most part, most people are cool most of the time. We have a few attention-seekers who simply cannot allow someone else on the internet to be wrong!
I suppose that's what happens when your team has the field, and there are fans who want their guy to pitch, but the other guy is pitching and throwing too many balls and not enough strikes.
Something like that.
FSogol
(45,456 posts)There are no criticisms or discussion of policy involved in those daily hate messages from the poster you are referring to, his supporters, and others. Their intent is to suppress the vote in the 2014 midterms using FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt). I hope the admins take a closer look at what is going on.
* ratfucking is a political term in use since the Nixon days. Look it up.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)we no longer kiss someone's ass just because they claim to be a democrat. We should hold obama to a higher standard than the jackass before him. Unfortunately he's been a major disappointment.
valerief
(53,235 posts)laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)I have observed that the emotional necessities (motivation) of a fringe Left winger to be very similar to that of a fringe Right winger. IMO, the motivation for this Mental ODS behavior is usually rooted within the individual himself and is not a result of external forces. They punish themselves because subconsciously they think they're undeserving of happiness. We merely represent their "shoulder".
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)rtracey
(2,062 posts)You just wait until the complacency of the Democrat Party pushes us into a GOP controlled House and Senate....then watch out, because if the President attempts too do ANYTHING with that congress....he's in for a major earful from this group. Pull out your veto stamp Mr. President.... the DU is watching, and nothing you do will be good enough.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Thou hast trolled, poorly.
Paging MIRT/Admins, we need a...
rtracey
(2,062 posts)Troll on this.... I have been a loyal Democrat on this forum for years... ok so wow I didn't say Democratic.....piss off dude
spin
(17,493 posts)or that of his administration in a forum such as DU.
The Democratic Party still is, and should always be, a big tent. Many who post here are extremely liberal and progressive, a good number are moderate Democrats and a few are conservative Democrats. It took all these different types of Democratic voters and a good number of Independent voters as well as a few liberal Republicans to put Obama into the Oval Office as our choice to lead this nation and best represent our views.
Obviously any President will be unable to satisfy all who voted for him. Not everybody will be part of the cheerleader squad.
I see no problem with anyone who voted critiquing and even criticizing an elected politician and his polices. If you didn't vote and didn't have a damn good reason not to vote, perhaps you should keep your mouth shut.
However I don't feel that calling any President names is truly productive. Being the President of the United States might be the most difficult and challenging job in the world and I have a lot of respect for anyone who is willing to assume that responsibility. Probably the two best days of any President's time in office is the day he wins the election and the day he leaves the office.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)the used car salesman analogy was beyond dumb.
frylock
(34,825 posts)wow. I'd love to take a look at your intelligent, articulate published work. do you have a link handy?
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)the work that i do publish is peer-reviewed. Not blogs on the internet.
Also, people, even intelligent ones make stupid posts from time to time. This used car salesman post was stupid.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)Ann Coulter...and on and on---published work doesn't equal intelligent or articulate. That's subjective.
While I agree Pitt has written some good stuff, his 'writings' of late have not been.
Gman
(24,780 posts)before the first bashing started. I remember well who it was and for these whinings she's on my ignore list.
frylock
(34,825 posts)it's only two minutes derp! yes, that was when many people started to question Obama's judgment.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)What has this administration done to move gay rights forward since the inauguration?
Oh, that's right, more than any other sitting president in history.
Yes, it really was only two minutes, and Warren has all but been forgotten by the entire nation.
Maybe those questioning judgment should start with their own.
Gman
(24,780 posts)Marr
(20,317 posts)Gman
(24,780 posts)And it was a president the LEFT shoved down everyone's throats in the primaries. Shows the lack of allegiance the left really has to anyone or anything. In fact it is nothing short of a friggin' miracle he won despite the fact he was the weakest candidate. But fate smiled, the world economy crashed and he won in spite of himself and the LEFT. But ever looking for something to bitch about, and too moody to even appreciate it's victory, the LEFT turned on the very candidate they told us was "the one" within hours of the election. How sad to be that way. So much for the LEFT's judgement.
Marr
(20,317 posts)What an interesting world you live in. Sounds very reassuring.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)You know, like how we all did when we were 15 and 16.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)To announce that there must be no criticism of the president... is morally treasonable to the American public.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/theodore_roosevelt.html#bCTsWAjbz9g6LWiL.99
Hekate
(90,565 posts)... or used to.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)this tired old strawman.
This guy is ragged and threadbare, please let him go.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)I stand in dawgly unity with you, sir!
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)is to stop governing from the Right.
The best way to allow the President to govern from the Right is to denigrate his critics on the Left.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
xocet
(3,871 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024735661
Here is what President Obama - Senator Obama at that time - had to say about single payer health care:
President Obama said, "But, as all of you know, we may not get there immediately, because, first, we have got to take back the White House, and we've got to take back the Senate, and we've got to take back the House..(applause)...(inaudible)."
One might have supposed that since he thought at that time that single payer health care was what he wanted to see enacted (subject to his conditions, of course) that he might have actually tried to support single payer by speaking rousingly about it to the public and to Congress after the election. Unfortunately, he neglected to care about single payer after the election - even with his conditions met.
This is unfortunate all the way around.
However, the question that you should have asked at the end of your piece is not the one you did, rather it should have been:
With Democrats like these, who needs Republicans?
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)either way, this is bullshit. It's disinformation, it's poor reading comprehension (ever hear of conditional "If--Then" statements and compound sentences?), it's obsessive, it's destroying Progressive unity, it's unproductive.
Anyone who thinks you can inherit a full blown war and just end it like you would close a door is a woefully simplistic thinker.
Ugh, the whole situation is making me so angry
Number23
(24,544 posts)And yes, some of Pitt's most ardently devoted followers actually tried to make that argument. That when he said "fuck you you piece of shit used car salesman" he was actually saying that it was the CAR and not the man that was the piece of shit.
The problem with these folks is that they think everyone is as dumb as they are.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)At least the month-long meltdown over a bikini photo is over.
obxhead
(8,434 posts)Policies that destroy the well being of the US and were vehemently railed against under Bush are now totally acceptable and championed under Obama.
The support for the most vile of policies here lately is just insane to me.
Cha
(296,889 posts)can see that doesn't stop the suckers sucking up on that hate infested rat's nest.
GeorgeGist
(25,311 posts)Skittles
(153,122 posts)hypocrites
baldguy
(36,649 posts)And we wonder why "our side" can never seem to get anything done. With "friends" like these... indeed.
Cha
(296,889 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Warpy
(111,174 posts)Fortunately, his actions spoke louder and the Iraqis are now mismanaging themselves.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Phew. That was a close one.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)The effect of endless bashing of the President and other Democrats will untimately benefit the RW along with their sick policies... then the "complaining left" will really have something to complain about.
Stellar
(5,644 posts)I noticed during the midterm how negative the people were about the president. It was enough to depress people. And I thought back then, if there were enough depressed people...they definitely would not get out and vote, even during the midterm which is to be expected. That sentiment seemed to be everywhere.
The only good thing for me was it kept me off the computer and I got more work done.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)to get what they want.
They have outsize influence in the MSM and social media and use this to try to create the perceptions they want.
It doesn't matter what the reality is, they think that if they can create a negative perception, they have won the battle.
Stellar
(5,644 posts)But I continue to do my share to help as much as I can. That's the best I or anybody can do.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)They smell blood in the water and they are all sharks.
reddread
(6,896 posts)the same small group that feed and kick their conservative posts as though they amounted to more than a cadre.
and they really dont appreciate dissent, sovereignty, democracy and leftist electoral victories.
BlueJac
(7,838 posts)I just wish Obama was a progressive. The ACA is better than what was, but a far cry from what is needed. I was hoping for the change we were all promised!!!
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)Obama got elected on "liberal" rhetoric but he has governed as a centrist. Not necessarily all his fault since the system does not really support Liberal thinking in government. Especially in these days of Teabagger Representation. Obama's hands have been tied in several key battles. On the other hand he has missed some opportunities--we all know what they are. And there have been a few--a precious few but still--significant successes in our direction.
In light of this, we must accept that some are disillusioned and taking it out on the administration. And they have every right to do so without being castigated. Let people have their say, even if you disagree. We can't all be in lock-step here. Our task as intelligent voters is to hold BHO's feet to the fire, and people do that differently.
The Obama supporters on DU are more prevalent than the critics. So your view is skewed.
MADem
(135,425 posts)leadership, makes DU suck. IMO it violates the ToS.
The DU Community Standards state: "It is the responsibility of all DU members to participate in a manner that promotes a positive atmosphere and encourages good discussions among a diverse community of people holding a broad range of center-to-left viewpoints." Members who demonstrate a pattern of disruptive behavior over time and end up getting too many of their posts hidden by the jury (measured by raw number or percentage) may be found to be in violation of our Terms of Service. If you seem to be ruining this website for a large proportion of our visitors, if we think the community as a whole would be better off without you here, if you are constantly wasting the DU Administrators' time, if you seem to oppose the mission of DU, or if the DU Administrators just don't like you, we will revoke your posting privileges. Remember: DU is supposed to be fun don't make it suck.
I agree with you that With "friends" like these who needs enemies.
Here's my take on it:
See, a lot of people think that calling POTUS a "piece of shit used car salesman"
--Does NOT promote a positive atmosphere.
--Does NOT promote 'good discussions.'
--Demonstrates a "pattern of disruptive behavior"--particularly when it's done more than once, "con brio."
--Ruins the website for a large number of visitors (judging by the pushback from competing threads on the subject).
--Seems to OPPOSE the mission of DU.
And last, but most certainly not least;
--Makes DU suck. Once makes it suck a bit. Twice makes it suck to Walt Starr proportions. Rallying minions to cheerlead that kind of suckage? Now, the meter is pegged.
It's not my website, but if it were, I'd get out the Hoover and vacuum up that mess, and empty the bag straight away.
I'm glad I am not the only one who is sick and tired of it.
thefool_wa
(1,867 posts)Is that people are finally waking up to the fact that there IS NO left and right, there are NOT 2 separate parties, there is ONE group of politicians who do everything in their power to keep us fighting amongst ourselves so we ignore that ALL of them, EVERY LAST GD ONE OF THEM is colluding with the money power in this country to make the rich richer and the poor poorer, and regardless of the small fraction of obamacare that "provides healthcare to millions" (i.e. mandates heathcare under threat of penalty) the law is, and pretty much always has been, about subsidizing the insurance industry by appearing to funnel the money through the citizens. Critical illness will still bankrupt anyone who gets it and nothing really changed about the crippling ACTUAL cost of our healthcare system.
DO not listen to anyone's rhetoric on EITHER side. NONE of them have our best wishes at heart, and all of them would screw us, even those who voted for them, if it puts money in their pocket.
Obama is no different. He got his office on pomp and circumstance and immediately started playing the power money game, all while feeding EVEN MORE into the distraction of divisive politics.
NONE of them are to be trusted, NONE of them have our best interests at heart.
The only reason this SEEMED to not be true from 2001-2008 is that we had a true and very obvious political enemy who was not only killing the country, but waging un-necessary wars that were doing nothing but killing people with zero purpose. Now the veil has been drawn, we can see them ALL for who they are, and so help me god, it will very soon be necessary for some kind of political purge in this country.
Implying that somehow, just because we are on the DU we are REQUIRED to back the president is the same kind of controlling bullshit the right pulled for 8 years under Bush, and it will not stand here.
JohnRogan
(51 posts)Remember Obama said Make him do it!
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)Their philosophy appears to be that they're prepared to see the Republicans rule for a thousand years just to make a point.
JohnRogan
(51 posts)why torment yourself?
Sen. Walter Sobchak
(8,692 posts)The third bullet point is "Vote for Democrats", the socialists who perceive no difference between Obama and say Augusto Pinochet and the occupiers who just want to fuck shit up don't appear to live up to that.
JohnnyRingo
(18,619 posts)Many here had their hearts and souls devoted to a Clinton, Dean, or even Kucinich White House and have been holding Obama up to their standards ever since. Admittedly, two of those three are decidedly more liberal than Obama, but Hillary still enjoys a very rabid following here.
Personally, I was more in the Obama camp back then, but I would have donated and volunteered my time just as faithfully if any other hopeful had become the eventual candidate. Such is my disdain for the GOP.
I'd be happy if Wes Clark or Howard Dean make a good run for 2016, but Clinton is fine too. I'm just afraid republicans will successfully exploit decades of negative imaging on Ms Clinton. Limbaugh can't call Obama what we wants to say, but he'd compare Hillary to the euphemism for a female dog in a second and get away with it. Indeed, A Clinton campaign would likely improve his ratings by double digits.
K&R to you for the outrage of the outrage.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,223 posts)They wouldn't be doing their jobs properly if you felt otherwise. There are couple of sites that direct their members here to do exactly what you describe in your o.p.
As stated above, Markos doesn't tolerate it, and hasn't lost a thing by actually enforcing his TOS. If the rules were enforced, I think Admin might find that any possible losses would make it safe for a lot of folks like yourself to return, and actually work on the stated mission of this board:
Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice
Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).
Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.
jazzwinders
(103 posts)Thank you!