We don't have a first amendment right to TRASH the NOMINEE on DU

[bravenak]

If we are living under the rules, and they state that the Primary effectively ends on DU as of June 15th, I see no reason why people are howling about censorship.

It was kinda cool to give folks extra time to 'get it out of their systems'. Nobody says you cannot say nice stuff about Bernie, or not constructively criticize Hillary in a reasonable non rightwing manner.

Wouldn't it be nice to come together, after so much time, and stand against the forces of the Rightwing? To keep Donald from having any access whatsoever to our military?

I cannot wait until this thing is over and we can fight Trump!

[elleng]

1. We know that; DU is not the government.

[bravenak]

2. Some folks seem to think they are being censored

[elleng]

7. They/we need a different term.

noun forbiddance; ban
blackout restriction suppression control forbidding

The effect of the action/prohibition is/will be similar (without governmental sanctions.)

[bravenak]

9. They will still be able to do it at many many sites around the web

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. There are lots of sites where people can trash Hillary

Free Republic
Conservative Cave
The Site Which Shall Not Be Mentioned
Jack Pine Radicals...


We just want to defeat Donald Trump. How about they go there and let us go on about the business of defeating Trump.

Skinner seems to agree:

Star Member Skinner (61,708 posts)
1. When the voting is over the primary is over on DU.

This has gone on long enough. Once the voting is done I have no interest in pretending everyone doesn't already know the outcome.

My opinion is that Donald Trump represents an unprecedented threat to this country, and I have no interest in providing a platform for people to act like a Trump presidency isn't such a big deal. I have permitted it during primary season because many people seem determined to pretend we live in a fantasyland where Republicans don't exist -- but once the primary is over reality sets in and we can no longer afford to ignore our Republican opponent.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910453

[bravenak]

18. Makes perfect sense to me

Those places are filled with rightwing attacks on Democrats

[LoverOfLiberty]

75. Reddit

you forgot Reddit

[DemocratSinceBirth]

77. Better...

This should be a Hate Free site for Hillary reporters.

[barrow-wight]

100. I keep seeing this "Site Which Shall Not Be Mentioned".

Now I'm curious.

That last one ... JimJonesRadicals. Scary as heck. The Bernie people here complain about loyalty oaths but if you saw what you have to add as a typed preface over there whenever discussing the possibility of Hillary getting the nomination, it's some scary Kool-aid krazy.

[merrily]

102. That was simply to keep the paid trolls from concern trolling. DU welcomes the Brock trolls.

JPR, which was founded to support Bernie, does not. DUH. It's no more crazy than DU's requirements about posting here in accordance with the purposes of this board.

No offense to any paid trolls intended. As my sig line indicates, I welcome their DU posts.

[barrow-wight]

104. JimJonesRadicals is CRAAAAAZY.

It's far less about the issues than it is the public persona of Bernie. While I've never been much for our culture's cult of celebrity, I could at least stomach that a little. What I couldn't stomach was the tone. And yes, I saw the intent of the post of which we speak and that makes it no less crazy. Basically the argument is that they want the vast majority of people who are not paid trolls to sound absolutely ludicrous in the name of the small few who are. I find it equally bizarre on this site that 90% of the pro-Hiillary posters are called paid trolls. Mind you, I support Hillary but she's just a candidate. The way these people talk about Bernie, you'd think he was Jesus. I've never seen anything like it and that JPR site makes the Bernie phenomenon look even more cult-like than any of the behavior on here.

[merrily]

105. I think your perception is the problem. I see cults of personality on DU all the time and also the

reverse--ad hom attacks, one after the other, such as Bernie seems to have nodded off at a ball game, ffs.

At JPR, there is more of a mix.

A lot is in the eye of the beholder. I can admit that. Perhaps you can't, so you throw out more insults. Sad, really, but not a surprise. Have a great night/morning.

[barrow-wight]

106. I have never worshipped any person (or religion) the way that people do this candidate.

So perhaps my beholder's eye is just boggled by the sheer devotion of it all and finds it creepy.

[merrily]

109. I felt the same way about Obama, though I supported him as much as I legally could, and Hillary.

So, as I was able to admit and correctly predicted you would not, it is indeed in the eye of the beholder.

All the adoring pics of Obama and Hillary that get posted here should really be a tip off, though.

Sorry, I've got to go. You're repeating yourself already and so I know this is not going to get more interesting.

You promised to bring me a circus next time, but all you sent were the clowns. Not fair! Not circus, either!

[barrow-wight]

116. The real circus comes on the 16th. :)

[stone space]

134. Same tune, different lyrics. "Send in the Drones" (Charlie King)

[merrily]

135. I can hear the video. That likely means you should be clapping much louder.

[stone space]

137. Well, I am a bit of a Charlie King fan, I'll admit.

I can hear the video. That likely means you should be clapping much louder.

Here's one that I saw him perform live in the 1980's. Several of the folks whose names are mentioned in the song were in the audience clapping along with me.

An oldie, but goodie.

"The Hammer Has To Fall"

[merrily]

138. That was great. Thank you.

[stone space]

148. De nada. There was a movie made about the Plowshares 8 Action.

The defendants played themselves, and Martin Sheen played the judge.

The movie mixes documentary footage with courtroom reenactments, taken from court transcripts.

IN THE KING OF PRUSSIA: THE TRIAL OF THE PLOWSHARES 8 takes us back to 1982 with Emile de Antonio's portrayal of the Plowshares 8 civic disobedience at General Electric's nuclear weapons plant in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. The group included Molly Rush, co-founder of the Merton Center. Posting of this cliip celebrates the April 13 visit of Martin Sheen, who plays the judge in the movie, to Pittsburgh, Pa and the Thomas Merton Center. YOU CAN'T HUG A CHILD WITH NUCLEAR ARMS!!!

A short history of the ongoing Plowshares Movement, covering actions from 1980 thru 2012, is here:

A Review of the Plowshares Movement through 2012

Published on Nov 3, 2013

A history of the Plowshares movement from 1980 to 2012, compiled from the records of many friends by Ardeth Platte OP and Susan Crane.

[merrily]

150. If only

Isaiah 2:4 (King James Version)

And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more

.

Sigh.

[mythology]

125. You forgot to mention DU has standards of discourse

Jackpineradicals thinks that referring to women as bitches and worse is perfectly fine. If somebody here called Palin that it would be hidden.

[merrily]

127. HUH? I forgot to mention? The poster raised a specific rule with me and I replied about that rule.

Last edited Wed Jun 1, 2016, 07:01 AM - Edit history (1)

No one pretended to be having a discussion about the totality of the board. So, "forgot" has absolutely nothing to do with anything. If you wanted to interject yourself into a discussion I was having with another poster to bring up a point totally unrelated to my discussion with the other poster, fine. Things like that happen on discussion board. No need to pretend that I "forgot" to mention something that had no relation whatever to a discussion I was having with another poster about one specific rule.

As to the point you brought into the discussion for the first time, though: One poster's and one board's "standards of discourse are another poster's and another board's censorship. I just try to follow the rules and my own rules wherever I happen to be posting. And the fact that a board does not believe in many rules or much censorship does not mean a board is "perfectly fine" with everything posted there. I just means the board has chosen to censor less than other board.

I don't agree with every post at JPR or at DU. I am sure you don't agree with every post on DU, either. For that matter, there have been specifically a few "standards of discourse" I have alerted on at DU as in violation of DU's TOS because of sexism, or racism, or homophobia that juries have not only allowed to stand, but have mocked me for alerting on them. I would not call you or any DUer not involved out because of that either.

I find it very odd that anyone would seek to hold me accountable for every thing posted on DU or on JPR by any poster that does not suit them. I don't own either board or make the rules for either board and I am not even a mod or host for either board, though I do jury here. I would not dream of pretending you are accountable for everything I don't like about DU because of some post you did not make.



(Journaling because this is by far not the first time, and likely won't be the last time, that someone reproaches me about a post made here by another Bernie supporter or a post made at JPR.)

[merrily]

124. Oh! I forgot to mention:

AFAIK, the rule has not been enforced, unless they nailed some poster with it before I noticed. Lots of posters well known to all of us have posted without including that stuff in the post and the posts are still on the board and the posters are still posting. It really was a trap for Brock trolls, as the thread said.

Silly me, leaving out the most important part!

Oh, and Manny Goldstein wrote that rule. You being such a newbie here may not know the significance of that, but I think most DUers who posted here before 2016 would.

But, if I think of it, I will let them know of your interest in the JPR board. They will no doubt appreciate it. Then again, they might not give a crap. Who knows?

[barrow-wight]

158. I do not know what a Manny Goldstein is.

And I get that there's this weird perception on this site that anyone new to it must have just emerged from the ethers of non-reality, but it's just not the case.

While that rule may be the most obvious example, it's the tone that's crazy and there's no telling crazy that they're crazy. I mean, I can say it, but nobody crazy will hear it. There is a clear distinction between those who are supporting Bernie (or any other candidate) based on the issues, and those who are have gone beyond the issues to seeing him as some sort of savior. It's not a new schtick. Religious people have been doing it for thousands of years.

[merrily]

162. That can explain it.

My comment had nothing to do with assuming newbie don't get reality, only that a newbie might not get Manny, who wrote that rule. At DU, he almost never posted in serious mode. So, I don't know how literal the rule is. I know that I have never seen it followed (except maybe by Manny) and I've never seen it enforced, though it's possible I missed something.

As far as the site, yes, some posters may see Bernie the way you say, but not all. (Most generalizations are false to one degree or another.) In any event, those who are "fans" of Bernie (as opposed to supporters) became that way because of his stands on issues.

I don't think seeing Bernie in a certain light is unique to JPR. After all, most of the JPR posters post here as well. In general, though, I have not seen Bernie treated as a celebrity with "fans," the way I have seen Obama treated here. I have lots of criticisms of Bernie, but I don't post them because he is an underdog. Maybe it's only projection, but I suspect the same is true of other supporters of Bernie. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever gushed over Bernie, either.

As I said originally, I think a lot a lot is in the eye of the beholder--and the ear of the beholder as well--your own biases and those of the people to whom you listen respectfully.

[barrow-wight]

172. I am sure you are right.

I am probably far too jaded and cynical to embrace a candidate that inspiring. I automatically think it's fake. LOL

[merrily]

174. I'm lost. I thought we were discussing posters on JPR, not you or Bernie.

If Bernie is a fake, you have to at least give him credit for having been in public life for over five decades without giving himself away. And, despite all the nonsense and lies about a PAC associated with a nurses' union being "his" PAC, he has kept his word about not accepting PAC money or corporate donation. Hillary talks opposition to Citizens United while taking the fullest possible advantage of it; Bernie lived his opposition to Citizens United. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280109865

My cynicism also runs to not believing Hillary when, after almost as many decades in public life, she claims she evolved, just in time for a threat of a primary challenge from Warren, followed by an actual primary challenge from Sanders. My brand of cynicism also runs to doubting that all the primaries and the caucuses have been on the up and up despite the many, many reports of shenanigans and the obvious bias of the DNC and state party officials.

But, anyway, we have gone far afield of the original topic, or at least what I thought was the original topic. Take care.

[Luminous Animal]

17. Which, no doubt, some will. It does not negate the fact that some posts will be

censored on this board. They always have and they always will. But soon, the censorship category will expand.

[bravenak]

24. It was agreed to at sign up

[LonePirate]

111. If that expansion bothers people, they need to examine why they are posting here.

Do they come here to talk up Bernie and sing his praises? If so, they will still be able to do that on June 16. If they come here merely to seek like minded individuals who share their Hillary hatred, then they should not be posting here now, let alone on June 16. Unfortunately and unsurprisingly, the persecution complex crowd and the Libertarians and Republicans masquerading as Bernie supporters around here have conflated the former with the latter.

[sheshe2]

23. You have talked a lot about rules, re Hillary.

There are rules here that were made clear when people joined this site. Now they want them changed.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

30. There are one billion websites on the internet.

If people are intent on trashing Hillary I am sure they can find a site.

[sheshe2]

45. I am sure they can, DSB.

Plenty of sites for them to go.

[Luminous Animal]

11. First Amendment rights and censorship are not synonymous. An organization

may censor without violating the First.

[bravenak]

14. And people can say what they want to say anyway, elsewhere

Nobody has to provide a platform for ideas that they do not want to have a hand in distributing

[melman]

20. Crazy, isn't it?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/118722819

[bvf]

89. Completely. n/t

[AlbertCat]

145. Guffaw!

fortunately, irony isn't...but is on display prominently.

[Gomez163]

57. I'M BEING OPPRESSED

[bravenak]

58. They shall overcome

[EndElectoral]

95. An inability to reveal truths is in fact censorship

[TimPlo]

163. Um if the DU site is saying you can't post XYZ

Then that is being censored. Censoring is just a act it has nothing do to with being right or wrong on anything. If Skinner says you can't post the word "nee" then that is censored the word "nee" It is his right to do that as this is his website. But it is still censoring not matter what, you can't change the definition of a word to fit your crazy bias.

"cen·sor·ship
ˈsensərˌSHip/Submit
noun
the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts."

[bravenak]

165. You can still post what you like elsewhere

[TimPlo]

167. Yea so?

I responded to your trying to redefine the word censorship, that is all. Why you feel the need to tell me I can post some where else is meaningless to the post I made. You might as well have told me I can watch TV or a movie for all the relevance it had to my post. Stop making straw man posts, you are thinking I some how said Skinner should not be censoring. I never said that. I just corrected your statement saying that it was not censorship when it is.

[bravenak]

169. The entire site censors rightwing drivel

We knew the rules at sign up. Why complain about censorship when we agreed to it?

[1StrongBlackMan]

5. Some, apparently, do not ...

They would be the one's standing on their right to free speech ... on DU.

[elleng]

8. I assume 'standing on their right' won't get them far.

[1StrongBlackMan]

28. It doesn't ... But that doesn't give them pause.

[Philly-Union-Man]

3. We don't have any rights on DU at all.

Anything you say can be pulled at any time for any reason. Your membership can be revoked at any time for any reason.

So, you know, there's that.

[bravenak]

4. Exactly

We all knew the drill at sign up

[sheshe2]

25. Exactly.

Hey bravenak.

[bravenak]

26. Hey. Almost over...

[reformist2]

74. True. This is the problem with the internet. It gives you the *illusion* that you have free speech.

[AgingAmerican]

6. There will be no nominee until the convention ends

Just hope she isn't indicted before that happens

[PJMcK]

13. Whatever happens, I hope you'll vote a straight Democratic ticket

Thanks for the obvious concern you have for our country. Let's collaboratively make certain the Republicans can't continue to destroy our country.

[LanternWaste]

155. Your allegation of hope almost sounds sincere.

Your allegation of hope almost sounds sincere, and its relevance seems apropos to your posts.

[aikoaiko]

10. Well technically we do. The governent can't censor our political discusssions with few exceptions

But admins sure can censor us.

[bravenak]

12. Sigh

So many places people can use to do the same speaking

[aikoaiko]

34. I know. I was trying to make a joke.

[bravenak]

36. Sorry.

[Yurovsky]

16. I will fight Trump, I just won't be voting for Hillary...

I still have to look at myself in the mirror every day. It will be a cold day in hell when I vote for someone who is bought & paid for by the very Wall Street/corporate interests that are destroying the working class & poor. She has made ZERO effort to distance herself from these bastards, therefore I cannot bring myself to vote for her. I just can't.

She obviously values that dirty blood money more than she values the votes of progressives like me. That 's on her, not me.

[bravenak]

22. Ok. June 15 is the day

[Yurovsky]

39. What will you do if the FBI recommends an indictment?

According to a poll I read today, a majority of her supporters don't think an indictment should disqualify her. Unfortunately for Ms. Clinton, virtually everyone else thinks that it does.

[bravenak]

41. Same thing I been doing

Supporting the DEMOCRATIC nominee

[chwaliszewski]

44. I think that has already been pointed out numerous times but thanks.

[bravenak]

48. Just trying to help out any way I can

[chwaliszewski]

50. If you're trying to help, I have a few suggestions.

[bvf]

91. Did they move the convention date up?

When did that happen?

[TimPlo]

164. Where have you been it was Sat, Feb 20

The day of SC primary. That about when the calls for Sanders to drop out started.

[bvf]

173. True. And for some others

it started the day Her Excellency announced.

Her turn, you know.

[geek tragedy]

70. You really can't hurt Trump's chances without helping Clinton's chances, zero sum game nt

[GulfCoast66]

92. How nice.

I guess we all find a way to feel superior to others. Of course since I can look myself in the Mirror after voting for Clinton you are my better.

Reminds me of a church I left.

But at least you are unsullied.

[Yurovsky]

153. George Wallace was a Democrat too...

But I never voted for him, even when I lived in Alabama in the '80s (yes, he was still governor...).

I consider corporatists as morally bankrupt as racists. You may choose to dance with the devil, but I'll pass.

[Vote2016]

19. The French Revolutionaries had no liberty to debate the Vichy government either. You make due.

[bravenak]

21. Oh good grief! The french revolution comparisons are outrageous!

[annavictorious]

128. Especially when the French Revolution is magically conflated with WWII

via the Vichy government reference.

[Autumn]

27. No one is TRASHING the NOMINEE on DU

We don't have one yet.

[bravenak]

29. For the purposes of DU, we will on June 15

See ya!

[Autumn]

32. Not June 15 yet, are ya running back and forth from now to June 15 in your time machine?

No one is TRASHING the NOMINEE on DU, in the real world we don't have one yet.

[bravenak]

33. Yes they are. Hillary is the nominee. 74 more delegates and it is a done deal.

Prolly get those in before the polls close in CA

[Autumn]

42. It all depends on the meaning of the word "is "in your post,

The words in your post *is* and *more* *Prolly get* * close in CA*. All those words say we don't have a NOMINEE on DU.

[bravenak]

46. Is. As in she IS so far ahead that by the time NJ is closed, she will have enough delegates for the

media to call her the presumptive nominee. As in, he cannot catch her before she hits the magic number. The cali and DC delegates will just run up her total on the scoreboard. For my personal self, Hillary is the official nominee, and the other contestants supporters are just needing until June 15 to get it out of their systems

[Autumn]

49. Awesome! You used the word *will*

[bravenak]

52. I'm givin folks that time they need to get it all out

[Autumn]

55. You are? How very odd, I could swear that I read that Skinner is the one doing that.

[bravenak]

56. It's why I don't write my own ops about Bernie anymore. Only Hillary for the most part.

Giving folks time.

[Autumn]

59. Yeah we know

[MelissaB]

31. +1000

[AtomicKitten]

86. yep

[saltpoint]

129. Pretty darn good point if

you ask me.

And I agree with it whole-heartedly.

[jack_krass]

35. Thx. I will watch the Hildenburg without commenting specifically.

[JTFrog]

101. I am certainly not going to miss those who make disgusting comments such as yours. nt

[jack_krass]

123. Disgusting is as disgusting does. You may not like my comments but...

-I've never blown up countries, creating mass death and misery, then laughed about it on in interviews.
-I've never taken 250,000 for a speech(and wouldn't, if offered)
-I've never cteated policies which have locked up hundreds of thousands of people

HRC has done all these things, so I think its her that earns the "disgusting" characterization

[Eric J in MN]

37. What criticism of Clinton will still be OK (if any)? NT

NT

[bravenak]

43. I think he said reasonable. Not just using stuff as a club to damage her chances.

[chwaliszewski]

47. "I can't wait until Bill is in charge of the economy."

Would that be considered a damaging comment?

[bravenak]

51. Not to most democrats

Especially us black ones. It got much better under Bill than Reagan or Bush for us.

[chwaliszewski]

85. Until the tech bubble burst.

I do blame Bill for signing the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act into law, effectively neutering the Glass-Steagall Act.

[azurnoir]

119. yes some of us do cherish what would be our childhood memories - things seem better back then

for someone in their early to mid thirties the Clinton years would be childhood and early adolescence, just as I have fond memories of the LBJ years - Civil Rights act-war on poverty -things we're now told are inconsequential

[MFM008]

38. June 7 they run out of states

Leaving only D.C. on June 14..
Over.
Finished
Donezo.

[bravenak]

40. Yes!!!!!!

[Logical]

80. Lol, but hillary now nervous about CA! She really knows how to seal the deal!

[Lordquinton]

53. See you at the convention!

[bravenak]

54. Or not

Won't make a bit of difference

[workinclasszero]

60. Lots of berners don't get that

[bravenak]

67. They will

Soon i hope

[workinclasszero]

94. On the 16th

Or they can hit the damn road.

Democrats have a dangerous demagogue fascist to defeat in the fall and we don't need to be takin fire from the front and the rear.

[bettyellen]

61. We're not even supposed to have the right to be sexist or racist but....

Somehow the influx of people who hate Potus and the majority of Dems also happen to disparage anyone who speaks out about "social issues" and a little veiled racism and sexism became normalized here.

It's going to be so much nicer when the rules are clarified and hosts expected to enforce them!

[bravenak]

62. Things sure changed here very quickly

Cannot wait until we get the new system and see if it is effective. This needs to end.

[bettyellen]

68. Well the Manny era was something- he was like a pied piper for a lot of folks....

And got away with saying a lot of disgusting things for too long. Gave a lot of folks Stockholm syndrome where they sympathized more with the GOP than their fellow liberals. Cheers to the end of rat fucking here!

[bravenak]

69. I swear he was a caver

He seemed to love nothing more than beating up on democrats day after day. The longer he's gone, the less I remember about him.

[bettyellen]

72. Biggest rat fucker ever- fooled lots of people though.

He was good at exploiting their anger for his own purposes alright. That's how the republicans do it- tap into that fear and anger.

[bravenak]

76. He's still up to it over there

I think nycskp too, since I saw all the cwords in use so prolifically

[bettyellen]

93. Ugh, dark days at DU

[Sheepshank]

63. some are still blowing the "democracy" blather with regard to DU TOS

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2095910

Some of us attempted to describe the difference between government and a privately owned site. I wonder if we got through?

[bravenak]

65. Their idea of democracy includes winning the primary without winning the votes

It's remarkable how people make stuff up to be outraged by

[imagine2015]

64. The Democratic Party will not pick their nominee for President before the convention starts.

Period.

The major purpose of the Democratic Party national convention is to select their candidate to run for President of the United States.

This will be a contested convention since neither Hillary Clinton nor Bernie Sanders will have obtained enough elected/pledged delegates to win the nomination.

Do you follow me so far?

That means the uncommitted, unpledged superdelegates can decide who will be the Democratic Party candidate for President. They are "free agent" delegates who may vote for any candidate they wish and are not required to vote for a candidate they might have indicated as preference for prior to the convention.

Still following me?

Any questions?

[bravenak]

66. Doesn't matter one bit.

[imagine2015]

88. What than is the purpose of having a delegated decision making convention?

To party, eat lobster and drink booze?

[m-lekktor]

71. Yep, it's a private site and the owners can make any rules they like. Nobody is forcing us

to participate and it isn't funded by tax dollars so first amendment rights don't apply. This should be obvious one would think. That being said I believe the owners have been quite accommodating considering they support Hillary Clinton. It is ridiculous to complain. I say this as somebody who doesn't even remotely support Hillary Clinton and realize I will be limited in what i can say later on down the road. If I don't like it I can leave. I can still run my mouth on facebook if I have the need but I am tired of arguing about this primary to be honest.

[bravenak]

73. Best answer yet

There are a bunch of places to post all over the place. Easy to find one that suits.

[m-lekktor]

83. It's ridiculous to complain on a privately run site.

The owners are Hillary supporters fer fuck sake!! geesh lol Besides, I need to learn restraint and get over this need to argue everything i disagree with on the internets. I am getting better, I think. lol

[imagine2015]

90. They have the right to turn DU into a Clinton operation to defeat Sanders at the national convention

Just as long as they make it absolutely clear that is their intention and purpose.

If that isn't the Administrators intention, than Bernie and Clinton supporters should continue to enjoy fair, equal and democratic discussion and debate on DU until the Democratic Party selects its Presidential candidate.

It's as simple and clear as that.

[morningfog]

78. The problem is the hill loyalist cannot distinguish

constructive and justified criticism (or even discussions of real news reports) from right wing garbage when it comes to Hillary. They take every comment that is not glowing praise and call the commenter a right wing trump enabler. It's silly and petty and dishonest.

[bravenak]

79. Best to err on the side of caution

[morningfog]

82. Or not worry about those incapable of critical thought.

[brooklynite]

81. This is like the Berniecrat attitude towards the Democratic Party...

Given the choice of doing the hard work to organize an online forum that meets their own standards and whining that the existing site won't automatically do things their way...

[bravenak]

107. They want the rewards without all that work stuff and coalition building

Such a joke!

[GRhodes]

84. So

Once the primary is over, the left must then shut up? As someone that supports Sanders, I would never expect that if he gets the nomination. My god, you push people in power to do things, you critique them, you call them out when they are wrong, you point out if they are selling out. You, in other words, don't give a monopoly to the right on pushing the nominee, cause guess what? If the right is pushing, pushing, pushing, and the left doesn't, the nominee will get pushed to the right. They will only have to respond to and defend right wing critiques. How does that make any logical sense?

If Clinton gets the nomination, her getting all that money from Wall Street means nothing? Or it does, but no one can say anything? If she is hawkish, which she is, no one can critique that? If she puts in place policies that benefit her largest donors, that's then okay? Okay, Chairman Mao. We'll let a thousand flowers bloom in eight years. Right now, just shut up. Got it.

[bravenak]

99. You can say whatever you want, just not here

[GRhodes]

156. Great

That has worked amazingly well everywhere it's been tried. Enjoy your group think in 15 days, no more having to answer to things you should be critiquing in the first place. So glad that the two major parties are what they are, we have such great captains guiding the ship.

[alarimer]

157. Pretty much.

That's always true. They pander to us to get our votes, but then throw away principle once elected. I expect Hillary to do the same, but she has no principles at all, so it won't be as disappointing at least.

I will just sit back and say "I told you so" when she supports cuts to SS (already on record for supporting raising the age, which is a cut) or bombs some other country that doesn't deserve it (but it's okay when a Democrat does it) or authorizes fracking. Etc. Etc.

For some here, criticism is the same as "bashing" and they appear to support positions that, if enacted in a Republican administration, they would absolutely despise.

[Turin_C3PO]

87. I hear ya.

People are acting like this is the first time this has happened. DU has always had a policy to not tear down the Democratic nominee during the general election season. That's June-November. I don't think that's too much to ask of people who claim to be progressive.

If Trump gets in, so many groups would be hurt. Minorities, women, LGBT, Jews, Muslims, atheists, the disabled, veterans, the elderly, and working and middle class people of all colors. From my view, only well to-do white Christians can afford a Trump presidency. Let's unite and make sure that does NOT happen!

[bravenak]

97. I agree, good post!

[EndElectoral]

96. Great organization - NCAC - National Coalition Against Censorship

http://ncac.org/issue/political-dissent

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?”

— President Thomas Jefferson

[Waiting For Everyman]

98. Oh well!

I can't help about the shape I'm in
I can't sing, I ain't pretty and my legs are thin
But don't ask me what I think of you
I might not give the answer that you want me to

Oh well

Now, when I talked to God I knew he'd understand
He said, "Stick by me and I'll be your guiding hand
But don't ask me what I think of you
I might not give the answer that you want me to"

Oh well

[merrily]

103. What is it called when a poster boldly denies something no one claimed in the first place?

Oh, yeah, that's it. They are cute, though!

[bbgrunt]

108. One person's trash is another's truth

[Fumesucker]

110. I haven't seen much trashing of Biden going on

I'm probably as guilty of that as anyone, pointing out how the Drug Czar was his idea and how he voted for the IWR and the bankruptcy bill and his role in the Anita Hill imbroglio.

But for the most part Biden is popular on DU.

[Rex]

112. I cannot wait until the new rules are in place!

[bravenak]

114. Can't come too soon!

[betsuni]

113. June 15th is St. Vitus' Day

Patron saint of dancers and entertainers, protector against lightning strikes, animal attacks and oversleeping. Sounds about right.

[bravenak]

115. I feel like rejoicing, it has been so bad

[betsuni]

117. It has been bad. But that makes the joicing and rejoicing all the sweeter.

And soon after June 15th's dance party comes the summer solstice -- my turn to bring the sacrifice this year! Hey, nonny no!

[azurnoir]

118. and what is it you'll be sacrificing ?

[betsuni]

120. Oh, haven't decided.

Food & Wine magazine has a good article about Summer Solstice Sacrifice BBQ ideas, and then of course I'll have to find out if any guests are allergic to my sacrifice choice.

[azurnoir]

121. be sure to let us know ummmkay?

[betsuni]

122. K

[azurnoir]

161. I was actually thinking something like goat the sacrificial type

unless of course you're vegan then the effigy of a sacrificial goat

[VulgarPoet]

140. Ever done a pig in a fire pit?

Done right, it might be the best damn thing you've ever tasted, and there's the whole anachronistic bent that makes it perfect for Solstice sacrifices. Wish I could do it here, but I don't have the land to dig a pit out in :/

[betsuni]

147. I wish. Nothing better than roasted pigs, nothing.

[VulgarPoet]

149. I did it once.

I think I was like 11 or 12 helping to dig that pit out-- everything from those years just blurs together 10 years later, but my god. It was the sweetest meat. Part of why when I'm actually at a comfortable enough place to do it, I want to buy a ranch home, preferably back home in Texas somewhere, with maybe a half an acre of land or something. Grow the herbs for my craft on a quarter of my land, have a pair of fire pits, one for bonfires, one for pig roasting, and just somewhere where I can relive the happier moments of my childhood.

I've got a really bad bend towards nostalgia.

[Warren DeMontague]

136. Have you ever seen the televised

St. Vitus subcommittee prize

[betsuni]

146. No, haven't!

[Warren DeMontague]

159. investigation dance, those ants-in-pants glances

well, look behind the eyes,
it's a hollow, hallowed anesthetized
"save my own ass, screw these guys"
smoke-and-mirrors
lock down

[B Calm]

126. Yes it would be nice to come together. So until Bernie official loses/drops out and Hillary

is still presumably the nominee it would be fair that anti Bernie posts during this time not be allowed too. After all our focus needs to be on Trump, not Bernie bashing.

[beachbum bob]

130. skinner will be busy house cleaning everyday I think

[Android3.14]

131. Or be antisemitic

Unless you are a Hillary supporter.

[VulgarPoet]

142. I considered putting that little bit of nastiness in my sig bar.

Y'know, an ever present reminder that racism is alive and well even in a contingent of folks who've suffered the worst from it... But that's a barb too far, in my opinion. Not something I'm capable of doing.

[hobbit709]

132. The irony of that coming from you.

[Vinca]

133. Ach! You VILL luff Hillary. Ve demand it!

[marble falls]

139. Amen. You said it all. Bring on Trump! All we need is either Bernie or Hillary!

[berni_mccoy]

141. Ain't you sweet.

[Betty Karlson]

143. We don't have a nominee yet. And California will vote in a few days.

So give your forgone conclusions a rest please. They are repelling.

[Gothmog]

144. There is no state actor on DU and so the First Amendment does not apply

The First Amendment only applies to actions by the state or a state actor. DU is a private organization and is not a state actor and is not subject to the First Amendment. It is Skinner's site and his rules control.

[Shadowflash]

151. What nominee?

nt

[HumanityExperiment]

152. ..bubble initiative...

HRC supporters here are heavily invested in this June 15th date... it's the kickoff for their bubble initiative 2.0, the HRC echo chamber technology is unsurpassed

The purging will be brutal, it will be vindictive, and absolute

This 'fight' against Trump with HRC's unfavorables at historic levels will be quite the three ring circus, grab your popcorn, sit back and just watch.. no need to post

If you do post, then know the rules and use them accordingly to make your point.. it's not that difficult to tweak HRC supporters here

[gordianot]

154. I already miss Obama he had class.

I absolutely hated his trade deals and willingness for the grand bargain on Social Security. His Secretary of State was terrible but I always figured there was a deal made there and Obama remained loyal to his people. Barack Obama was cool and collected in the face of the most raw bigoted racism and when he spoke out he stung the smug.

Actually the next 4 weeks may be more fascinating than the last 4 years. DU has been a good place to come and vent but alas no more. Who knows DU may become a good place to share a laugh if it lightens up I will buy a star, but you can never again vent on DU.

[StevieM]

166. Saying that President Obama made a deal to make Hillary Secretary of State is accusing him

of breaking the law. Any such deal would have been illegal.

President Obama named Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State because he wanted her to serve in his administration. And she did an outstanding job IMO.

[gordianot]

175. I disagree but so be it call it an understanding.

Historians are sure to be interested in the Clinton State Department and it looks as if many of the deepest secrets will be known. Legality with some people seems to be a push.

[StevieM]

176. I believe that historians will accept President Obama's version in its entirety, which is that

she was shocked when he offered it and he had to talk her into taking the job. And it never came up until after the election.

I kind of understand why people who don't like Hillary refuse to believe this. After all, if it's true then that means that Hillary went all out to help Obama win the election for no other reason than because she loves the country and wanted to do the right thing. Some people can't allow themselves to accept that.

[Prism]

160. I solemnly promise

Come June 15th, I won't post any weirdly creepy and highly dramatic photos of myself behind prison bars because I'm not allowed to troll around the site.

Pinky dinky swear.

[ismnotwasm]

171. Oh dear.

A wit

"Let us work without reasoning,' said Martin; 'it is the only way to make life endurable"


Voltaire, Candide

[AgingAmerican]

168. At which time 'forced vacations' will come back

Can't wait!