In your opinion, is DU too critical of Obama, not critical enough of Obama, or just right ...

[jefferson_dem]

in terms of criticism of Obama?

[xchrom]

1. not critical enough. nt

[jefferson_dem]

2. Thanks for your vote.

:hi:

[xchrom]

4. ...

:hi:

[molly77]

71. Obama should not be blamed.

He has a clinton administration. WE have a fascist govt. The whole system has got to go before WE see change. Do you remember the joy on Obama's face and his family's when he first came into office. They all look sad now. Esp. the younger daughter.

When Obama vetoed the bill that would have given the banks retroactive immunity to steal , plunder and foreclose...he made a statement. Maybe it is only important to those who might lose their homes. That bill passed unanimously in the Senate.

I still appreciate my president. I do not appreciate the system he has to work in.How much more proof do we need that our govt. is fascist?

[jpgray]

3. Someone's been posting in my forum!

Hopefully Goldilocks doesn't get eaten.

[Cant trust em]

5. Since it is a population of the most partisan democrats possible, it's probably about right.

There are some people who defend him and some people who rip him a new one. Shouldn't be too surprising to see a bit of both.

I do think that there is probably a silent majority of people who are mostly supportive though. Internet chat boards tend to be more about voicing negative emotions than patting each other on the back.

[boppers]

6. The beatings will continue until morale improves.

Polls show much stronger support than we see on DU, and I think you have a great point about partisans, so, I'll give you a pat on the back for that. :)

[ProSense]

7. There is a difference between

constructive criticism and criticism designed to tear down the President. A lot of the criticism isn't constructive. How can anyone view as constructive criticism the claims that the President is making things worse, that he's a "trojan horse" and a "bad man," and that everything he does is worthless?

[jefferson_dem]

10. That's an important consideration.

There's a question about the degree of criticism (how much) and the nature of criticism (how constructive...or fair).

Personally, I think there's too much, unconstructive criticism...but everybody probably already knew that.

[uppityperson]

17. This is what I see also. There is a difference between constructive criticism and

dichotomous thinking (wonderful or evil).

[harun]

81. Also being critical doesn't always mean you don't support the person.

[stray cat]

8. Rationale, logical, informed, practical, knowledgeable, justified are what I would like to see

I could care less whether it was critical or not critical - just not stupid or ignorant or a left version of Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin

[Hissyspit]

20. Hunh.

That's funny.

[OregonBlue]

48. Then you're on the wrong board.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

9. No possible way to measure that...

...there are too may variables.

As an example, a full-blown, 100% "he can do no wrong" Obama supporter could make a critical statement that others of that ilk might find "too critical."

And by the same token, an Obama basher might offer words of praise and piss off his / her fellow Obama bashers.

And we know that we have all of those stripes on DU. My personal feeling is that what's left of the middle class / working class is hemorrhaging, and I'm really fucking sick of Obama's obsession with "reaching across the aisle" for "partners," so we probably are not critical enough.

[jannyk]

11. If you'd asked me a couple of weeks ago, I'd have said not enough..

... we lost many brilliant and insightful DU'ers that dared to voice what, apparently, the majority were secretly thinking/feeling.

Now I think it's just right and, with the 'fear factor' removed, the level of discussion and debate has improved. DU is again a learning tool and not just a heavily vetted propaganda machine.

[jefferson_dem]

14. Who got tossed for voicing what the "majority were secretly thinking/feeling"?

Do you have examples? Not an attack. I'm genuinely curious.

[jannyk]

21. I do have examples, yes.

But I believe 'naming names' is still an act that can earn one an unwelcome pizza.

:scared:

[jefferson_dem]

31. Well then.

Perhaps you could share an example of the sorts of things they got tossed for that you claim the majority believes.

[Pisces]

38. The only people gone are the ones disgusted with the way the site has turned. True blue dems

that can't stomach the crap churned out on every thread.

[polichick]

15. I really hope those who were kicked out have been invited back...

...but haven't seen anything about it.

[polichick]

12. It is what it is - people post what they're thinking and feeling, as it should be. nt

[Scurrilous]

13. I think Obama is a bad man!!1!

BAD!

[bullimiami]

16. I think too critical. But I dont begrudge anyone voicing theirs.

What he is doing should be no surprise. Obama has always been very centrist and always worked with the opposition.
Regardless of the stupid spin about him being a leftist and communist.

I think the average DUer is left of him.

I voted for Kucinich in the primary knowing he had no chance and truly there was no candidate I truly felt for.
The field was chock full of very centrist, corporate Dems.

Im not seeing a big difference between Clinton and Obama. I was often disappointed with Clinton but on balance he was better than average and much better than any Republican.

[LonePirate]

18. Not enough. I don't think he's the President he portrayed himself as during the 2008 campaign

[DFLforever]

19. Lots of bad faith criticism of the President on DU

- to put it nicely.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

22. Too critical IMHO

without a doubt. Some of it is certainly justified and/or constructive but a lot of it seems to be rather inflammatory, not based on any real facts (i.e. speculative), and/or lacking the appropriate context.

[Pirate Smile]

23. It is too disgusting to even visit anymore. Sometimes I do out of habit but that is ending quickly.

It'll continue to spiral into the toxic garbage that it has become since the new rules came into effect.

[livetohike]

24. Same here. Been here since March 2004 and

the site has become a "bash Obama" and "bash all the Democrats we don't like site". I came here as a refuge from the media that are against all Democrats. It used to be a refuge.

[sammytko]

27. yes, i might not post much, but I was reading since it started

makes me very angry to see Barrack treated so bad. I'm going back to Salon, even if I have to pay to post.

[jefferson_dem]

30. I hear you, Pirate Smile.

This place is starting to spiral around the proverbial rhetorical drain. But ... I encourage you to hang tough! We need voices like yours on DU. :)

[babylonsister]

54. I'm getting to the point where I don't want to be here anymore

either-what's the point? I know there are many people out there who are after Obama, but didn't think I'd see that or see it be allowed here.

[jefferson_dem]

56. Not unlinke hate radio in terms of persistent, half-baked criticisms and smears of Obama.

That's no exaggeration.

[mgcgulfcoast]

25. just about right

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sammytko]

28. AMEN!

[boppers]

32. +1. I can't imagine what this place looks like without "Ignore".

I thank the forum gods everyday for that little feature.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OregonBlue]

33. Today alone Obama was called a Reaganite and evil on DU and we have to even ask this question?

:eyes: :eyes:

[jefferson_dem]

34. In the past few hours, I've seen Obama called a "whore" and "NOBAMA".

What has happened to this place?

[Union Scribe]

36. So click alert

like I do when I see rule violations. That is the procedure, yes?

[jefferson_dem]

40. I did.

Hopefully, you would do the same.

[Union Scribe]

41. I told you, I have.

And the system seems to work quite well. But I don't then feel the need to start a thread insinuating the whole site is rotten because someone said something out of bounds.

[jefferson_dem]

45. I didn't insinuate shit.

I posted a poll that asks about the political dialoge on DU with legit value options. If that makes you feel all paranoid and defensive, that's your problem. Deal with it.

You may not know this but I've been here for a long long time. I've seen shit come and shit go...this is just the latest version.

Oh, keep hitting that alert button, eh.

[OregonBlue]

37. Sounds about right. Again, do we even have to ask this question? Seems pretty obvious.

[Telly Savalas]

58. That's not criticism. That's just inane bullshit.

This place is sorely lacking in reasoned criticism of Obama. It's hard for anyone to get motivated to write a thoughtful criticism of the President when instead of stimulating an honest discussion, it will just be met by declarations of Obama's infallibility or a bunch of one-dimensional leftist bumpersticker slogans written in all caps accusing the President of being the second coming of Mussolini.

[Pisces]

35. This place sometimes resembles Free Republic in the type of posts about our President.

[Strelnikov_]

39. Sometimes?

The shark has been jumped.

[Pisces]

42. I was being generous.

[Exilednight]

50. I agree. The way some on here defend Obama's policy without applying ..............

rational, much less critical, thought reminds me of the way Freepers defended Bush.

[Warren Stupidity]

43. Is that you, goldilocks?

[tekisui]

44. I don't think it is possible to be 'too critical', what is possible and happens

is posters make it too personal. When posters, from all perspectives, focus on the personality of Obama or react to posts as if there was an affront on their person, there is no meaningful discourse.

There cannot be too much criticism of policies and actions. Calling him names or defending the person over the policies gets us no where.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AndrewP]

47. Criticism is fine. It's not a fan club. But some can be over the top at times.

I sure the hell would take President Obama over that nutjob from Arizona and the flake from Alaska.

Name calling and nicknames for the President aren't something I like. But I don't think it's wrong to point out things we would like him to do better.

[OregonBlue]

49. Agreed. But the Obama is evil, Obama is a bad man, Obama is worse that Bush, threads tend to get

rec'd and have turned off a lot of posters lately. The last 2 weeks I could have been reading Free Republic for all the difference. Sad to say that a few people who hate the president and have nothing to say constructive but only want to tear him down are running this board a good deal of the time. Some days it's absolutely stomach turning.

[Still a Democrat]

82. This

Questioning startegy, expressing disappointment, etc, is fine. It's the view that Obama is not really a progressive or even an evil corporate booster that are problematic.

[Bluenorthwest]

51. I was not aware that DU had taken an editorial stand on Obama

nor that there was a collective mind called DU. This looks to me like a place filled with individual posters. Does DU smoke too much? Is DU hitting the sauce? Do these pants make DU look fat?

[jefferson_dem]

55. Why have a mission, standards, rules, a recognizable community culture...?

After all, we're just a bunch of random folks who just happened to stumble upon these forums and occasionally post something or other.

Uh huh...

[Lucinda]

52. All of the above. Depending on the issue involved. n/t

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[krawhitham]

57. Way to too critical, to the point they are driving members away

[pnwmom]

60. You're not kidding. Lots of long time members

have thrown in the towel.

They should call this ArnarchistUnderground or LibertarianUnderground (Libertarianism being anarchy for rich people.)

[Ikonoklast]

77. This. You cannot call yourself one thing, but in truth be the complete opposite.

Like the self-described 'Dems' here that have nothing good to say about...actual Democrats.

[Kaleva]

79. Odd isn't it.

"Like the self-described 'Dems' here that have nothing good to say about...actual Democrats."

[Forkboy]

86. Been here since 2001. Watched a lot of good people walk away.

Would you like to discuss old timers walking away and why?

[craigmatic]

59. I think we get overly critical of Obama sometimes. His flaw is that he's bad at selling his

achievements. He really doesn't talk about what he's done and alot of it goes unappreciated. He's not nearly as bad as people make him out to be but he can still do more. It's going to take him leaving office in order for us to fully appreciate him.

[Writer]

61. There should be an option for "way too goddamned fucking critical." n/t

[woo me with science]

62. ...

[Cali_Democrat]

63. Overall I would say too critical, but some of the criticism is warranted.

Regardless of what DU thinks, Obama and the Dems have 2 years to get their shit together before the 2012 election.

2 years is a long time in politics and overall I'm still optimistic although it's getting harder.

[jefferson_dem]

64. A solid majority says "too critical".

Interesting but not surprising. ...The real silent majority.

[BlueGirlRedState]

65. So this is where y'all are...

I've been wondering. Reading over the posts on this thread, I wish it had the FB feature of being able to "like" your comments. I have been a member for a long time, but my posting count is low. I don't relish being verbally run over by the majority who post on DU. I'm a "stand by your man" woman when it comes to Obama, Mrs. O, and the little Obamaettes. He's not perfect and I'd love to see him get a little more in your face. But he's doing what he said he would do, and he's been trying since his speech at the 2004 convention to bring back the "United States of America."

Interesting to read this thread and see many of the names of posters I've come to rely on are feeling the way I do. Surely what DU has become is not what it was envisioned to be.

[jefferson_dem]

67. Excellent post, BlueGirlRedState!

Thanks.

...and don't forget to "Keep Austin Weird". :)

[BlueGirlRedState]

68. Instead, it's keep Waco Wacko

Talk about a long row to hoe!!!

[jberryhill]

66. Like the tilt of local newspaper comments...

Djever notice how the comment section of your local paper is overrun by people who seemingly have nothing to do all day but listen to Rush Limbaugh?

There are some prolific posters on DU who pretty much pump out any attack on Obama that pops into their head, and the discussion is dominated by the unending impulsiveness of a hyperactive few with little self control and a lot of time.

[snot]

69. I note that

the total who think Obama deserves as much criticism as he gets here or more is at present 88%.

[jefferson_dem]

70. Wha?

[Still a Democrat]

72. Calculator must be in the shop

That's not what I see either.

[snot]

83. Sorry; I shd stay away from math.

[political_Dem]

73. Too critical to the point of blatantly disrespecting Mr. Obama as a person.

It would be different if it were simply a matter of policy. Instead, it's a tribunal every day in which the same defendant is declared guilty repeatedly. And while the false charges are being trotted out, the vegetables and invectives fly while the torches and pitchforks light up the night sky. It's quite astounding to see.

[Meshuga]

74. From my observation...

DU is composed of people who are all three: too critical, not critical enough, and the people who go back and forth based on specific issues/actions.

People have the right to their own opinion and expectations of Obama.

[Dr.Phool]

75. Who cares?

[jefferson_dem]

76. I do.

Hence, I offered the poll in order to gauge the sentiment of DU. Since you don't care, I suggest you run along now.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

85. Those who are told by the critical "base" that that are the majority view here.

[TheKentuckian]

78. Not even close to critical enough of the President and the corporate owned Congress

Wealth is still concentrating into fewer hands, stupid Treasury exhausting wars are still raging on, the rule of law is even more of a joke than the past and is trotted out only to defend the indefensible, the fucker covered and still covers for BP and the oil industry, more and more folks slide toward poverty, he has proven to be a union buster, his education policies are far right wing to the point that Gingrich is part of the team, the bankers, the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance cartel got dibs on forming "health care reform", and he appointed some of the most bought and corrupt fuckers he could find to run the government among many other issues.

Obama and his type of politics are a runny turd in our punch bowl and he should be punted rather than revered.

If I wanted to vote for Poppy Bush and Bob Dole, I had every opportunity to do so and declined. Obama is little different and probably worse than either on civil liberties.

[Kaleva]

80. People got some extra freedom to post thier views and a few may be abusing it.

Below is a quote of a comment skinner made in the Ask the Admin sub-forum:

"We know that some prigressivs are unhappy with the President, and we've been giving people a lot of leeway to speak their minds. But frankly I'm rather appalled by the things that some DUers will say when they are given the opportunity to do so. And then I'm appalled by how many people will actually recommend those posts. Sometimes I, too, find myself wondering if I'm in the wrong place."

[TwilightGardener]

84. The manner of criticism is everything.

It can be respectfully done. It doesn't have to be endless and damaging personal teardowns. (He has no balls, he wears a pink tutu, he's stupid, he's a bad person, he's a clown, he's a patsy, he's a toady, etc.)

[Forkboy]

87. Depends on the forum you ask this in.

Serious answer: I don't know.