Reminder: Obama would be banned from Democratic Underground.

[bananas]

Obama's proposed cuts to Social Security should be LOUDLY and severely opposed.

He's made steps forward in other areas, but any cuts to Social Security would be a step backwards.
Although he didn't get us the public option, carbon caps, gay marriage, etc,
he has taken our country baby steps forward on these issues.

But ANY cuts to Social Security or Medicare would be a step backward,
and should be strongly and loudly criticized and opposed.

Some references for those who forgot or were unaware:

Obama: "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4422945&mesg_id=4422945

Skinner: "We expect all of our members to support equal rights for all people, regardless of sexual orientation. That includes the right to marry. ... If you are opposed to gay rights, you are a homophobe. Don't share that particular point of view here or else you're going to get banned. You've been warned."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1324374&mesg_id=1324374

[Dappleganger]

1. ..

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

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

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Zing!

[AlabamaLibrul]

4. but but but....

he's a fierce advocate? michele bachmann might be the next president?

:scared:

[jaxx]

5. Now that's a stretch.

[Bobbie Jo]

12. Just more flamebait.

SSDD

popcorn, yadda yadda, etc....

[Number23]

42. One of those really bad stretches where you hear an unfortunate "pop"

And accidentally cut one.

[Solomon]

60. First we primary him, then we ban him from DU

:rofl:

[piratefish08]

6. why do you love Michelle Bachmann?

:rofl:

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

45. Because she wants to strengthen Medicare and Social Security

and because she is all for recognizing all marriages.

She's such a warm-hearted sweetie.

[woo me with science]

7. It is appalling, disgusting, and horrifying.

If espousing cuts to Social Security and/or Medicare benefits doesn't count as a Republican position, what does?

We are not talking some minor issue here. Defense of the most vulnerable among us has always been at the core of what it means to be a Democrat.

How dare any principled Democrat make excuses for this trojan horse of an agenda.

[bananas]

9. +1000. nt

[demosincebirth]

23. Many on the other side hold the opposte view. How interesting.

[woo me with science]

28. What "opposite view"?

Care to put the "opposite view" into words?

[bananas]

49. Good question - but no answer. nt

[Kaleko]

52. Yeah, I would like to see the "opposite view" spelled out, too,

(because once you do, it's clear as day that it is irrational and indefensible.)

LOL.

[SammyWinstonJack]

31. +100000!

:applause:

[gkhouston]

43. Oh, but we're *improving* it!

Did you know our entitlements program is obese? Time to get trim and strong!! :bounce:

[neverforget]

8. mmmm popcorn and beer

:popcorn: :beer:

[WorseBeforeBetter]

10. But his views on marriage equality are evolving, silly!

Patience. Tsk.

[upi402]

11. except that Skinner is a big Obama supporter

I saw an interview where he said that recently. So maybe not banned from DU.

[Cool Logic]

14. There is nothing unusual about that. RHIP

(Rank has its privileges)

[bananas]

19. Skinner: "this is a litmus test issue, because we are talking about REAL PEOPLE"

"But this is a litmus test issue, because we are talking about REAL PEOPLE, our fellow members of this community."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1324374&mesg_id=1324374

Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Thu Nov-04-04 07:30 PM
Original message

<snip>

We have very few litmus test issues on DU. We permit members to be pro-life or pro-gun or whatever, provided that they are generally on our side.

But this is a litmus test issue, because we are talking about REAL PEOPLE, our fellow members of this community. I simply will not tolerate the idea of some DU members arguing that other DU members are not deserving of full and equal rights. This is a moral issue. If DU had existed back during the civil rights movement, I hope that we would all agree that this was not the place to discuss whether blacks deserve civil rights.

<snip>

Let's not take a step backwards on Social Security or Medicare.
We are talking about REAL PEOPLE, our fellow members of this community.

[indurancevile]

55. 1/3 of retirees depend on social security for 90% or more of their income.

2/3 depend on it for 50% or more of their income.

we're talking life & death here. "rights" are immaterial if you're dead. i think social security is about the biggest moral issue going.

[bananas]

66. Absolutely agree. nt

[Smarmie Doofus]

13. If it we're up to me....

I'd ban him from more than just DU.

[Demeter]

44. + A MILLION

[provis99]

15. nonsense. Obama sets the standard for DU these days.

If he were an actual liberal, then I'd agree he'd likely be banned.

[ProSense]

18. "If he were an actual liberal, then I'd agree he'd likely be banned."

Does that mean that anyone still here is not "an actual liberal"?

[ProSense]

16. Ooooh, my turn:

Kucinich "would be banned" for calling for the President's impeachment!

Hillary "would be banned" for agreeing with Obama!

Bill Clinton "would be banned" for calling for cuts to Social Security.

Wheee!!!!

[DevonRex]

17. Hahaha!

Great post.

[bananas]

20. Nope - Skinner specifically made this a litmus test issue

Skinner specifically made this a litmus test for DU:
"But this is a litmus test issue, because we are talking about REAL PEOPLE, our fellow members of this community. I simply will not tolerate the idea of some DU members arguing that other DU members are not deserving of full and equal rights. This is a moral issue. If DU had existed back during the civil rights movement, I hope that we would all agree that this was not the place to discuss whether blacks deserve civil rights."

The other items are not litmus test issues.
Nice try at changing the subject and thread-jacking.

[ProSense]

29. I see:

So based on a 2004 post about DU rules, none of the top three Democratic candidates should have been supported at DU? In fact, all three would have been banned based on the OP premise.

Seems a little desperate.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. Does Obama now support gay marriage? Or, have the rules changed?

:shrug:

[ProSense]

34. Were the rules

different during the 2008 primary?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

35. Do you think the rules should be enforced? Or, not?

Or, does that fall under the "Some animals are more equal than other animals" rule?

[bananas]

37. Supporting a politician doesn't mean supporting all their policies

I strongly support Obama's efforts at nuclear arms control - something he was unanimously awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for.
And the Nobel committee said that part of the reason for awarding it to him so early in his presidency was to support and encourage him to make stronger efforts during his presidency. And he has been following through on that.
Valerie Plame and others have realized we have to get to "Global Zero" - no nuclear weapons anywhere on earth. Obama has not come out for that, but at least his efforts on arms control are a big step in the right direction.

I strongly oppose Obama giving out more nuclear loan guarantees - I said they would be expensive boondoggles, and Entergy, Exelon, and Constellation all cancelled their plans for new reactors because "the numbers just don't work", as the CEO of Entergy put it. And that was before Fukushima. I still support him because he is taking positive steps regarding most other environment and energy issues.

Obama's position on gay marriage is so offensive that it violates one of the few DU litmus tests and would result in him being banned. But we still support him as a politician because he is making steps in the right direction.

Obama's proposals to cut Social Security and Medicare are extremely offensive. It's one of the few issues he's taking a step backwards on. And it will cost votes in 2012, not just for him, but for other Democrats as well.

[Bobbie Jo]

30. Another submission...

Hamsher "would be banned":

Justifying defeat of Democratic candidates
Insensitive Bigotry
Disrespectful nicknames,crude insults, or RW smears against Democrats

Next?

[JoePhilly]

59. Fiengold voted against closing GITMO.

[demosincebirth]

21. Another dead brain statement.

[WillyT]

22. LOL !!! - K & R !!!

Very good!

:evilgrin:

:bounce:

:hi:

[dionysus]

24. let's all set sail on the good ship USS Flamebait...

[DevonRex]

27. Seems like a cruise ship that just goes round and round and round.

Only docks to resupply the bait.

[Lucian]

25. But it's okay for Obama because he's a Democrat.

:eyes:

If I said I was against gay marriage right now, my ass would be hitting the door on the way out of this website, right? Yes.

[Solly Mack]

26. I'm loving this thread.

K&R

Rules are rules (and all that)

[Electric Monk]

33. Me too

[Zorra]

36. Huh. That's fact, and pretty much undeniable fact..

Logic equation:

If DU guidelines state:

"...If you are opposed to gay rights, you are a homophobe. Don't share that particular point of view here or else you're going to get banned..."

And: Obama believes that:

"....marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage."

Then: Obama is a homophobe as defined by DU guidelines, and would be banned if he posted this sentiment at DU and DU guidelines were then enforced in this situation.

DU rocks.

Thank you for supporting human rights and civil rights.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

46. :)

:thumbsup:

[slay]

38. K&R

this is how out of touch with progressive values Obama is. Everyone should at least recognize and acknowledge this.

[bananas]

64. Yup - that's the point of the thread. nt

[Dr. Strange]

39. Would be?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=181447

[bananas]

50. LOL!

:rofl:

[Blue-Jay]

40. .

[hifiguy]

41. And well he should be

He is a DINO. FDR and LBJ are rolling in their graves at his using SS as a bargaining chip with the fascist assholes who always opposed anything to mitigate inequality.

[bananas]

65. "FDR and LBJ are rolling in their graves at his using SS as a bargaining chip" - well said. nt

[nashville_brook]

47. devastating observation.

:thumbsup:

[Brickbat]

48. Heh.

K&R.

[NYC Liberal]

51. No, he would not. Did you even read what Skinner wrote? nt

[bananas]

53. Skinner wrote: "this is a litmus test issue... That includes the right to marry."

I don't see any weasel words, do you?

[NYC Liberal]

56. You really need to read what Skinner wrote (and has written since).

1.) Skinner said, "Don't share that particular point of view here." Unless Obama advocated against marriage equality on DU, he would not be banned for it.

2.) He has (correctly) called Obama "the most pro-gay president in history" and "a Democrat and a supporter of gay rights" (also obviously correct).

3.) He has also said: "On the right to marry, it should be noted that he {Obama} opposed prop 8 in California, so even on that issue his position is somewhat nuanced."

You should peruse http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4689492&mesg_id=4689492">this thread for the posts containing the above quotes and more of what Skinner has had to say about this.

[bananas]

58. In that thread, Skinner reiterated that "opposition to gay marriage is not permitted here on DU"

in post #41 of the thread you just linked to: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4689492&mesg_id=4689885

Sure, if Obama kept his mouth shout about gay marriage, he'd be allowed to post here, but how likely is that? Especially considering that it's a litmus test issue - you really think he would just blow off all the thousands of DUers asking him about it? I don't think so, I think he'd give a straight answer.

[NYC Liberal]

61. We're talking about fantasy, not reality. So anything could happen.

Your claim in your thread title -- "Obama would be banned from Democratic Underground." -- is hypothetical conjecture, not fact.

Go ask Skinner in AtA if you want facts.

[bananas]

67. So you didn't see any weasel words either - good.

Skinner and Obama's statements were both very clear.

[Skittles]

54. I had to look closely

to ensure Obama not giving us the finger in that pic

[cali]

57. reminder: YOU don't run DU. YOU are not Skinner.

[Starboard Tack]

62. "Obama's proposed cuts to Social Security should be LOUDLY and severely opposed."

What specific cuts would those be?
Why do you care how he feels about marriage? He has never expressed a desire to interfere with states' rights or support a constitutional amendment on marriage being restricted to heterosexuals.
Do you have an alternative candidate you think could beat him next year or do you have some other agenda?
It is time to start rallying around our leader and leave the criticism to our opponents.

[TNLib]

63. No he wouldn't there plenty of DLC posters on DU that are never banned

:eyes: