Question for frustrated, disillusioned DU'ers

[Sheepshank]

There seems to be a high chance that on any pro-Obama thread, the same talking points against much of Obama's actions are stated. The conversation goes further into influx of trolls, and how dissenters are actually true Dems with the right, no, necessity to speak out. The people calling for the purging of trolls are slapped down as doing little more that proffering an across the board STFU.

So my two questions to those Dems truly not happy with Obama,
1: Do you really expect me to believe there are no plants, trolls, paid RW shills posting on DU?
2: How am I supposed to tell the difference?

[Smarmie Doofus]

1. Post count. n/t

[begin_within]

2. I'll give it a shot.

1. No.

2. Don't even bother trying to tell the difference. The two "parties" are now just factions of a single Corporate Party, differing mainly on social issues that will never be resolved because they are based on belief systems. Both parties now favor the ruling class and corporate power structure. The endless manufactured talking points, scandal-of-the-day, and periodic sideshows masquerading as "elections" are simply distractions designed to get you to think there is still a democracy at work. The real power structure remains no matter who "wins" one of the sideshows. "Who wins" has as much impact on the real power structure as who wins American Idol or Monday Night Football does.

[leftstreet]

4. Troll!

:hi:

Excellent post!

:toast:

[Blecht]

5. This I'd recommend

Not the OP.

[Sherman A1]

33. Agreed & Well Said

This is Precisely what has happened. Until there is public financing of elections, it will continue (perhaps some variations on the theme, however it will be essentially the same). If we want to solve our problems, we have to get money out of the election process or there will be no real debate of ideas.

[spin]

6. +1000 (n/t)

[jaxx]

7. I think it is a grave mistake to say both parties are the same.

They are different on social, fiscal, and legislative issues. Read what those teabagger pubs want to do to this country and then be glad there are Democrats.

[leftstreet]

14. The poster made the distinction

"...differing mainly on social issues that will never be resolved because they are based on belief systems."

[jaxx]

21. You can't discount the others.

[MADem]

29. Concur.

I look askance at anyone who repeats that point. I mean, really, no one can believe that once informed--and it's not that hard to read a party platform. There are clear and abiding differences. Suggesting otherwise is a "Makes me wonder" thing.

[Webster Green]

8. Indeed.

You're channeling George Carlin.

"It's a big club, and you ain't in it".

[hibbing]

11. agree with a caveat

Hi,
I generally agree with you and realize that both parties are controlled by their corporate masters. However, do you think the actions Al Gore as president would have been the same as the idiot son after the bombings in NYC? The morally unjustified war in Iraq being my main issue?

Peace

[begin_within]

18. No of course not. The individual politicians are not all identical.

Gore would have been a different President than Bush. But the real power structure that has America in its grip remains in place no matter who gets elected. Although I admire him for his strident campaign to raise awareness of global climate change, Al Gore was still a DLC candidate.

[Tx4obama]

12. Fifteen Differences Between Democrats And Republicans

Fifteen Differences Between Democrats And Republicans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1855320

[hfojvt]

13. I find that to be somewhat simplistic

Because there are clearly real differences.

For my favorite, and thus oft-repeated example. Consider just two proposals on page 3, A - the making work pay credit, and B - a payroll tax cut. http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxcompromise2010.pdf

A - gives 28.9% of $57 billion in benefits to the bottom 40%
gives 23.4% of $57 billion in benefits to the top 20%

B - gives 12.1% of $112 billion in benefits to the bottom 40%
gives 46.4% of $112 billion in benefits to the top 20%

Neither of those two proposals will have "much impact on the real power structure" but there are still substantial differences in that one favors the bottom 40% and one clearly does not.

Of course, now Obama, and even the CBPP is pushing option B, but we could have had much more progressive tax and budget impacts IF ONLY we had won the 2010 midterms.

It would not have changed "the real power structure". The rich would still be rich, and powerful, but the working class would be better off, substantially, with Democrats in power.

[xiamiam]

26. Yes..agreed..but the truth is that in America we still have one vote each..we dont have to vote

for the given choice..really, we dont..we just have to wake up

[Kaleko]

27. That is the view from an altitude

where you can see the entire system as a whole.

People incapable of holding this vision always confuse the visionaries with petty, moralizing critics with hateful attitudes. Nothing could be further from the truth, but you can't make lower altitude denizens see what is out of their reach, too big for their narrow scopes.

Compassion follows the outrage when we're done with raging against the world views people naturally hold at their stage of development. Evolution is going into further empathy and deeper understanding with What Is.

[hfojvt]

3. No

and what difference does it really make?

If I say "X is true" or a paid, or volunteer RW shill says "X is true" the relevant question is still related to the facts. Is X, in fact, true, or false.

One person noted the difference between a scientist and a politician. When a scientist hears somebody says something he/she asks "is it true?" whereas the politician asks "why did they say it?"

And the politician is never gonna believe the simple answer "uhm, because they think it is true" because truth is more like cards to them than a real inquiry. A person is supposed to hold onto whatever truths they have, until they can use those truths as trump to win the hand in some power play.

[Union Scribe]

9. How am I supposed to tell you're not a troll?

[Sheepshank]

10. if I were, how could you tell ;)?

What would make you think I may NOT be a troll?

[Union Scribe]

15. If we're going to be suspicious, you can't act above suspicion.

To me, this is what a troll would do: Post shit about trolls, pointing fingers and suggesting that there is essentially no way to differentiate these dangerous operatives from normal apple-pie-loving Americans. Then I'd play dumb as a stump and watch the thread crash and burn in a wreckage of accusations, recriminations, and innuendo.

[BrightSideOfLife]

16. The Obama Administration decided that because I'm a Progressive

I don't matter. That's all. Not sure what you mean by disclaiming dissatisfaction with the current "bend over for the right" policy of the administration as being a "Troll" is all about there.
Just expressing my total devastation at watching FDR's legacy being undermined while proclaiming how much we admire Reagan.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

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

[BrightSideOfLife]

20. What in the world does my "52 posts" have to do with anything?

Why do I have to defend my "progressive credentials" to your sorry a__?
Tired of the "Defend him at no matter what he does" crowd.

[sabrina 1]

34. You don't have to defend yourself and airc, it is against the rules

for members to attack others based on their post count.

Welcome to DU. Sadly, even though many are still in denial, you are in the majority nationally and no amount of false claims that we are over-run with trolls is going to change that. What WILL change is for the WH to start acting like they are Democrats and stop caving to Republicans. I don't even care if they lose, but put up a fight so we KNOW which side they are on.

[xiamiam]

28. right ..and why is your profile unavailable..nt

[MADem]

30. I think that "Hide profile" stuff needs to go.

You can limit what you say about yourself, but the concealment, in and of itself, is offputting.

[BrightSideOfLife]

36. Gee, maybe because I'm not an effing "DU expert" like you.

[Cali_Democrat]

32. Your profile is hidden

How do we know you're not a paid Republican operative?

[BrightSideOfLife]

35. Yeah, I don't own the stupid website.

How do I know the moon isn't cheese.

[Starry Messenger]

19. I suspect that all of these omg trolls!!!11 posts are by trolls.

It's a bad faith posting with intent to disrupt.

If you can't tell the difference between the left wing and the right wing, then your political acumen is severely lacking.

[petronius]

22. I tend to gloss over these troll-related threads, but my answers are

1. I doubt if people who aren't trolls really care what you believe on that point, and why should they?

2. Why should you try? Either you agree with what a person posts or not, find it worth reading or not, choose to reply or not. How does another poster's motivation for being here really impact your experience of DU? (If the only answer to that is that some people are consistently useless, just hit Ignore - it still doesn't matter why they're here)...

[gkhouston]

24. +1. n/t

[EFerrari]

23. Calling for the purging of trolls is against the board rules.

Why would anyone do that unless they've decided to be disruptive?

And, seriously, if after all the time you've been here you can't tell the difference between members of this community and trolls, why are you here?

[Systematic Chaos]

25. Hello cave twats.

:hi:

[Morning Dew]

31. Hell, half the time I don't even look to see who the poster is.

So, Message - not Messenger.