Now that Biden is officially nominated, can we stop bashing Democratic Representatives who are

[whttevrr]

currently running for an elected office.

Primary is over, right?

Strict adherence to no Democratic Party members being bashed, right?

[mrsadm]

1. Definitely agree

[whttevrr]

2. The purity derangement syndrome is annoying.

Fucking, ay. If I wanted to see that crap, there are a fucking shit tonne of right wing talking points available everywhere else.

[BannonsLiver]

6. Purity derangement syndrome

[GeorgiaPeanut]

49. Amazing isn't it .?

I laughed too

[Arkansas Granny]

3. Fair enough, but we need to recognize that not every criticism of a Democrat is bashing.

I serve on a lot of juries where the offending post merely disagrees with a position a Democratic figure has taken.

[Hekate]

4. Same here

[ProfessorGAC]

32. Me, Too!

The most benign criticism can trigger an alert, on occasion.

[ms liberty]

5. This. n/t

[whttevrr]

11. Support the Democratic candidate.

Period..

[anamnua]

18. Agreed NT

[ismnotwasm]

19. True enough

[Demsrule86]

20. That is wrong when we are dealing with a candidate because the alternative is a

Republican...so don't just don't. And by the way constructive criticism, holding feet to the fire...is not helpful period. Support Democrats. Now not talking about extreme cases clearly.

[whttevrr]

38. I know, right?

Get the win first.

If a member needs to be disciplined, removed, or censured afterward? Yes. After weighing actual evidence, do it.

But until the election is over? Support Democratic Candidates.

[GeorgiaPeanut]

50. Any criticism of some figures is construed as "bashing"

Those figures reign supreme and thou shalt not criticize them or else.

However, the same figures can refuse to endorse Biden and boo Hillary Clinton and that is considered to be perfectly fine.

Bizarro world is DU.

[dawg day]

7. Fortunately, Q doesn't seem to have taken over

Democratic candidates, but what if there were Q ,advocates as in the GOP? Sometimes a rogue candidate gets through in the primary. Happened in my district decades ago, mentally ill guy named Bobby got nominated over someone with a foreign name.

Just wondering... what then?

[whttevrr]

10. No

Support the Democratic candidate.

[Demsrule86]

21. One instance that happened decades ago ...is not concerning.

And what I witnessed right here where president Obama was attacked mercilessly was horrible.

[dawg day]

31. I know I was just putting that out kind of to really point out that Democrats almost never

nominate someone who is just personally totally unacceptable, unlike the GOP. That one time was a mistake-- and now that I remember, the local party refused to support his candidacy at all. (He was a real nutter- hard to explain-- he would make prank phone calls pretending he was young women TV stars.)

[Demsrule86]

33. And here is the thing about that. I would still vote for the Democrat...he can be removed

after he is in office...there is never a reason to vote for the pugs. We need numbers in order to govern.

[rgbecker]

8. In Massachusetts, the primary is not until September.

And believe or not, we have a Kennedy challenging Senator Markey for the nomination. Just gotta allow me to bash that.

Joe Kennedy III.....WTF?

[Luciferous]

9. Yeah that is a dumb move, Markey is a good Senator nt

[Demsrule86]

22. Well there have been challengers to other long term Democrats. AOC won one such primary.

I don't see why Kennedy is singled out for scorn when other have done it. Personally, I don't like primarying sitting Democrats.

[whttevrr]

30. September...?

Oh god! When will it end!

Jesus Massachusetts, Get with the program.

j/k

Yeah, primaries can get a little leeway but once the primary is over we should be all in for whichever person was chosen locally to represent the Democratic Party.

[NurseJackie]

12. Nobody is doing that.

can we stop bashing Democratic Representatives who are
currently running for an elected office.

Nobody is doing that, but... why the qualifier?

Strict adherence to no Democratic Party members being bashed, right?

Nobody is doing that.

Instead, how about if we stop using the term "bashing" as an ad hominem attack that questions the motives and intelligence of anyone who is offering sincere and legitimate criticism or holding-feet-to-the-fire?

Primary is over, right?

What does that have to do with anything? Not every disagreement or criticism can be correctly labeled as being related to the primary.

[whttevrr]

13. oh, please.

It is what it is.

[NurseJackie]

14. Ridiculous. The accusations are simply untrue.

[whttevrr]

15. Support Democratic Party Candidates.

No matter what.

[NurseJackie]

16. The "problem" you're describing does not exist.

Who do you believe is not being supported adequately enough?

[whttevrr]

24. I have seen two freshmen women of color disparaged.

Why do you fight so hard to say it isn't so?

What is your goal here?

[NurseJackie]

26. How have they been "disparaged"?

Nobody here is doing that. Perhaps elsewhere, but not here.

[whttevrr]

28. What?

You are either just being argumentative or are ignorantly obtuse.

AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib have all been subjects of since deleted and some remaining post that have been disparaging. That you advocate otherwise is very telling and makes you unworthy of future debate on this topic. You refuse to admit reality and are an annoying afterthought at this point.

Have a great day!

[NurseJackie]

39. Ad hominem

I haven't insulted you. What makes you think you have the right to attack and insult me? We disagree, but that's not justification for saying things like that to me and about me. I don't deserve that.

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue.

The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

[Hekate]

34. @@@@@

Wherever there is a pot to be stirred, right?

[whttevrr]

40. Who is shit stirring?

I'm not sure I'm following your commentary here.

[Hekate]

41. A pot can contain any kind of mush, such as corn meal mush, oatmeal, etc

Why would your mind go elsewhere?

[whttevrr]

42. what?

Why is it so hard to answer a question directly?

Who is stirring whatever in your metaphorical pot?

WTF?

[Hekate]

43. In response to a poster other than yourself, I wrote that "a pot" was being stirred....

Very short comment, and in no way referenced the contents of said pot, only that it was liable to be stirred.

Your mind jumped to shit. I wonder why? — How rude.

[whttevrr]

44. I thought the person you responded to was shit stirring

I was unclear of your position. So I asked a question.

Thank you for clarifying. Carry on.

[anamnua]

17. Occasionally a Democratic candidate can shoot their

mouth off and say something so outlandish that it adversely effects their electoral chances and has a negative spillover for their party colleagues. In these cases
a bit of tough love and focused remonstration may be necessary.
A clue to jog your memory:
There are an awful lot of Catholics in New York😅😀😀

[Sympthsical]

23. The Left bashing needs to chill

If AOC so much as breathes, there’s always a predictable brigade that swoops in to have a go or twelve at her.

There was a lot of hubris in 2016. That we could somehow afford to alienate the Left because it was in the bag. I never thought that, and I was proven right.

We need everyone. We need to smash Trump. Sanders is doing everything he can. All of my Sanders supporting friends are on board with Joe. So there are some assholes on Twitter. There always are. What is the purpose of dragging it out and around?

Too many people who are forever lecturing on “Don’t bash!” and “Unity!” out of one side of their mouths are also the same ones who never miss an opportunity to get their licks in on the Left. It hypocritical and obnoxious.

What’s the aim here? We nominated the moderate. They got what they wanted, but they’re still angry and hostile at their rival wing.

We’re very united right now. We have the same aim for November. Left bashing is divisive, and I question the motives of those who are constantly doing it.

[whttevrr]

25. I am usually: "whatever, closed that tab"

But damn... the AOC hate is real here.

[NurseJackie]

27. Ridiculous.

[whttevrr]

29. Whatever

[Hekate]

35. Ah, now we come to it. Thank you for the clarification.

[whttevrr]

37. Edit: wrong reply

nevermind

[Arazi]

36. +1 million

[anamnua]

45. I don't want to rake up the embers of another thread

Last edited Thu Aug 27, 2020, 07:14 PM - Edit history (1)

but it is disingenuous in the extreme to label expressed misgivings about recent controversial comments made by AOC as 'hate'. I had absolutely no quibbles with the woman up to this point. And my concern in no small part stems from self-inflicted damage she may have done to her re-election bid.
My issue was with the actual statement and my reaction would have been exactly the same irrespective of where its author lay on the Democratic political spectrum: left wing, centrist, establishment, progressive or whatever.

[whttevrr]

46. Oh please. Stop. She was talking about statues of white men.

It’s about the fact that a huge supermajority of statues in the Capitol are white men.

And you decided to post some EWTN religious infomercial about Saint Damien.

Link to tweet

"At no point did I say Fr. Damien was a bad figure - in fact, I explicitly stated that my observations weren’t about litigating his or any individual statue.

It’s about the fact that a huge supermajority of statues in the Capitol are white men. Barely any women or BIPOC."

~Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @AOC US House candidate, NY-14

EDIT added for context:

Lots of super bad faith takes out there on social media accusing
@AOC
of hating on Father Damien. This is the (very good) point she was making.
Quote Tweet


.@AOC questioning why there aren’t more women statues in the rotunda, using Hawai‘i as an example and suggesting there should be a statue for Queen Lili‘uokalani, who was the only queen regnant and the last sovereign monarch of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

Link to tweet

[anamnua]

47. I know the biggies: CNN and Fox.

But little or nothing about the rest. Therefore I am in no position to comment about EWTN'S general orientation. However I could see nothing wrong in the actual clip I posted; this was just one of a number by the way.
AOC’s much vaunted explanation, posted above, is somewhat perfunctory and falls a good deal short of what is required. The question is still out there as to why, among all the statues in the Capitol, she picked the worst one possible to illustrate a point about ‘patriarchy’ and ‘white supremacy’. Nor has the point that his statue was there because the Hawaiian people wanted it to be there been refuted.
I also have yet to hear your own, personal issues, if any, with Fr. Damien and the rationale behind same.
The Catholic-bashing on that thread was quite striking and will not have impressed our illustrious nominee.
Incidentally, Fr. Damien’s spirit lives on:
Among those who stand up for disadvantaged and marginalized minorities.
Among front line health care workers who put their lives at risk in the fight against Covid 19.
And, indeed, in the soul of the Democratic Party.

[whttevrr]

48. Perfunctory or not it will suffice in its truth.

And 'What is required?' is facts:

She did not say Fr. Damien was a bad figure - in fact, she explicitly stated that her observations weren’t about litigating his or any individual statue. Perfunctory truth is still truth.

I think I stated quite clearly that I do not care one wit about the statue of your saint. I do not care about bronze, alabaster, plaster, marble or even golden calf idols. What can I say. I'm not a fan of idolatry. Are you?

I do like the Statue of Liberty. But other statues? They are pigeon shit receptacles. I like the Statue of Liberty because of it's size and prominence in the immigration story that is a part of America. But, I was not devastated when Charlton Heston found it buried to the torch. I was not offended by it's desecration. It's a statue.

My opinion of your saint is not important. Good for him for being so caring to lepers. He was a better man than I will ever be. But again this was never about him. It was about Patriarchy and its physical representation in our Capitol. If a woman in America has an issue with that patriarchy, I as a fellow American, care about her opinions. My mom is a woman and it always bothered me that the ERA never passed. I am more upset about that than I will ever be about some statue of a guy from a hundred years ago.

I just don't care about statues. Capiche?

[anamnua]

51. She is the party's Pasionara/wunderkind

Fair enough. She is certainly one of the more articulate and generally impressive among its latest batch of representatives. However she is not infallible and can get it seriously wrong.
Here's what I think happened:
She shot from the hip about Fr. Damien without knowing too much about him.
When the controversy arose she decided to inform herself at which point her jaw dropped and she murmured 'Oh my God!'.
But at that stage she had painted herself into a corner.