General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFor those saying Obama is most chillingly perfect incarnation of pure evil on the planet....
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by SYFROYH (a host of the General Discussion forum).
Oh, that's right. No one is saying that.
So consider this an OP calling BULLSHIT on all strawman attempts that try to pretend that valid criticism of the President based on policy positions is the same as calling him evil.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
snooper2
(30,151 posts)hmmmm...
Do I want Batman or Sherlock Holmes on the case LOL
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)Bonobo
(29,257 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,198 posts)"Oh how BAD they are for not agreeing with us that the President is bad! Let us say how bad they are treating us, but we are the ones posting so much! Let us try to get people think they are trying to quiet us when really WE WANT THEN TO SHUT UP!".
So call this me calling BS on your type and your OP!
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)And I think "your type", the type who wants a President who will "weep and hold them" is part of the Reader's Digest bullshit emo crap that allows for the kind of fucked up hero worship we see.
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,198 posts)Your type will divide the Party and then the Republican will take it all!
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Yes, we will win. We will devour them like macrophages devouring a virus. We will envelop them, drink their milkshakes and make them disappear.
We will win.
Then, we will be them.
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,198 posts)Your kind will drive them to the Republicans in droves!
The people that vote with us, yet are not really of a party will have your kind pointed out to them and they will think "Man! They are so nasty to each other! Do they really have a plan?"
Sound familiar? It should! It is what the Democrats pointed out to people about the Republicans! And they will use it on us! AND YOUR TYPE IS HELPING TO GIVE THEM THAT EXAMPLE TO USE!!!!!!!!
Then we will loose all the good we have got so far! So thank you for destroying all the hard work!
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)And it is "lose" not "loose"
I just fucking hate that mistake.
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,198 posts)Your one of them that just love to be nasty! I have no time for nasty! Just GLAD I don't have to see it any more!
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And how there is absolutely no fear that one of their own will drive some of them to the Dems?...do you see them worrying about Rush or Hanity or even Glen Beck?
Well I think I know but I ain't telling...cause I am sure you will only be able to learn it on your own...not from the likes of me.
But some of us wring our hands an worry about every little departure from orthodoxy that anyone expresses....and I suggest that is more destructive than anyone who calls out Obama on things.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)5th Amendment right to trial, right to habeas corpus and charter schools, and other issues are what are dividing our Party.
I could accept his having a different policy direction than the traditional Democratic Party on say, one or two of those issues. But the problem is he is as conservative as Reagan and maybe more conservative than Nixon or Eisenhower and way far afield from any Democrat before Clinton on those and so many other issues that I cannot deal with it at this time.
He has just failed us on too many issues.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)Cuz having a president that does a fly over of a disaster areas, shoves people in football domes or ignores the shit while eating cake with senator mcfuckedup is totally preferable to a president that shows some fucking iota of compassion, or as you called it emo crap.
As if there's not enough shit for you to be legitimately angry about you attack something that's good. You go after Obama for visiting people of disasters, sounding every bit like Rush fuckhead. A tragic event in someone's life made a little brighter by a visit from the president and you call it emo crap.
Take this screed, call into Rush blowhards show on Monday and I'll betcha he'll laugh his ass off while congratulating you for putting that lib right the fuck in his/her place.
Jesus. Fucking. Christ.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)You think I said I preferred Bush??? How did you get that idea?
Delusional.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)Example of what? Music, cars, elephants, what? Example of what?
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Need a map to that conclusion?
one_voice
(20,043 posts)I'll just re-read the OP.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)I did. Still bullshit.
magellan
(13,257 posts)Or perhaps not knowing the context at all.
That other poster had the privilege of meeting Obama when he visited her town after it was ravaged by a tornado. He was kind to her and showed her true compassion. For this reason she'll broker no criticism of him, period. There's something of idol worship going on there imho. Understandable, I suppose, considering the circumstances under which she met him.
Bonobo was alluding to that, not criticizing Obama for visiting disaster sites and offering sympathy to survivors. I think if you reread the post you'll see that.
I think there is some rabies around DU lately. eh?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)including the words 'hate' 'hitler' referring to people who are outraged by some of the policies and the capitulation to Republicans, eg, on SS by people we elected and trusted to do the opposite (Carney states they only included cuts to SS because Republicans asked him to do so. Democrats didn't, he is a Democrat, why is he allowing Republicans to tell him what to do & ignoring Democrats?) are the ones this OP is referring to.
They are struggling to defend the indefensible, which is fine. I understand the frustration when someone you admire does something it is hard to defend. I went through several years trying to do the same before I stopped being a blind partisan when I realized the reason I was having such a hard time was not my fault. It was the fault of people I had trusted, had defended, supported, helped get elected, who had done something wrong, and I didn't need to try to defend it.
It was very freeing. And then I grew up and focused on what is important, which is not personal politics, but issues. Politicians only matter to me now according to how they vote. Not how charismatic, clever, seemingly nice, good-looking, have a 'd' after their name. I care only about where they are on the issues.
All of that does not add up to hatred for anyone. Even Bush. Hate is a wasted emotion, and sure isn't worth wasting on people you don't even know. I am sure they are all very nice people in their personal lives. But once we give them the job of speaking for us, then I will not ever again be quiet when they are doing wrong by the American people. They should expect that.
They can handle it, in fact I don't think they care what we say or think about them. So I don't get people who rush to defend them, blindly. All of them will richly rewarded after they are out of office. They are not who we need to worry about.
I worry about those whose lives they have affected, who will not be richly rewarded by anyone. Taking anything away from those people is simply not going to be tolerated, excused, explained away or agreed with. That is OUR job as citizens.
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,198 posts)Most of the post as of late has been of the later!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)up shit, pretending to be huge 'supporters of this president'. They are the ones this OP is about.
Those criticizing the policies of this president are rightfully angry. The are DEMOCRATS. Did anyone expect that actual Democrats would not be angry after all the decades of fighting off Republicans from touching SS, with a DEMOCRATIC president slapping them in the face by offering cuts to SS, but worse, perpetuating the Republican Lie that SS is in some way responsible for the deficit?
I have a hard time even thinking about it, it makes me so angry frankly. If this was a Republican this board would be completely united right now against this disastrous proposal.
How I know whether I am being a hypocrite or not. I ask myself: 'If Bush did this would I even try to defend it'? There is no excuse, no explanation, no reason on earth for this proposal and yes, people are pretty damn angry and rightfully so.
If expressing rightful anger over something as bad as this was seems 'nasty' to you, then maybe you should ask YOURSELF 'what if this was Bush, would I think it nasty to criticize him for it'?
ancianita
(43,303 posts)about betrayals of the party's foundational platform. This is exactly the time to demand honesty and transparency from this party's president on down. Angry and nasty are not wrong. They are appropriate on both the policy and the political levels.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)magellan
(13,257 posts)Back in the day, DUers were ripping Bush** for modest COLA increases (not keeping up with inflation). Not sure why anyone expects us to be happy with a proposal to change the way COLA is figured that amounts to a cut.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2550423
Isoldeblue
(1,135 posts)I'm sick and tired of being treated like the enemy or an idiot for wanting to wait this thing out and hear Obama's side on this. To feel loyalty for the man I voted for seems to be wrong now! The, "I'm so cool being against Obama" crowd refuse to give him the benefit of the doubt. Despite all he's accomplished in almost five years, in spite of the right fighting him at every turn; now he's destroying us?!?! NO president in history has ever had to be up against the obstructionists, Obama has. Shouldn't that matter?
I get idealism, as I'm an idealist. But if your idealism becomes so unrealistic with expectations that no president could meet, then there's a problem.
Coming in here lately isn't much different from wandering into the ConCave and getting eaten alive.... No compassion or understanding. Just plain meanness, derision and putting words in my mouth.
Here's but a small sampling:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022662605#post48
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022662605#post47
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022662605#post24
I am more upset with what's happening here in DU, than I am about the CCPI. With that, we still don't know how that will turn out. So I'll wait before I get too upset about.
But to come here, where I once felt so at home and comfortable, up until a couple days ago, and not be able to express my opinion without rude comments worthy of baggers and neocons, made to me is just not right.
I had always believed that the left were more civil. Well, there's a ton of you that have made a liar out of me!
one_voice
(20,043 posts)
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)good on social issues and crap on economic issues. he`s just to the right of eisenhower
Grins
(9,439 posts)Really? 'Cuz I get these Reich-wing emails all the time saying that shit.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Whisp
(24,096 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)there were Hitler posters, from the left and we laughed because we hated his drone program.
And 'bend over for Republicans'. His spokesperson at the WH, Carney explained him putting SS on the table this way 'The Republicans asked him to do it'!!!! Is that bending over or not? We are talking about SS here. And we are talking about a Democrat offering to cut benefits because 'The Republicans asked him to do it'! I have more examples, some he provided himself and was quite proud of his catering to them.
Moving on: 'civil rights denying' yes, there is pretty long list of back-tracking on Civil Rights issues starting with the grotesque NDDA. Don't get me started.
And this: new-boss-same-as-the-old-boss who didn't even wait a decent six months after his re-election to put Social Security on the table. Was it six months? I do remember being told to wait and see before getting 'hysterical' as he had not yet 'put it in the budget'. That was about two months ago, it's April, so yes, that is true. We were right, we expect this of him now.
Offshore drilling. Remember that? How long into his term was it before he lifted that 30 year ban?
That is not nasty, it is FACT. Unless you can show that none of it is true.
People are ANGRY. Social Security?? I doubt he is surprised, he surely knew the reaction he would get to this. We've been told he enjoys getting 'the left' angry. It gives him creds with Republicans, they say. James Carville more or less confirmed that also.
Nasty is falsely accusing someone of hating this president because they refuse to remain silent over issues like offering SS cuts to Republicans. I am a critic of many of this president's policies, I like HIM, I despise some of his policies because they are Republican policies, George Bush policies.
Response to Bonobo (Original post)
russspeakeasy This message was self-deleted by its author.
zappaman
(20,627 posts)I like your new avatar.
Not that there is anything wrong with David Byrne...
Logical
(22,457 posts)
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"For those saying Obama is most chillingly perfect incarnation of pure evil on the planet.... Oh, that's right. No one is saying that."
...real?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022194242
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Good one! 
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts) Isoldeblue
(1,135 posts)Thanks for your positive input. 
unblock
(56,186 posts)all criticism of obama is legitimate provided it stops juuuuuuuust short of calling him hitler!
or is it stalin? pol pot? i can't keep my chillingly perfect pure evil incarnations straight.
fwiw, i have no real problem is "valid criticism of the president based on policy positions". well, with one slight but important tweak; i'd prefer "valid criticism of the president's policy positions".
in any event, normally i avoid any argumentation on the extremes, but this one was so comical i couldn't resist a little tease back.
aikoaiko
(34,214 posts)A majority of responding GD hosts voted to lock this OP because it violates the "No whining about DU" prohibition in the SOP.