General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsthe anti-Snowden crowd are making DU look like this
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Violet_Crumble (a host of the General Discussion forum).
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Response to Enrique (Original post)
zappaman This message was self-deleted by its author.
flamingdem
(40,865 posts)
woo hooNoOneMan
(4,795 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)That aint me
using you mother tongue correctly is NOT a crime . Spoken , you may use idioms or common usage expressions ,; but in writing that is not permissible .
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)So I'd say I manage quite well. But I appreciate your take on what is and what is not permissible.
madokie
(51,076 posts)I type it like I say it and if anyone don't like it they can kma 
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)META morphing into "GD" (guns dogs). Once a target of hatred is legitimized, the stuff seeps into everything.
AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)The loyalists and the independent, critical thinkers fight each other. The country and its people are more important than a leader who makes everyone hope for so much, and then dashes them and because people don't want to believe that they were had, continue to hope and prove their loyalty, and hope that he will truly be the president that he said he'll be. Never ever blindly trust people, you will get taken advantage of.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)want purity and their way and nothing else. It's people like you who gave us the debacle of 2010, which may repeat in 2014.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Other options:
Demand that Snowden be off limits to criticism.
Create a pro-Snowden forum.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)High hyperbole is more of a center right thing. So just saying they make the place look bad does not really equate to 'calling for a purge' nor does saying the style and quality of the criticism is low equate to 'demanding criticism be off limits'.
The need employ extreme language suggests an underlying weakness to the ideas communicated.
It just looks silly. Call for a purge. Silly.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Or just point out how foolish they look as the OP suggested. High hyperbole is more of a center right thing."
...for some, maybe a mirror is in order: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023190129
It's really fascinating to watch a bunch of people who don't care about facts, lambasting others because they don't buy into the Snowden is a hero meme.
I mean, this OP is basically implying that criticism of Snowden is making DU look bad. Imagine that.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)think about the surveillance and the collection of meta-data.
People may differ about whether Snowden should have stayed in the US and stood trial or whether he was right to leave. I think he was probably wise to leave, that his message would not have been heard had he stayed, but that can be argued.
But what I am wondering is whether there really are people on DU who support the surveillance and the collection of meta-data and if so why?
I just can think of arguments for a very focused, limited program of surveillance, but I honestly cannot think of one good reason to just capture all of our metadata through surveillance.
We can't all be potential suspects? What is the real purpose for this program?
I have theorized that this program permits the government to analyze, separate, sort and bunch us for the purpose of practicing psy-ops on us, trying to influence us.
Does anyone else have any possible explanations for the government's choosing to keep all this metadata for everyone. Is our government keeping it so that there will be an electronic record of all of our foolishness out in some electronic cloud in order that an advanced civilization can read our communications and find out who we were. Do they really think we are that interesting?
Can you imagine how many e-mails they are collecting with these weird Glenn Beck and fundamentalist slogans and conspiracy theories in them?
Can you imagine all the e-mails arguing that Obama is a Kenyan-born Muslim?
What is the point in collecting all this junk?
Our posts on DU? Please how much money do we pay for this ridiculous and potentially dangerous program?
Can anyone articulate an argument justifying it, supporting it?
Forget Snowden. What's with the government's metadata fixation?
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)It's a tireless job to try and redirect, the narrative. You've tried very hard to make it something else all day, regardless of the numerous pro-Snowden posts....You should just C&P to save yourself a little time.
But clearly, the OP is all about how those that forego the Snowden hero worship are authoritarian, stupid, uninformed, blind, sheeple, RW, Bush lovers, idiots .... did I miss anything?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)How can a secret program and secret courts and secret laws be consistent with the concept of democracy, of representative or self-government?
How can the people petition their government to change a law if that law is secret?
How can the people petition their government to pass a law changing a court decision or pass an amendment to the Constitution to change a court decision if that decision is secret?
I would like to see someone talk about how secret laws are consistent with democracy, with self-government. Because I think that they are not consistent with self-government.
I will keep posting what I know makes sense, what is logical. If someone comes up with an argument that makes more sense or is more logical, I will be pleased to change my mind.
But to me, all this secrecy goes way beyond what is necessary and it is nullifying the very basis of our government -- the concept that even if indirectly, ultimately we govern ourselves.
As long as we have secret laws, secret programs, secret courts that keep secrets of this kind from the people, we do not have government of the people, for the people and by the people. We have government of the secret select, for the secret select and by the secret select.
Can't have it both ways: secrecy and democracy.
Cha
(318,746 posts)they want it.
RC
(25,592 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)To say nothing of the alerts and objections when someone posts something less than flattering about Obama.
Why do you think Snowden is so demonized by some around here? Because what he, Snowden did, reflects badly on Obama because Obama is now owns the spying apparatus bu$h started. The ballyhoo should not be about Snowden, but about what Snowden has exposed. Snowden is just the conduit to the source of the stink in the core of our government. That should be what we are outraged about, not Snowden.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Why do you think Snowden is so demonized by some around here?"
I suppose you want me to accept your theory in order to reject criticism of Snowden?
Do you actually believe expect me to believe that you think there is valid criticism of Snowden?
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)azurnoir
(45,850 posts)the attempt to get Obama's critics to call for his impeachment, something that would lead to being PPred, but thankfully or sadly depending that worm died on the hook without being bitten
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"I agree the redirect attempt was quite lame almost as lame the attempt to get Obama's critics to call for his impeachment, something that would lead to being PPred, but thankfully or sadly depending that worm died on the hook without being bitten"
...explain why that makes no sense. You are implying that there are people who truly believe Obama broke the law and deserve to be impeached, but they are afraid to say so for fear of being "PPred."
What you're saying is that those persons value their membership here more than standing on principle.
I started that thread because I saw no evidence the administration had broken the law, and the attempt to fan the flames to create the impression that the programs were illegal were hyperbolic and rhetorical.
Yes, "the redirect attempt was quite lame."
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)under estimated the critical thinking abilities of some DUers
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"No I am saying the poster of that thread under estimated the critical thinking abilities of some DUers "
...I think you're implying that they're afraid to speak up.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)R. Daneel Olivaw
(12,606 posts)
bobduca
(1,763 posts)WHEN BUSH DID IT IT WAS ILLEGAL, WHEN OBAMA ADMIN DOES IT IT IS OK BECAUSE JOHN ROBERTS CREEPY VILLAGE OF THE DAMNED EYES MAKE IT ALL BETTER.
JEESH UNPATRIOTIC PAULBOTS BETTER RECOGNIZE MY LOYALTY!!!!11111111111111111111
...I CAN'T HEAR YOU! ! 11! 1! ! 1
TYY
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Just highlight your text and then do control-x.
bobduca
(1,763 posts)CAPSLOCK REALLY DOES MAKE IT HARD TO BE SUBTLE WITH A 'B'
quinnox
(20,600 posts)
The plane wasn't diverted! Snowden didn't release anything of importance! Its all a big conspiracy against Obama!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)the NSA isnt spying.
"Lately, the Snowden haters are doing a good imitation of this -"
...Snowden critics simply want the facts: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023195883
His fans appear to be only interested in feel-good misinformation and holding him up as more heroic than any hero ever!
Snowden's fan club is quick to side with Snowden regardless of the facts, even though some of the things that Snowden has said are contradicted by the documents he released. Example: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023137494
If Snowden was interested in the truth he wouldn't be making false claims and exaggerations.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I'm bothered by what Obama admitted to: that the NSA is collecting our metadata.
That's what came out thanks to Snowden.
The collection of metadata is vast, encompasses most Americans' data about their communications. And that is really terrifying to me. If the STASI could have had that, they would probably still be in charge and have enslaved many, many people in East Germany.
Why does the government want that information on so many people? Why are they saving our metadata? What is the purpose?
Why does the government want to analyze and store the names and addresses of people on my e-mail list, on my phone bill? Why do they want to maintain a file of my Google searches?
It's ridiculous.
What is behind it?
I would like those who like the surveillance programs to please explain why they like them. I've heard a lot of talk about Snowden, but no explanation about why the government needs to store my e-mail information along with that of so many other people. Please let me know if you can explain.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)the ones you like are OK...the ones you don't must be ignored because they contradict the ones you like...and then say you just want the facts.
It is and age old game you play.
And always topped off with some hyperbole like..."holding him up as more heroic than any hero ever! "...it must always be ever, never, and not a shred of evidence...none zip....nada.
As if no one would believe it if it were not expressed in hyperbolic terms.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"And always topped off with some hyperbole like...'holding him up as more heroic than any hero ever!' ...it must always be ever, never, and not a shred of evidence...none zip....nada. "
...saying that Snowden hasn't been compared to MLK, Rosa Parks, Paul Revere, Nelson Mandela, Ghandi, Jesus, etc.?
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I will steal it and deal it...
quinnox
(20,600 posts)I was looking for a good pic, and found one on google images. You are welcome to steal it!
backscatter712
(26,357 posts)The McCarthyist character-assassination is fucking disgusting, which is why I feel absolutely zero guilt for all my hidden posts. Ever notice how they get nasty, and spend their time constantly bullying and provoking and shit-stirring, but when somebody gives them the verbal punch in the mouth they so desperately deserve, they're so fucking quick to jam the alert button and shriek like a bunch of oh-so-delicate flowers.
What a bunch of babies.
flamingdem
(40,865 posts)cornfused
HipChick
(25,611 posts)flamingdem
(40,865 posts)Of course I think this person have me on ignore so we may never get an answer!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023179373#post208
The protests are really about projecting.
flamingdem
(40,865 posts)
You just hit that one out of the park, flamingdem! 
Cha
(318,746 posts)Cha
(318,746 posts)[URL=
.html][IMG]
[/IMG][/URL]
Cha
(318,746 posts)
BobbieJ oBluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)nt
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)I can't wait to see an example that out-angers and out-bullies the very post to which you just agreed.
We are through the looking-glass, peeps.
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)but can someone please relay that this post is the very epitome of the concept of projection?
General request: Please don't alert or have post #8 removed. It speaks volumes more than any counter-argument ever could.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Well just one glance at your transparency pages reveals that YOU'RE the one that engages in that kind of behavior.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Seems to have spread to include other DU groups on the watch list.
postatomic
(1,771 posts)
Cha
(318,746 posts)Snowden.
Beaverhausen
(24,697 posts)Can't you disagree with someone without calling them names?
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)Trying to refute arguments is futile. But written insults and namecalls are plain as day.
Beaverhausen
(24,697 posts)sheesh!
Beaverhausen
(24,697 posts)
railsback
(1,881 posts)Ron Paul ejaculates. You do the Libertarian work.
Cha
(318,746 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)
longship
(40,416 posts)Stop ideological name calling. If you have an argument, based on the facts, make it. But to characterize some of your fellow Democrats, or DUers, as being anti-Snowden/pro-Snowden shows monolithic thinking, where ones partisan purity is based on an oversimplified and characterized issue.
The Snowden affair is very complex. I do not know yet, after all the weeks of dodgy (and often somewhat questionable) reportage, what to think of the guy. Having gone through a security clearance likely rated as high, or higher, as his I question his history. (No matter, that.)
Yet I sympathize with what he has evidently done -- if the reportage is to be entirely believed. But I also realize that much of what he revealed isn't new, and there's ample evidence of that, from Keith Olbermann in 2006, no less.
This topic is very complex and has been entangled. Snowden's actions, whether you agree with them or not, have been mixed up with some very serious Constitutional rights. (One should always take the Bill of Rights seriously.)
But that's where DU goes off the rails and where reasonable discussion descends into name calling, chair throwing, DU alerts, and generally bad behavior.
I am not happy about this. Our job is to fight our opposition, not each other. I disagree with people here, but I do so (hopefully) with respect. I have recently supported a few DUers who have been under personal attack and will continue to do so as long as assholes here continue to make such attacks.
And I will do that whether I agree with them or not. It's time to clean some things up here. It's time to stop personal attacks and name calling, yet alone kindergarten attacks on posting styles. Some DUers who I have long respected are acting like four year olds. (I have even supported some of them in the past few weeks when they have been attacked.)
Argue passionately, but not personally. No ad hominem attacks! Not ever.
Defend your position with facts, not speculation. If you do speculate make it clear in your narrative that you are doing so.
Don't make shit up. Much of our imformation comes from journalism. But that is a messy affair, at best. Form your opinions, not on one single source, but on consensus of the reports. If you reject a source, explain logically why you do so. (Okay! FOX News is a no brainer here, as is WingNutDaily, etc.)
Be prepared to defend your position, but do so respectfully. If you are going to stab a post with a knife, at least make sure your opponent understands that you respect an intelligently argued response. Satire is fine as long as you don't shut off the argument. Sometimes it's just better to not respond at all and let the thread die on its own.
When a disagreement descends into chair throwing, throw in the towel, respectfully. Don't bore down further into the thread where nothing but school yard name calling happens.
If somebody name calls you, bow out gracefully. You've won. It is appropriate to politely remind them of that, and then do not return!!! Again. You've won. (But understand that winning at DU means beating Republicans, not beating up other Democrats.)
Let's keep focussed here on what DU is about, getting good Democrats elected.
That's all.
Thanks.
Love you all.
flamingdem
(40,865 posts)DU needs one!
longship
(40,416 posts)I have limited bandwidth here. I would have volunteered long ago otherwise.
I was not always so agreeable here, but one learns, partially by making mistakes, partially by observation of other's mistakes. And of course, the good examples.
Oliver Cromwell, 1599-1658
Always good words to take to heart.
flamingdem
(40,865 posts)Lovely quote. I should read Cromwell more often!
longship
(40,416 posts)Almost all here are Dutch Reformed Calvinists, with a smattering of other conservative sects. Nearby urban Grand Rapids is the home to AmWay, the DeVoss family, who has their name on every other building in the city. Son-in-law founded Black Water (mercenary thugs in Iraqi war).
So, although I live a bit north and in a very rural area -- no cable TV, city water/sewers, broadband Inet -- there are a few devoted Democrats here. Just not too many. Certainly not enough to elect one to state legislature or US Congress.
Regardless, one presses on.
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)and therein lies the problem: There seems to be a need to affix labels to those who don't see things 100% the same way, and it's NOT a clear-cut issue.
But many people do see it in black and white and are increasingly angry and belligerent with those who disagree. Post #8 is an excellent example.
longship
(40,416 posts)You are not one I know here. But I don't get around much. Nice to see support for DU sanity.
Margaret Atwood, "The Handmaid's Tale"
Amonester
(11,541 posts)Admins should stick a similar one on top of GD, IMO.
longship
(40,416 posts)And may throw chairs into the thread to support their anger. Wish it wasn't so.
Thanks.
bluedigger
(17,431 posts)You're not alone in your desire to be able to rationally discuss the topic without having to take a "side". 
Marr
(20,317 posts)It had a lot of activity, a lot of posts. But they were all what I would consider Obama apologists. I mean, I recognized all the names. And there were only perhaps 10-15 of them, posting over and over in the thread. No one else. Just this one little echo chamber, talking to itself.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Then of course, there are the dozens of "I've been on DU for 30 years" posters with less than 1,000 posts that are resurrected, no, strike that, that just happen to wonder through, during "condition red".
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)Shift rotation is just on the odd numbered days, except when there is a full moon that falls on a Saturday in an even numbered month.
Make a note of it.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)I just didn't care and posted it anyway.
flamingdem
(40,865 posts)Let me know if that works with your schedule.
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)I'm really not even supposed to be here now, as it is.....
Shouldn't be a problem.
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)you can also find similar threads that are almost exclusively populated by long-standing "Obama detractors".
Also an echo chamber, or are those OK because they reinforce your viewpoint?
Marr
(20,317 posts)There are some issues that only seem interest the defenders, and others that only seem to interest critics.
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)Only time is going to tell how this is going to shake out.
Until then, I guess everyone will just keep throwing their opinions at each other until something actually develops.
The problem is that pent-up anger seems to be on the increase while people are whiling away the time.
Marr
(20,317 posts)If this really is "old news that we've known about since 2006", I would think everyone would have formed an opinion by now.
Sorry, but "hold your comments until it's all over" is never good advice.
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)If people could actually hold their comments until facts came in or until things actually developed, this place would be nearly silent - and who would even bother trying to advise this forum of such?
But until then, let's be real: all the chatter about this particular issue isn't much more than space-filling speculation with such miniscule tidbits of actual information trickling out. And I mean on the end game for Snowden.
As to what he's released? If there's anything illegal therein, people here should know by now the GOP and MSM would be all over it, whether or not they support/like the President.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)why can't both sides here at du do the same?
ya i`ve watched mean girls with my daughter...
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Lack of weed would be my guess.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)and turned out to be a zero. All the Paulbots in the world can not change him into a hero.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)
wandy
(3,539 posts)"Many of the requirements are costly and cosmetic, requiring clinics — without financial assistance from the state — to widen hallways, doorways and even entrance awnings."
"In recent weeks, similar debates have taken place in Republican-controlled legislatures across the country. In Texas, where state Sen. Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth) led her now-famous 11-hour filibuster, legislation is still pending that probably would end with the closure of all but five of the state’s 42 abortion clinics."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/north-carolinas-abortion-law-sham/2013/07/07/21a19b1c-e5a2-11e2-aef3-339619eab080_story.html
Yes, yes I know, Ed Snowden is IMPORTANT here. But, he's not such a distraction to our Teapublican friends as they fight for control over womens bodies, raise collage tuition loan rates and sally forth to rape the planet in general.
Ya, go ahead, flame me. I'm just some cranky old moose here to remind you that we have other problems.
Violet_Crumble
(36,385 posts)This one falls under the 'no whining about DU' part of the SOP.