General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFor all you people who seek attention with nothing good to say about Obama....
Why do you waste your time? Don't you have better things to do like get out and agree with the Repulican base how ineffective Obama has been. If your not in the forum to bring uplifting to this party.....I think you should find elsewhere to go.
If your not happy with Obummer because he did not do what you expected...go ruin somebody elses day.
There were a lot of really good D.U. members who brought unity here at one time no matter how bad times were for the democrats.
Nance Greggs comes to mind.
Although I will never have the insight or writing ability that Nance Greggs once shared on this forum of uplifting her party in the worse of times I would hope a part of her motivating, positivity would shine in here more often.
So just for today.............I will remember some of her insipiring posts and lift myself and hopefully others from the all to often depressing
Obama bashing posts.
So wherever you may be today Nance.........I for one truly miss your battle to keep things peaceful here on D.U.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Not everyone who is not entirely pleased with Obama is Anti-Obama
But there are some who think if you're not a 125% cheerleader you're Anti-Obama.
Control-Z
(15,686 posts)I was a Hillary supporter. I am not disappointed with Obama, though. He's doing what I expected - maybe more. I support my democratic president and despise the right wing. I believe in a united party and the slow wheels of justice. That doesn't make me a cheerleader/apologist.
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)And you know there are plenty of them here.
jtrockville
(4,266 posts)If you are craving "lock-step" I'm afraid you won't find it here.
I, for one, intend to stay put, and have NO intention of "lock-stepping" with ANYONE. If a candidate's or legislator's behavior warrants criticism, I WILL NOT look the other way.
samplegirl
(13,989 posts)go find somewhere other than a Democratic forum to complain in.
jtrockville
(4,266 posts)Lock-stepping isn't required here at DU.
surfdog
(624 posts)Of course lockstepping isn't required, I think OP is just saying that parroting Republican talking points isn't very democratic
Repeating lies and slander isn't holding the president's feet to the fire.
jtrockville
(4,266 posts)The OP is complaining about Obama bashing. Obama got most of the criticism I see here at DU the old-fashioned way: he earned it.
Just like anyone else, some of what he's done was good, some was bad. Are we only allowed to speak of the good?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)The anti-war Democrats, the anti-indefinite detention Democrats, the anti-extrajudicial assassination Democrats... thus, any liberal or progressive, or leftist that has Democratic allies in Congress on any of these issues belongs on a Democratic discussion board.
Zhade
(28,702 posts)We're. Not. Fucking. Leaving.
Get over it.
11 Bravo
(24,310 posts)And we'll most assuredly "get over it". After all, we can't miss you until you just go away.
obamanut2012
(29,369 posts)If he is the man you, and many of us, think he is, he would not agree with your OP.
I think demanding posters who don't agree with you to leave DU is most UNdemocratic.
derby378
(30,262 posts)This is a forum for Democrats. And the way Washington has been going about things lately, more than ever, we are the Democratic "Underground." So deal.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Is undemocratic, with a small d.
Citizenship requires praise when warranted, and equally criticism.
It is frightening that this very basic function of the citizen has been forgotten.
Lock step is not democratic.
There is more, intelligent politicians, perhaps not partisans, understand that they have to listen to the critics enen more that cheerleaders.
Chew on this... FDR listened to those critics and went on to become a great president. Hoover did not. I prefer this president starts channeling FDR. What you say?
FredStembottom
(2,928 posts)What you say is so simple and bed-rock.
Why do we have to see hundreds of DU postings each day from a tiny few able to indulge in the sheer luxury of hounding those who live in a much more precarious America. Hurting people express criticism. They just do. It's a politician's job to be confronted by the down-trodden.
What's more... I now see Obama turning towards these very critics. The pain and suffering just might finally be registering in D.C. and Democrats of all stripes seem to feel the need to, just maybe, address some of these problems that newly impoverish thousands per day.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)literally. This is confounding to Partisans but OWS is having an effect, a real effect, and pulling politicians to the left.
True nature of the process, and what FDR did, what is the minimum I can do to keep these people from literally revolting?
FredStembottom
(2,928 posts)So why people get on here and insist on happy faces all around when expressing deep-felt disappointment seems, now, to be working..... is beyond me.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)when faced with true grass roots. It does not matter who is in charge. The state and those who have a perceived interest (or in the case of Congress a real one)... feel this bitching is a direct challenge, which it is.
This is not a strange dynamic, in fact it is very common... just the language changes.
TheEuclideanOne
(2,487 posts)are aiming to accomplish.
Let me give you the short and long version.
Short version: If you don't make it clear, with your words, that he is on the wrong path, his own party will not re-elect him.
Longer version:
If I were obama's campaign manager or his press secretary, I would take your exact position. But I don't understand, from a logical standpoint, why your viewpoint makes sense to you.
Hypothetically speaking, if I were a cheerleader for Obama, never said a bad thing, supported him 100% on what he does, even if it is the exact opposite of what the party holds dear and what he campaigned on to get him elected.
So, we can start by saying that we are absolutely clear that you will support him blindly, 110% even if he does the following.
a) Eliminates Medicare, using the savings to give to the corporations.
b) Institute economic policies that make the great depression look like a vacation in the catskills in comparison.
c) Starts numerous additional wars, taking a strong stance on how important torture is to our military strategy.
d) Removes every other remaining Safety Social net.
e) Takes a strong Pro-Life position, making abortion illegal under any conditions.
f) Re-implements DADT
I could add a few more, but I have enough to make my point. In that scenario, you support him 110%, so you are surprised if I can not subscribe to your position? I am assuming that the members of DU opposing your, "If you are not a cheerleader, you must leave", argument. I can't speak for them, but it is a hunch.
Before you even think for a second about saying that you would be against him following through on any of these positions, stop yourself. You can not complain since, in your eyes, that is not Democratic. After all, if Obama did institute all of these things, and I complained, I would leave. My only option, in your world, is to keep my mouth shut and say only positive things until I can get a chance to vote for him in the next election. In the end, I won't, even if I keep my mouth shut the whole time.
But let me ask you this.... This list is an exaggeration, but if you do nothing but cheerlead as you are suggesting, you encourage him to do all of these things since he knows he will get re-elected by people like you. Actually, he doesn't really know, but he would absolutely think that this will get him re-elected because everybody is cheerleading even though they detest what he is doing and will NOT vote for him.
In a nutshell, your argument is not logical and will accomplish the exact opposite of what you think it will. You will just feel giddy like a little schoolgirl up to the day that he loses the election. And, the reality is also that this type of behavior you encourage will cause him to lose the election, but you will wake up the day after the election thinking that you have been oh so helpful to him.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,316 posts)he also has planned for Social Security. He will be a busy man. 
TheEuclideanOne
(2,487 posts)At least in this first term, he did a number of things that I would have not expected at all. Very disappointing things. He knows that he has to run for re-election, but also knows how horrible the alternative is, so he has less accountability than he should have.
If he knew that Republicans were running a candidate that would make a GREAT president and that he has to deliver his "A Game", he would be less likely to get his headstart on "A" through "F" because it would mean he would certainly lose his job. Instead, he can do what he wants and play the "Don't like it, well what other choice do you have, that other clown?"
You are right, in the next term, it does not matter how much we call him out, he does not need to be re-elected.
Letting the President know that his supporters will not vote for him when he does things that go against their goals is the only way we can make sure he does not do those things. Blindly cheerleading will encourage him to do them. Of course, in his second term, we got nuttin!
One nice way to look at this is that we have the rare opportunity to pick the president of our country. Unless Citizens United is overturned, no future generation will get this opportunity. So cherish it, because after this election, we will have to just hope that the corporations pick somebody that we like.
lark
(26,081 posts)You sound just like the southern rednecks that used to harass me at work because I marched against the Vietnam war! Amerrica, love it or leave it was their refrain. Funny how you use right wing terms to harass other Dems. I didn't leave my country n won't leave here either. REal Dems support diversity of opinion.
leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)I tend not to click on threads that I know are going to upset me.
That said, I welcome the ability here for all to post their point of view, whether I agree or not. Most are valid concerns, and not Obama bashing. I would hate to post in an echo chamber. A lot of food for thought is posted here, by people I don't always agree with. There's always going to be a pill here and there. Don't click on their threads or replies.
unionworks
(3,574 posts)...just get along? ROTFLMAO. 
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)People have legitimate criticisms of this administration and they voice those concerns here. I'm not sure how one equates that with "seeking attention." Sorry if that "ruins your day." 
If you are seeking an echo chamber, maybe it is you who should "find somewhere else to go." At DU, independent thought is not discouraged.
Response to samplegirl (Original post)
HereSince1628 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Starry Messenger
(32,381 posts)Bless your heart! 
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)Although I misread that as italics. 
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)since you brought it up, that whole your = you're thing.
obamanut2012
(29,369 posts)ha!
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)when Al Gore was eviscerated by the farleftwing and the anarchists.
How'd that work out? It should have been a lesson learned.
Romulox
(25,960 posts) AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Romulox
(25,960 posts)has proven Gore wrong, full stop.
Al won't even touch the subject, these days--nowadays, he pretends like was never the point man for job-obliterating NAFTA. 
Lord Helmet
(2,158 posts)Anybody that sat out 2000 or voted 3rd party bears some responsibility for the Bush years.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)for his past actions. He doesn't get to pretend like it never happened. 
SaintPete
(533 posts)and now you've had enough bait?
Fucking hilarity of the highest order
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)In response to Dubya's selection.
RUMMYisFROSTED
(30,749 posts)Outrage about imaginary happenings like the eviscerating of Al Gore on DU in 2000 made me jump to the reply button.
ETA: And AK didn't become a member until 2005. Weird.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)I wrote for a Green magazine at that time and there was plenty of overt as in 'not imaginary' evisceration of Al Gore going on in 2000, in fact, there is some right here in this thread. I concede a poorly worded original post but as DU usually rolls, when some cannot argue the point, they resort to the role of sphincter police pointing out spelling, syntax, or grammar errors as subterfuge.
RUMMYisFROSTED
(30,749 posts)I'm not arguing Gore's piss-poor campaign.
RUMMYisFROSTED
(30,749 posts)RUMMYisFROSTED
(30,749 posts)So that's how it worked out.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)in spite of my poor wording
dionysus
(26,467 posts)Romulox
(25,960 posts)otohara
(24,135 posts)Keep her feelings to herself.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)it might "repress" her!
NavyDem
(570 posts)You're welcome to come to the Barrack Obama Group where the detractors are not welcome. Here in GD, they are welcome to post negative or positive as they choose. The group is hosted by solid supporters, and it is our haven away. I loved Nance's writing as well, and if she were to come back, she would also be most welcome in the BOG.
Vanje
(9,766 posts)
MuseRider
(35,176 posts)Grab the smelling salts I feel swooning coming on.
Good grief. Better toughen up there. In case you needed this pointed out to you, and I guess you do, there are very few people who "hate" Obama. Angry with him, yes. Disappointed with him, yes. I am very very angry with him, livid as a matter of fact but then I knew I would be. He is doing what I thought all along he was going to do.
Been here for a long time, not going anywhere until the admins boot my ass out. I will speak my mind, within the rules, as we are allowed to do.
You want uplifting? Try doing that yourself since you are so happy with him. You will hear from those who aren't but if you did not expect to then you are in the wrong place. Try letting it all go, it is not going to get better as we go along this cycle. This is not going to change anything. There will never be an elected leader that pleases everyone. If there is we no longer living in an at least semi free land.
Remember Me
(1,532 posts)Covers most of the points I was thinking.
StarsInHerHair
(2,125 posts)cultists....
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)gonna set those pom poms aflame
StarsInHerHair
(2,125 posts)the President remembers he told us to hold his feet to the fire.
Riftaxe
(2,693 posts)What happens if we care about civil liberties and are truly horrified at the list of things the current administration has approved into law?
Estevan
(70 posts)quinnox
(20,600 posts)On the contrary, maybe its time for you to think about a new place to go if you can't stand any form of dissent. I don't think this site would survive so great (financially) with only devoted Obama supporters quite frankly.
Estevan
(70 posts)Last edited Sun Dec 18, 2011, 02:15 PM - Edit history (1)
Because that's the reality outside of the perfect liberal utopia you've created in your head.
And that's the way it's always been. Wake up and LEARN.
This reply meant for RIFTAXE
sometimes smartphones are too smart
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)When I have to cough up an additional $300 a month to my mom and my mother-in-law because their LIHEAP got cut and now I have to cover their bills so they have heat in the winter.. I should shut up and go ruin someone else's day?
YEah god forbid someone disturbs your kitties and rainbows and lollypops.
I don't hate Obama. But some of his decisions have hurt me financially. I should just shut up and be happy that it's not Bush or Gingrinch hurting me?
Your post is one of the most selfish, narcissistic things I have ever seen. I'm sure Obama would be proud that you are telling voters to take a hike.
You do understand that all this lock step is bad for the party right? You understand that when you Cheered Obama for "moving forward" and not arresting Wall Street criminals and War Criminals that you not only left the door open but wrote a written invitation for the criminals to do it again with impunity.
A few comments about Obama on some web page isn't going to effect him. If it effects you so badly, then maybe it's you who should stop wasting peoples time.
boppers
(16,588 posts)Estevan
(70 posts)Slam her if you don't agree with her pov. But who gives a fuck about her grammar?!?
That's not very 99% of you...
boppers
(16,588 posts)The word choice, however, was a common homophone error.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophone
As far as considering proper usage of words to be "elitist", well, I guess that goes a long way in explaining the decline of the education systems (and thus, the economy) in many english-speaking countries.
Estevan
(70 posts)"proper usage" with the intent to deride the op. IS ELITIST.
boppers
(16,588 posts)
dawg
(10,777 posts)Even the policies of "centrist" dems are unsustainable and damaging to the vast majority of citizens.
Electing Democrats is essential to moving the country leftward, but that is not all we need. Anti-worker policies hurt ordinary people, even when they are being championed by politicians with "D's" beside their names.
Liberals need to criticize this President and Democrats in Congress whenever they fail to make the choices that we believe are needed for the country.
This isn't a game. We can't just support our team and leave it at that.
Remember Me
(1,532 posts)Response to samplegirl (Original post)
Bunny This message was self-deleted by its author.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)Nance Greggs is not a good example of an open-minded person to say the least.
Zhade
(28,702 posts)Long on self-importance, short on universality. I don't miss her ego one bit.
that says it all really. But heck, she is welcome back to DU3, just as soon as the ignore function comes back. <evil grin>
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)Not.
Estevan
(70 posts)Dorothy Parker would have dismissed you for the lightweights you are.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)Firefox with Adblock worked wonders on that.
Nance Greggs was the definition of divisive.
I truly hope the new DU isn't going to be about threads like this one.
jannyk
(4,810 posts)Then had the nerve to reappear a few days ago, on old DU, posting a link to her website. Classless.
Shining Jack
(1,559 posts)"She's elsewhere on the net, you can find her if you like." I happened to see her elsewhere on the net and that was an interesting experience. 
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)dedicated to swarming her posts and coodinating it from a secret forum. But I'm sure lots of her detractors here are well aware of that.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)Vanje
(9,766 posts)Uh. Bankers. Wall Street execs.
Insurance execs
Dewey Finn
(176 posts)Nobody other than those small groups of people you just named? He hasn't done anything for anyone else? That's what you're saying?
Michael Fisher Munds
(15 posts)He also helped himself a lot.
boppers
(16,588 posts)Soldiers. Civil Servants. People with credit cards. People with "pre-existing conditions". Autoworkers. Green energy workers. Internet users. Legal medical marijuana operations and patients. Students. Homeowners. (etc.)
bhikkhu
(10,789 posts)"Obamacare" begins to take effect.
ProfessorGAC
(76,706 posts)You really don't know why energy prices have fallen, do you?
You really don't know what the SEC did, do you?
You really don't understand how lower energy prices help the poorest of our citizens, do you?
Your post manifests the sentiment of someone who really isn't paying attention.
eilen
(4,955 posts)are you posting from Venezuela or Iraq?
MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)Your hatred of Obama has blinded you absolutely.
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)1. Young people who are now covered under their parent's insurance plans.
2. People who are waiting for cures and treatments from stem cell research.
3. Pell grant recipients
4. Sexual orientation victims of hate crimes
5. Americans with disabilities, who got $12 billion in more funding
6. Same sex partners of Federal employees, who now get benefits
7. Women in other countries who are no longer bound by the "gag rule" that prevented US aid from aiding organizations that provide abortions
8. 11 million kids who now have health care thanks to the CHIRA
9. Anyone who uses a credit card
10. Anyone with a pre-existing medical condition, who can now get health care
11. Victims of domestic abuse; increased funding for VAWA
I could go on and on and on, but I'm sure you won't listen. Enjoy life under repuke rule, which is what will happen unless Democrats get out and vote.
http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
housewolf
(7,252 posts)Give me a minute and I'll edit with the link
Here it is
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100233108
slay
(7,670 posts)i've been waiting since he took office. sure we got some minor token good stuff, which was then far, far, far outweighed by his willingness - no eagerness - to compromise early and often with the republicans - which is not what any of us voted for - those people are crazy and owned by the 1%. people have every right to be upset with the way Obama has ruled - i know i am! 
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)Increased funding for national parks and forests by 10%
Significantly expanded Pell grants, which help low-income students pay for college
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/obama-signs-bill-on-student-loans-health-care/
Expanded hate crime law in the US to include sexual orientation through the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act
http://www.hrc.org/13699.htm
Provided stimulus funding to boost private sector spaceflight programs
http://www.commercialspaceflight.org/?p=458
Appointed nation's first Chief Technology Officer
Signed financial reform law establishing a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to look out for the interests of everyday Americans
Signed financial reform law prohibiting banks from engaging in proprietary trading (trading the bank's own money to turn a profit, often in conflict with their customers' interests
Signed financial reform law allowing shareholders of publicly traded companies to vote on executive pay
otohara
(24,135 posts)they'd hate him too!
Cheer up samplegirl, go to an OWS event if possible - that will lift your spirits!!
Spread the word of the gross inequality - it's working, people blame the GOP!!
Zhade
(28,702 posts)OWS would eat her alive -- there's not much love for Obama there! And rightly so.
All this daddy-worship by the fan club is unhealthy.
otohara
(24,135 posts)Do you know the OP?
Daddy worship?
Lots of assumptions in your post.
nebenaube
(3,496 posts)But I have just about lost all respect for him. I thought he was a coward when I shook his hand, but that's because the hands reaching out from behind me startled him and I was robbed of eye contact at that moment. But then he continuously caves... and then there is the indefinite detention bill and DEA gets the Military Tech to assist when 90% of their mission is to persecute pot heads... so maybe, considering his flip on MMJ, just maybe... his is.
Dewey Finn
(176 posts)But I think your response is beyond disgusting. If you're capable of introspection, maybe you ought to ask yourself why you have to indulge in such sickening, juvenile ugliness. And you have appalling nerve dragging OWS, which is all about consensus-building and positivity, into your incredibly nasty little screed.
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)yawn
Number23
(24,544 posts)Do you think that if you post it enough times, that will make it true?
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)I would wager he has much more insight into the movement than you.
Dewey Finn
(176 posts)and anyone at our local Occupy exhibiting that sort of contempt and divisiveness would have been politely asked to not contribute.
Number23
(24,544 posts)That's really all that needs to be said.
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)Which one?
Where was a pro-Obama consensus reached at one of these GAs?
I await your link.
Dewey Finn
(176 posts)Why would it?
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)Obama defenders won't last long cheerleading in a GA, because he is complicit in many of their grievances....get it?
You were so busy demonizing him (Zhade) you didn't realize that.
I'm still waiting for the link BTW.
Note: I do not speak for Zhade nor any Occupy, only my REAL experience with the movement.
Dewey Finn
(176 posts)I see. You think a message board is a drama class. "Zhade" said something vile, but I'm the one "demonizing".
There were no defenders or cheerleading of Obama at our GA. Nor was there any condemnation. He didn't come up at all. Maybe everyone was too busy discussing affordable housing and banking reform to get around to him.
As to whatever link you're demanding, find your own links. I'm not here to do your research for you, whatever it is.
U4ikLefty
(4,012 posts)no links, no Occupy location, no GA proposals or comment to point out?
You are too cute...rookie.
I'm done with you.
Dewey Finn
(176 posts)And I suspect you don't either.
Dewey Finn
(176 posts)You vant to zee my papersss, ja?
I hope you don't sling that paranoia around at your GA, but I have a sneaking suspicion you probably do. You must be very popular.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)- on several political websites, off and on, over the past few years.
What I have discovered is that there is a certain type of poster (here and elsewhere) who simply want to complain, and have an audience for their complaining.
It is a small group, I believe - but they tend to post frequently on the sites they participate in. I have seen such people change their positions from one day to the next. If Obama does (a), they complain that he didn't do (b). But when it's pointed out to them that he actually did do (b), they will reverse themselves and claim that (a) was the right course to take.
Said posters will often choose extremely trivial issues to complain about; Obama's choice of dog, or where he vacations with his family, and so on.
If there is one thing I think Obama supporters and Obama critics can agree on, it's that the constant complainer is equally annoying to both groups. To the supporters because he has nothing of value to add to a discussion, and to the critics because he takes attention away from legitimate criticism.
Just my observation - but unfortunately, the constant complainer enjoys disrupting the vast group of people who want to engage in REAL discussion, while cluttering otherwise decent message boards with trivialities and pessimism.
Mira
(22,685 posts)
Duct Tape
(196 posts)he deserves it. I can't stand those who ALWAYS deride him or praise him.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)- of posters who say, "I love that Obama did this, but I hate that he did that."
It indicates that they have weighed what they have seen and heard from all angles, and have determined what they feel to be positive, and what they feel to be wanting.
It is that kind of case-by-case assessment that gives credence to their comments. Rather than paint with a broad brush, they choose to highlight details - a trait as desirable in the true artist as it is in the true critic.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Check out the GD forum. If it's anything like DU2, you will find the same 7 names posting anywhere up to 5-10 threads A DAY. EVERY. SINGLE. DAY. And I'm sure it's PURELY a coincidence that the folks doing it are staunch naysayers of this president.
So yeah, what they lack in numbers they sure as hell make up for in volume (in both senses of the word).
Michael Fisher Munds
(15 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)Shining Jack
(1,559 posts)Sorry to learn that you're cognitively impaired.
Number23
(24,544 posts)No one was talking to or even about you and you just jump in with an unnecessary and unprovoked (not to mention absolutely idiotic) personal attack. Definitely the mark of a happy, HEALTHY human being. You must be a joy to have around.
Shining Jack
(1,559 posts)Wow, that's deep. I bow to your mastery of junior high level rhetoric.
Number23
(24,544 posts)For no other reason than to toss out a needless, unprovoked and pointless insult that is not even the slightest bit relevant to the discussion at hand is so much more indicative of a mature and healthy mind.
Shining Jack
(1,559 posts)Just for fun I checked all your replies in this thread and except for one instance all of them are needless, unprovoked and pointless insults and/or derision instead of rational debate. Frankly, I'm worried about your beautiful mind. Oh, and to not hurt your fragile ego and make you feel better about yourself I'll let you have the last word. Have a nice day.
Number23
(24,544 posts)And me asking "if you post something enough times, are you hoping it becomes true?" is the EXACT same thing as questioning someone's cognitive ability.
If that's the best you got, I can understand why you have been following me around this thread proving the veracity of your new nickname. It suits you more with each post.
Edit: And I've noticed that every time either one of us posts, the rec count gets a bit higher. It was 78 when I last checked, now it's up to 82. So please, by all means keep responding.
Michael Fisher Munds
(15 posts)You said that my 3 posts made no sense, hence the cognitively impaired bit he said to you because you insulted me and BTW I had 6 posts when you said that, do you have problems with simple additions? You said that Shinning Jack's post was absolutely idiotic and changed the last part of his handle as Jackass witch is childish and showed that you can't do much besides name calling, two insults for the price of one. The "nice post" must be the exception to all the insults that you've been throwing around in this thread (and probably every place you post too so you really must be a joy to have around yourself. Tsk, tsk, tsk not very HEALTHY).
Finally you fell for the old "I'll let you have the last word" trick therefore admitting that you have a fragile ego. Yep, you sure look ridiculous right now. Just for giggles I'll say the same thing: You can have the last word to boost your fragile ego. I'd bet one of my kidneys that you'll fall for it again, genius.
Number23
(24,544 posts)You should have stayed gone.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Great post, by the way.
redqueen
(115,186 posts)
sibelian
(7,804 posts)thank you.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)To those who use that extreme language I always ask them this: if criticizing a policy is 'bashing' then what do you call it when a person says another group should not have equal rights? That must be worse than mere criticism and disagreement, when one stands and declares a group to lack 'sanctity' and that sort of thing. So if to criticize is to bash, then to oppose the rights of others is what? Extreme intolerance? Ignorant hate? You tell me. Since you are in charge of all.
And by the way, crude nicknames for the President are forbidden here. You should not use them, and you do not see others using them here, no matter what you wish to coyly imply about this community, that shite is not allowed at all. I'm sure you know this. And yet you used that word to characterize others, who did not use it. You claim you do this 'for Obama'? I think he'd take issue with your tactics. As always, you are welcome to go to the Obama Group, where all agree with him 100% all the time. They oppose what he opposes, one assumes. You should remain in that restricted echo chamber of xerox like minds if discussion is upsetting to you. To each his own.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)When you refer to those who 'lack sanctity', do you include those who are declared 'not true progressives' if they don't agree with your views?
Would you agree that there is a difference between valid criticism and 'bashing'?
"As always, you are welcome to go to the Obama Group, where all agree with him 100% all the time. They oppose what he opposes, one assumes."
Did it ever occur to you that you assume wrongly?
"You should remain in that restricted echo chamber of xerox like minds if discussion is upsetting to you."
Do you not find it a bit odd that those who support a Democratic president on a Democratic website are told they should restrict their postings to a small 'group', rather than being permitted to voice their opinions as part of the wider community that posts here?
My observation is that the 'echo chamber of xerox like minds' works both ways. There are those who decry lock-stepping, while lock-stepping themselves in their own little echo chamber of anti-Obama rhetoric, despite their cries that they are of independent mind.
But, as you say, "to each his own". It's an interesting concept which, IMHO, should include all opinions, not just those you personally agree with. And suggesting that Obama supporters should keep to their own little niche sounds rather like the 'extreme intolerance' of which you speak.
EFerrari
(163,986 posts)Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)- often invoked when one has no valid response to queries posed.
I am hopeful that the person to whom the questions were directed can respond with his/her own opinion on the matter, and without your assistance.
EFerrari
(163,986 posts)And hopefully, the poster has a more pleasant way to waste five minutes.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Nailed it!
Jakes Progress
(11,213 posts)Check the post in question. Look up "strawman". Eat crow.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Jakes Progress
(11,213 posts)EFerrari
(163,986 posts)of abusing the English language.
If you really need it broken down, here are the straw men in that post:
When you refer to those who 'lack sanctity', do you include those who are declared 'not true progressives' if they don't agree with your views?
The poster didn't say that.
Would you agree that there is a difference between valid criticism and 'bashing'?
"As always, you are welcome to go to the Obama Group, where all agree with him 100% all the time. They oppose what he opposes, one assumes."
Did it ever occur to you that you assume wrongly?
This is also a red herring, a merstrawman.
"You should remain in that restricted echo chamber of xerox like minds if discussion is upsetting to you."
Do you not find it a bit odd that those who support a Democratic president on a Democratic website are told they should restrict their postings to a small 'group', rather than being permitted to voice their opinions as part of the wider community that posts here?
The poster didn't say that, but pointed out if criticism is intolerable, the BOG would be a more comfortable place to post. Plus, this is cherry picking.
My observation is that the 'echo chamber of xerox like minds' works both ways. There are those who decry lock-stepping, while lock-stepping themselves in their own little echo chamber of anti-Obama rhetoric, despite their cries that they are of independent mind.
Conflates legit critique with "anti-Obama rhetoric".
But, as you say, "to each his own". It's an interesting concept which, IMHO, should include all opinions, not just those you personally agree with. And suggesting that Obama supporters should keep to their own little niche sounds rather like the 'extreme intolerance' of which you speak.
The poster still has not said that but instead said that if the OP can't tolerate criticism, the BOG is the better place to post, which is true enough.
I was being very precise when I called this a chorus line of straw men. And aside from the fact that this reply reminds me of the inflated rhetoric, unmerited condescension and logical slipperiness of rants we no longer see on DU, I don't see it as moving the discussion forward in any way.
The thing is, I believe samplegirl is upset about the crit of Obama she's seeing here. But it would be much easier to talk to her about it if she wasn't calling out roughly half of DU. And this reply from Summer Hathaway only makes the difficulty worse, imo.
Come on, Monday.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)It sounds like a Broadway show.
I like the idea. I think it's catchy.
Number23
(24,544 posts)'Tis the beauty of language - it's always evolving. And calling "strawman" a phrase is not nearly the grammatical error that you are pretending that it is.
The fact that you feel some compelling urge to be so pedantic about this speaks to the truth of that poster's statement.
EFerrari
(163,986 posts)Well done.
And the language is not evolving to make straw men into truth, no.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Sounds like you've lost the plot so let's just end this here. You can continue to pretend that the poster calling strawman a "phrase" is some sort of grammatical tsunami. She, along with the rest of, couldn't care less particularly as it is not any of us that are looking crazy as a result.
Thanks for all of your contributions to this "thead."
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)one you are unable to engage in.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Thanks for stopping by.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)Michael Fisher Munds
(15 posts)And I'm not being sarcastic, I totally agree with you.
Kurovski
(34,657 posts)She's the best.
And It's best for some to keep in mind that English majors are not the internet's unicorns. 
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)it makes me wonder what the intellect is of these people who personally attack folks for criticizing the president.
Estevan
(70 posts)I'm so tired of that phrase already. It does nothing but fill a void in the user's head.
EFerrari
(163,986 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)this is why he is opposed to marriage equality. In the group in question, one must agree with all policy, including that one.
All of us are free to take our opinions all over DU, no one is asking anyone to remain in a niche, save the Obama group, which excludes all who do not agree with all policy of Obama or at least agree to not mention any disagreement, that is, we can not advocate there for equal rights in marriage in that group. That is the rule. No disagreement with the President.
Got any of that? Somehow I doubt it.
Number23
(24,544 posts)For God's sake there is not ONE member of the BOG that is against gay marriage. NOT ONE. You will find posters there agree with the president on alot of issues and disagree with him on alot of others.
And you sure as hell assume alot for a group you don't even participate in. Are we really that interesting?
jannyk
(4,810 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)Shining Jack
(1,559 posts)Not even a single one? Really? Can you prove this? I have serious doubts.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)- that gay people are not 'sanctifed'.
He has made his personal views on same-sex marriage known; I disagree with his views. Strongly. As I disagree with him on many issues.
To say that the BOG "excludes all who do not agree with all policy of Obama or at least agree to not mention any disagreement" is silly at best.
To say that you "cannot advocate there for equal rights in marriage", and to further assert that this is some kind of "rule", is astoundingly inaccurate, and truly unjust.
From what I have seen of the infamous "BOGgers" who post on this board, there are no greater advocates for equal marriage rights than they continually prove themselves to be.
"All of us are free to take our opinions all over DU, no one is asking anyone to remain in a niche, save the Obama group ..."
How sadly ironic that someone speaking about equal rights would, in the same breath, declare that the e right of others to post anywhere they wish should be limited, if not curtailed completely.
Got any of that? Actually, I think you do. And that's something you might want to think about.
Remember Me
(1,532 posts)They were objecting to her tantrum and demands that others toe her line.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)- in the reply you responded to, but to a reply by Bluenorthwest.
I ask him for a clarification of something he said, and he has now answered my queries.
eilen
(4,955 posts)"As always, you are welcome to go to the Obama Group, where all agree with him 100% all the time. They oppose what he opposes, one assumes."
Did it ever occur to you that you assume wrongly?
He is not wrong.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)- and new to the BOG as well. So I am not familiar with the post/thread you're referring to.
I will say that what I've seen categorized as 'criticism' on this board is often just bashing. And the hosts are allowed to make that call, as well as determining who is trying to disrupt the group discussion.
But to say that all BOGgers agree with Obama 100% of the time is complete nonsense.
FarLeftFist
(6,161 posts)SaintPete
(533 posts)because we're not far right wingers, how simple does this have to be? One thing I've experienced with the far right though, is that they have melt downs when people disagree with them. or challenge their beliefs.
madokie
(51,076 posts)We've lost a number of good and insightful writers who brought much to this place due to the obama bashing going on day in and day out. I pretty much stay away as much as I can anymore as I'm tired of it too. I say if you/meaning anyone, want to bash Obama go to freeperland and bash all you like but leave us Democratic supporters alone. I know I'm only dreaming
quinnox
(20,600 posts)That at least can be respected.
I'm kind of surprised this hasn't got more recs to be honest, I would have thought most of the Obama hard core crowd would be all over this.
slay
(7,670 posts)but he's a terrible leader and an embarassment to the Democratic Party. It's called free speech - combine that with a bad leader - and you get people speaking their mind about Obama. we're not here to provide propaganda in favor of Obama - well most of us aren't - we're here to discuss the situation of politics in the US - which is horrible. see congress's 9% approval rating. if you want all rah-rah-rah then maybe the forums on barackobama.com would be more to your tastes. or the Obama group here on DU.
Vanje
(9,766 posts)He rocks long-sleeved cotton.
kath
(10,565 posts)Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)I always see references to Obama supporters who "think he looks dreamy" - and yet I've never seen that comment made by an Obama supporter.
However, I see it posted all the time by his detractors.
No doubt there are pics available on the net - so please feel free to "hubba hubba" to your heart's content. I promise I won't tell a soul about it ...
Michael Fisher Munds
(15 posts)And Bo is so cute!
Vanje
(9,766 posts)
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Says the attention seeker.
Seriously, get over it.
I and others will be critical of Obama if we feel it is warranted.
themadstork
(899 posts)and it's healthy.
Quartermass
(457 posts)Maraya1969
(23,498 posts)to get through to some people who do not seem to realize that our forums are big and wide and have influence and if you want to bring the President's poll numbers down you can put up a bunch of anti-O threads. If you want the President's poll numbers to go up you can put up a bunch of pro-O threads.
People are, after all, fickle.
Response to samplegirl (Original post)
Obamanaut This message was self-deleted by its author.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)interesting.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)unkachuck
(6,295 posts)....I'm glad you're feeling better today, samplegirl....
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)SaintPete
(533 posts)
paulk
(11,587 posts)and it's only taken a few days.
Already the level of crap that's being posted here has become, well, painful to wade through.
this OP is a joke, and DU is rapidly going to become the same...
garbage like this thread belongs, at best, in the lounge.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)I accepted the decision, which was 4-2 by the way. But one of the jurors really let me have it for alerting the post.
Cameron27
(10,346 posts)looks like my initial optimism was misplaced. I probably should've waited a while before deciding to delurk & donate again.
Deep13
(39,157 posts)
mmonk
(52,589 posts)and being told it is for attention or dissention purposes. Thinking it might be good to leave or not post until 2013.
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)by saying Obama is great. really. so why does he keep wimping out to the Repukes. I do keep hoping this will lead to something but 3 years in a row he's given in to Repukes. he's playing like the Candidate (movie)
JCMach1
(29,202 posts)but maybe I'm wrong...
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Not one reply in working on 7 hours after posting that sort of crap.
StarsInHerHair
(2,125 posts)
fishwax
(29,346 posts)Michael Fisher Munds
(15 posts)SaintPete
(533 posts)know what I mean?
crim son
(27,552 posts)Those of us who are displeased to downright pissed off w/regard to our President have not abandoned our progressive principles - quite the opposite. Dissent is a form of patriotism and if you don't believe it... I think yo u should find elsewhere to go.
tblue37
(68,436 posts)Last edited Sun Dec 18, 2011, 01:10 AM - Edit history (1)
hangin' out on DU2.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)
Skittles
(171,717 posts)another day, another whiner 
Solly Mack
(96,943 posts)napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)I heard him on TV the other day, speaking out on behalf of home health care workers. That really impressed me, because they are some of the most kind people I know, they should really be respected, but are largely invisible. Not to Obama, though.
To me the best part of the Democratic spirit is standing up for the little guy like that, asserting an innate human worth that transcends wealth or status. When ever I think of what made FDR great, it was the image of him at the podium fiercely defending the value of the disadvantaged, while manifesting the very image of it in his broken legs and unbreakable spirit. When you see something like that it doesn't cause immediate reaction, but rather it kind of seeps into your heart slowly like cool water, it inspires you over time, it sticks with you for years. Politics of these days have abandoned the desire to establish that kind of long term inspiration in people, favoring instead those things which invoke immediate reactions - sound byte crap. That's why when I see modern politicians taking the time for those little bits of inspiring moral deeds or words I value it.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)it doesn't come off as photo-op-ism either. Speaks to a quality of character that I want to see in more politicians and other leaders.
napoleon_in_rags
(3,992 posts)Like I said, home health workers are nearly invisible, unlike firefighters, police or other high profile workers a politician might want to be "seen" standing up for. They don't have a lot of money either, so its a case of Obama truly standing up for the little guy at that moment.
totodeinhere
(13,688 posts)I doubt if most criticism of Obama's policies comes from attention seekers as you claim in your OP. They are sincere Democrats who happen to disagree with him on some issues. And by the way, speaking of attention seeking, your OP seems to qualify in that regard.
Kablooie
(19,108 posts)you have to expect some flatulent ranting vented along side of it.
This has never been a mutual admiration society and I hope never becomes one.
Michael Fisher Munds
(15 posts)Gee!
ellisonz
(27,776 posts)
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)We are not entitled to speak out?
piratefish08
(3,133 posts)wow - this shit again?
i think i'll stay and bitch, thanks.
Rex
(65,616 posts)I saw her going away post on DU2...what a waste, leaving the community is her mistake to make.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)
William769
(59,147 posts)Members of DU are a diverse group of people.
Diversity is always good.
Discussing difference of opinions is always good too.
So what group do I fall into?
jimlup
(8,010 posts)Faith No More
(238 posts)Sold out by the very party we hoped would lead us out of the mess left behind by bush and his cronies. Obama has accomplished some good things during his first term but they pale in comparison to the fact that he's been an utter and complete failure at leading. Instead, he's relied on the corporate sellouts in his cabinet who care only about their own interests and those of their former employers. I had great hopes for Obama, maybe too great, but seeing him give in to the repugs over and over without exception has dashed those hopes.
spooked911
(8,194 posts)some are good, some decent, many bad. God I am sick of his sycophants.
sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)He forced those Republicans to sign a no raising taxes pledge. Now Norquist has as much power as the President. Why would you not want a different view point? it would turn this place into Fox news.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)
RetroLounge
(37,250 posts)
RL
Shining Jack
(1,559 posts)You obviously don't know a thing about writing! 
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)
hlthe2b
(113,973 posts)that your desire to limit the free speech of others sort of backfired, samplegirl. No wonder you are no where to be found.
Why not come back and have a civil discussion. I'll bet you will find far more areas of agreement than disagreement among even the Obama "critics". It is a sign of maturity to appreciate and respect the wide spectrum of opinion--even among those with whom you generally have much in common. Why not give it a try? I'll bet you'd be amazed at how different the result.
got root
(425 posts)hope that helps
bertman
(11,287 posts)Karmadillo
(9,253 posts)eilen
(4,955 posts)
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)flamebaiter
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Whether Bush or Obama.
Overseas
(12,121 posts)unless they feel very strongly.
I have abandoned posting in some of those threads that are critical of Democratic legislators and our president over solid principles because the original posters have been jumped on with very little logic except-- Oh, so how would McCain be doing right now? -- or-- He's done good things too -- which the posters usually have already mentioned when they dare to express their disagreements with some policies.
I can't help thinking that some of the 15 or so people that stomp on anyone who dares express discontent are actually working for the opposition, hoping to discourage those who are more progressive than our president and further alienate them from the Democratic party.
paulk
(11,587 posts)that this sort of thread is apparently what DU is going to become.
That 59 people rec'd this means that 59 other DUers, plus a "jury" that decided the thread was ok, feel that any discussion that
doesn't see eye to eye with the Obama administration is agreeing with the Republican base and should post somewhere else. I wonder if the owners of the site are down with that? 'Cause it's going to be damn hard, Skinner, to make any money with only 59 people posting here.
This is a watershed moment, people. That this thread has been allowed to stand marks the end of DU as any sort of viable or worthwhile discussion board. IMHO.
Jim_Shorts
(371 posts)I know it's cliche but decades ago , I considered myself a fringe republican, today I am a fringe democrat. I am not leaving this party, it is leaving me.
I think the majority of people who citicize this president are not trying to tear the party down, we are trying to SAVE it.
The people who started this board have the right to take it in whatever direction they want and I can respect that but I hope they decide to stand for a solid set principals and not help facilitate the ever constant rightward shift of our politics and political discussion.
btw, Nance Griggs (who lives in Canada) is still getting her word out, berating people like Michael Moore. Easy to find her writings if that's what appeals to you.
RevStPatrick
(2,208 posts)I guess it was just sort of random that this was the first thread I opened and read this morning, and I find it rather fascinating on so many levels.
Maybe it's a Sunday morning thing, or the holidays coming up, but I want to be gentle today with samplegirl. She's gotten a lot of very well deserved shit for posting this OP, and I think that all the salient points have been covered by others. I want to try to take a slightly different approach in my response, and an approach that samplegirl and others may not like.
samplegirl - I can tell by your writing style, spelling and grammar, and choice of topics to discuss that you are kind of shallow and not very bright. Please don't take that as an insult, it's not meant to be one. It's meant to be an observation. It's OK to be kind of shallow and not very bright, as it takes all kinds to make a world. And you can certainly work on those traits, if you choose to, and add some depth to your character with hard work on yourself. Actually, there's nothing more in important in this life than working on oneself so that one is, for example, less prone to "spew" as you have done here. Take this as a bit of encouragement and maybe a prodding to start your work today, and to worry less about what others are doing and saying.
The fact that you have not been back to reply to all the feedback that you are getting to your OP leads me to believe that you might be dealing with a bit of embarrassment over what has happened on this thread. True, as others have suggested, you may have been at work or otherwise indisposed for the last 20 hours or so, but in my experience, people who drop bombshells like this one, either defend them vehemently, or quietly monitor them constantly. I suspect that you will read this reply, as well as all the others. It's OK to be embarrassed about what you have done, samplegirl, and dealing with that embarrassment is part of the work that you do on yourself. And yes, I may be totally off the mark here.
samplegirl - This place is frikkin' amazing! I've been going to discussion forums all over the internet since my days on The Well in the early 1990's. I've seen all kinds of political forums on the internet, and for my taste, this one is by far the best. I first came here to read Conservative Idiots #1. I lurked for a while, and then joined in the discussion. The constant sniping got boring to me after a few years, and I stopped coming here. I forgot my username and password a year or so later when I came back, so I started a new username. The point is, that with a couple of breaks, one of them for about a year, I have been here from the beginning. It might be time for you to take a break.
The reason that I think this is the best political discussion forum on the internet is that it attracts a wide range of types and opinion. True, it is meant for Democrats and other "politically liberal people," so the range of discussion isn't a broad as it could be, if it were to include right-wing participants. There's enough of a range among "politically liberal people" to keep the discussion sufficiently broad as to keep it interesting. Or maybe you are not interested in interesting? Maybe you are here only for "inspiration"?
Words that stood out to me in your OP - "uplifting, unity, motivating, positivity, inspiring, peaceful..." Are these the things that you seek? Those are certainly excellent things to seek, since there is so much stress in this life. The country, and the entire world are on the edge of the powderkeg right now, so those are certainly things that people are looking for in their lives. I can't blame you for be stressed by "disunity." But that is not the purpose of this discussion forum, although there are certainly moments and flashes of "unity" or "positivity" around here.
For example - this guy is constantly posting threads that are positivity in Obama's favor:
"The Case for Obama...a truly historic presidency"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100233108
Personally, I don't think President Obama, who I happily voted for and will do so again, is doing an "historic" job. I think he's a good human being, I think he is dealing with forces that we will never understand, and I think that he is a thousand times better than McCain/Palin would have been, or than any of the current Republicans trying to capture their nomination would be. But I do think that there are plenty of things that Obama has done or has not done that are pretty horrific.
I'm allowed to think that, I'm allowed to say it out loud, and I'm allowed to write about that here on this discussion forum. You know that. You're allowed to seek attention by complaining about attention-seekers, and you're allowed to reminisce about "the good old days" when a particular practitioner of hypnotic writing held you in her sway. Things change, and so do we all. Change is not always good, or positive or healthy or fun. Sometimes it takes painful change to get to the other side where things are better. Sometimes it's best not to take things that you have no control over too seriously.
samplegirl - take some time off, have a nice Sunday and a pleasant holiday season, do some work on yourself, and don't take this place too seriously. The world is pretty fucked right now, as it always has been and as it always will be. You won't change the world, but you can change yourself, if only just enough so that the "unity, inspiration, motivation and peace" that you seek come from within...
I would like to leave you now with one of my favorite little bits of holiday silliness:
Cheers!
RevStPatrick
jannyk
(4,810 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Maybe the OP didnt feeling like writing a lot for this OP. Maybe they were late for a bus or for work.
Brilliant posts do not make sweeping generalizations about people without sufficient evidence.
saras
(6,670 posts)I just don't see these people on DU. A few trolls, maybe.
The problem, I think, is that the idea of "unity" is bogus. There is not, in reality, a unity of desires strong enough to coalesce in unity of support.
I'd happily go run someone else for President if the Democratic PARTY would get its stupid, oppressive two-party, winner-take-all principles the FUCK OUT OF THE WAY. (oh, excuse me. I thought you said "run someone else", not "ruin someone else" - the first is a much better idea.
You don't want peace, you want hypocrisy and lies, just like the Republicans.
apocalypsehow
(12,751 posts)site," etc., etc.
Methinks you've hit a nerve. Rec.
Robb
(39,665 posts)
racaulk
(11,550 posts)Good job, samplegirl. I hope you are proud of what you have contributed to this forum with your thread. Did you achieve the unity that you were apparently seeking?
Epic fail.
When, oh when, will people learn that they cannot dictate what people can or cannot say on the Internet?
And Nance Greggs was a member that brought unity to this forum? Pah-leeze!!! That might have been true while Dumbya was in office -- IMHO, some of her rants directed at the Bush cabal were quite excellent. But after Obama's election Nance directed her attention and her ire at her fellow Democrats and proceeded to write possibly some of the most offensive and divisive tripe (to pit DUers against one another) that ever graced this forum. Good damn riddance to that rubbish.
seems about right for those who complain - about all the complaining! oh the irony..
dionysus
(26,467 posts)CarmanK
(662 posts)The TPARTY NATION As perceived by the neocons, given a face by Ronald Reagan, designed by Rove, implemented by Bush/Cheney, propagandized by the MURDOGS at FOX and paid for by the KOCHROACHES is a direct assault on our democracy. They want to undermine the US constitution to achieve political and personal financial goals. They are traitors to the basic concepts to our democracy "that all are created equal". They are masters at divide and conquer, they will lie, cheat, steal and "committ murder (in Iraq and Afghanistan) to achieve their goals of world market place domination and extreme wealth. They want to shrink govt and to cripple it. Obama is the only means we have to stop the savaging of our nation by the wrongheaded, meanspirited, callous TPARTY NATIONALISTS before they suffocate our democracy and sell off ALL common good assets.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)You're the ones giving aid & comfort to the Repukes by cheering all of the right-wing positions supported by the president. Stop bashing Dems for awhile, especially for being "too liberal"
Phlem
(6,323 posts)Are you serious with post?
Sounds like someone needs a lesson in Democracy.
-p
mother earth
(6,002 posts)in these times of horrific suffering. That's the difference between true patriots and wannabes.
The question might be asked, why do you even belong to a political board? If you only want those who agree with you, perhaps it is you who should change affiliation or get out of politics completely. Have the courage of your convictions and state your case. Lord knows the base feels it was thrown under the bus. These are difficult times, and we have an illusion of democracy. The GOP has been chaotic and insane for years, shall we join that insanity at the other end of the spectrum? I don't think so...
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
JohnnyRingo
(20,870 posts)People here find some new nitpick every week. It reminds me of Sean Hannity's show where they complain one week about how Obama's spending 2 miilion a day on vacation, then next week a new shiny object catches the eye and it's all about flag pins or a Thanksgiving speech.
I actually saw a comment here that tried to convince that if Obama prosecuted Cheney on war crimes the entire country would get behind him and he'd win 2012 in a landslide. I used to do a lot of acid when I was a teen, but I never hallucinated that intensely. Others think Obama should ignore Congress and just rule by fiat. They're 100% sure no one would consider that a dictatorship, and indeed it's what a good democratic president would do.
I often wonder if Bill Clinton were still president that DUers would be calling for four years of Bob Dole. After all, he "reformed" welfare beyond recognition, sealed the deal on NAFTA, and kowtowed to the Gingrich led congress.
I'm as left as anyone, but I stay vested in reality, and that reality demands I acknowledge the large center in this country without whom no one becomes president. If Obama took the advice of the malcontents here we'd be addressing our complaints to President Biden today.
On edit:
I wonder if I'll have to endure 5 star rated posts next October that beg DUers to stay home on election day or "hold their nose" to avoid the overwhelming temptation to vote for Romney. If that happens, I'm done. I'll find a democratic themed forum.
mother earth
(6,002 posts)I guess you are not an Occupy supporter....if you were, you'd understand, it's all been bought & paid for, financed by Wall St.
JohnnyRingo
(20,870 posts)One might opine that Obama should haved speared the money beast in the chest and brought about such a social rennaisance by the end of his first term that we'd all be firmly in the middle class, but I think 30+ years of corporate greed may be quite a formidible dragon to slay.
Is OWS working? What progress have you seen so far? The media already gave its parting yawn, and even the protesters must know by now that they really can't occupy anything for long. As I recall, the reaction to OWS was also laid at Obama's feet because he didn't step up and endorse the movement in a great FDR speech that let corporate money rain down from the Wall Street windows like so much confetti on new Years Eve. Joe Biden didn't even stop in and join a drum circle while he was in town. If protesters want to occupy public land they have to aquire a taste for tear gas and violence, like the Bonus Soldiers of WWI and the Native Americans at Alcatraz in 1969. Neither occupation ended well and accomplished little.
What many fail to see is that it isn't the protesting that causes a negative reacton from government officials, it's the occupation. I can go to downtown Youngstown every day of the week for months and protest my cause, and no one will bother me. It's when I announce I'm going to live there that I can expect trouble. The beef isn't about squelching free speech, it's about the settlement itself.
Occupations turn into tent cities. Tent cities turn into shanty towns, and those become urban slums on public land, usually named after the mayor or president in office (see Hooverville). No public official will welcome that, and I'm afraid failure is it's destiny in the 21st century.
I'm all for the movement against wealth disparity, I just think there must be a better way. I can't pretend to know the answer to reversing what has become an embedded American tradition of amassed wealth, but protests have a shelf life. Many people my age still believe we ended the Viet Nam war with guitar solos, but truth is it was a obviously long and arduous process that involved many factions.
Walter Cronkite did more to end the war than Abbie Hoffman and Jimi Hendrix put together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Alcatraz
mother earth
(6,002 posts)squash them. The media is full of propaganda and it's a great tool, but the tipping point has been reached. There truly is a 99% and it goes far beyond political parties, which is why they will never kill Occupy. There is much power in the 99% and it has been awakened...look what small increments of that awakening surge caused. It's a beginning, NO swan songs to be played...we haven't seen anything yet....and there's no going back.
JohnnyRingo
(20,870 posts)and I hope the pounding the working class has suffered all my life is somehow reversed. I'm a lifelong union member, and it's been our cause for decades as well. Unfortunately, big money has successfully sold the propaganda that unions are corrupt and useless.
Indeed, instead of a scattered leaderless movement that has 100,000 hands on the tiller, I think public unions are a more intimidating force than a sit-in. It's clear how much the monied class fear unions and they will stop at nothing to neuter them, but an organized labor force can be persuasive and unstoppable.
I see the day unions see a resurgence (perhaps as a side effect of OWS) and national strikes become a common negotiating tool. Unions are what built the middle class to begin with, and it's only been since the decline of organized labor that we've seen the trend that led to where we are today.
The zions of business are very well organized, and I believe only an equally organized (and well funded) labor movement can counter them. Imagine the day unions have a strong power of lobby and legislators have a choice which hoop they want to jump through. We're organized, and we vote.
You and I are on the same side of the fence, we have only tactical differences.
mother earth
(6,002 posts)resurgence, and you can bet OWS will be the impetus. Think of it this way, it's only 3 months young....a wave that swept over the nation because we've all reached the tipping point....in a strange way we have TPTB to thank for outrageous swindling that brought us to this point. I was too young for the 60'ies, but my feeling is Occupy will blow even that era away....it's early on, my friend.
May the "force" be with you over the Christmas holiday and into the new year, my fellow DU'er! (Where's my toasting smiley icon?)
Cheers!
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)That a post apparently aimed towards calling out those unhappy with the President is also seeking attention. You're certainly likely to get it - and have, from what I've seen of the posts in response.
I'm not happy with the President because he did not fulfill the promises made when he was a candidate. There are numerous policies of his that I disagree with, in the beginning, I expected more. Now he generally does exactly as I expect. His effort to overturn DADT was a pleasant surprise for which I do give him credit. His efforts to bring an end to the Iraq occupation also deserves credit. His crackdown on medical marijuana - his continuation of many Bush policies, the wealthy corporate types he has in high positions... those, not so much. Most disappointing for me was his refusal to hold the Bush administration responsible for the disasters it created. It was something though, I would have gladly overlooked had he fought for a public option, which we desperately need. If you don't think we need it, take a look at his health care reform bill. Read it. Incomprehensible would be a one word, adequate description. It's always the fine print that screws us in the end.
I think I can fairly and honestly say that I was once one of his most vocal supporters, at least in my neck of the woods. I read the Audacity of Hope and it gave me hope. I listened to his words and looked forward to the future I believed he could help us create. Yet I feel now, ultimately, that the corruption and greed of the government and their corporate backers is far too overwhelming for even a very talented, very intelligent man to take on. Nonetheless, I'll go again to the state convention to support him if he needs it. He'll get my vote because he is the lesser of two evils. Not what I hoped for, not what I feel we need, rather, the best we can do right now.
Positivity is great, but it must be tempered with realism. There are plenty of reasons to disagree with and be disappointed in the President's performance. There are promises that many of us remember, that inspired us and lead an entire generation of young voters to get out there and vote for him. I do not think he will ever again see such overwhelming support. I do not think any candidate for decades to come is likely to. I think he missed his chance to do great things because he was too busy trying to do good things, I think he lost several battles because he was too concerned with everyone getting along. I think he is a good man, very diplomatic, a great speaker. I do not think he is a great leader.
I am not here to bring uplifting to the party. I am here to share ideas, opinions - occasionally I will use what little wisdom I have to try to help others feel better, but I'm not here to sugar coat things or lift the spirits of all. Such a task is beyond me, in any event.
I'm also not trying to ruin anyone's day. You can agree to disagree with respect, with tolerance. Some of my best friends were once enemies, at least in the psychological or political sense (although as a younger man, it was more common that we made friends only after the bruises healed).
I would suggest that calling people out in the manner you have done is likely only to inflame them. No one here is likely to leave because you don't like what they have to say. I think there's room for everyone here. Democrats, progressives, independents, liberals, radicals, communists, socialists, anarchists and many many more. One of the great things about this Country has always been our diversity, not just in race or religion, but the diversity of our ideas, both intellectually and philosophically.
Life would be dreadfully boring if everyone agreed. DU would have no purpose then.
FloridaJudy
(9,465 posts)That this thread has made it this far without anyone bringing up a pony.
Count me as neither a cheerleader nor a heckler. Yes, Obama has done some good things. He's also done some really rotten things that contradict his campaign promises. How's that closing Guantanamo and restoring the rights of the accused to a fair trial working for you? When he makes a massive misstep like not vetoing the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, my duty as a thoughtful citizen and a life-long Democrat is to call him on it.
And as to Nance Greggs: anyone who thought she was promoting unity, or was even a decent writer, probably needs to stop drinking. It worked for me.
Mr Dixon
(1,185 posts)I agree