Greenwald is not the left.

[ProSense]

Greenwald: Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100294827

Then he got defensive.

@Wolfrum Thanks: of course Obama = better than Paul on those issues for progressives - though I do say Endless War jeopradizes entitlements

http://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/153169132471328768

Greenwald does exactly this: Hype Ron Paul based on soundbites. One can find any number of clips or writings contradicting these soundbites, as with the anti-war claim. You're opposed to the death penalty, but would let people die without health care?

Let's look at the numbers: There were less than 80 executions in the U.S. last year, the lowest in 40 years. Tens of thousand of people die each year without health care

Greenwald doesn't for a second consider that Paul's positions are propaganda.

"Endless War jeopradizes entitlements"?

What the hell does that mean? You know what jeopardizes "entitlements": getting rid of them and believing they're unconstitutional.

Is slavery an entitlement program?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100294914

Debunking the "Ron Paul Cares About Civil Liberties" Myth

Last week Glenn Greenwald won the Dumbest Tweet of the Week award with this beauty, about Ron Paul:



<...>

http://angryblacklady.com/2011/12/28/debunking-the-ron-paul-cares-about-civil-liberties-myth/

Glenn Greenwald defend Rand Paul against "Democratic myths"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022485711

Disappointing those who 'stand with Rand'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022742805

[leftstreet]

1. Neither is Obama n/t

[MineralMan]

8. I have always found that image to be disgusting.

Equating Obama with Bush is the height of insulting the elected Democratic President of The United States. Have we gone so far on DU that this is acceptable? I hope not.

[LordGlenconner]

9. Some were either too young, or too oblvious to remember

[Raine1967]

12. It appears as tho it was found not acceptable. n/t

[MineralMan]

15. Yes. A good jury decision, all around. Results below:

At Tue Jul 23, 2013, 12:59 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

Doesn't seem to be at times
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3321800

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

YOUR COMMENTS:

Posting this photoshopped melding of President Obama and George W. Bush is the same as saying Obama=Bush, and that is hurtful, rude, over the top and disruptive content. This post should be hidden, at the very minimum. The TOS violation is something else, again. We don't do this on DU, or shouldn't.

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue Jul 23, 2013, 01:04 PM, and voted 4-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: Can't I peruse DU for one fucking day WITHOUT Obama hate???
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: Disgusting.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Alert is for TOS violations, not because someone said something bad about Obama. Learn to discern the difference.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: ARRGGHHH!! MY EYES!!!!
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Personally, I think the photoshop illustrates something very real about Obama's policies, especially when the involve the military-industrial complex, corporate rights, and civil liberties. I think the alert description is over the top.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

Thank you.

[SunSeeker]

33. It was just one vote away from leaving it, since ties go to leaving it.

The fact that it was that close shows how ridiculously high the Obama hate level is on a supposedly DEMOCRATIC board. Sickening.

[MineralMan]

39. Yes, it was. However, in my experience, most hidden posts

are 4-2 votes. It's way less frequent to have a 5-1 or 6-0 vote, except for obvious trolls who don't care what they post. So far, I've served on 394 juries.

[David__77]

127. I don't think the picture denotes hatred.

Obviously, it is a criticism of Obama's policies. I would prefer that people not post it, but instead use words in this forum.

[SunSeeker]

128. Obama = Bush, which is what that picture says, is hatred of Obama.

How any purported Dem could say Obama is the same as Bush and then claim they don't hate Obama is beyond me. Saying you think Obama is wrong to go after pot shops is criticism of Obama. That is not what that picture is. A photoshopped picture of Obama melding into Bush shows hatred of Obama, adds nothing to the discussion and does not belong on a Democratic discussion board whose TOS prohibits that sort of over-the-top bashing of a Dem. If I wanted to see shit like that, I'd go to Huffpo or Yahoo.

[otohara]

14. Hate Is On The Rise

for POTUS at DU and other sites.

I say hate, because you'd have to really hate Obama to post this picture.

[SunSeeker]

36. +1

[AlbertCat]

86. you'd have to really hate Obama to post this picture.

Oh Pu-leez!

Got Hyperbole?

I don't hate Obama. But I think he's mamby pamby milquetoast against a mad elephant that doesn't care if its right or wrong. He has bad advisors and is ill served by them too. And there's too much praise for Reagan. But he's certainly better than any alternatives we had to choose from. And in elections we vote for who's better, not perfect.... because perfect is not ever a choice.

And the pic is just tacky... not an all encompassing political statement. In fact, it's kinda funny in its cluelessness.

[otohara]

95. And Yet It Got Pulled For Being Hyperbolic

I had nothing to do with that -

[AlbertCat]

96. And Yet It Got Pulled For Being Hyperbolic

Yeah.... because these jury decisions are always fair and never ridiculous. No one on DU has a thin skin!

[otohara]

100. So Go Somewhere Else

where you can post shit about the president, the site and it's members.

[AlbertCat]

112. Arrogant much?

Don't tell me to go somewhere else.

I love DU and have been here for a long while. Just because jury decisions are often ridiculous and over sensitive is no reason to go elsewhere. I need not spend my time with only people who agree with me 100%. I'm an adult.

How 'bout you?

[bonniebgood]

69. No mineralman, Obama has gone too far to be acceptable. nt

[MineralMan]

82. Uh-huh...

Thanks for your input. Really.

[DevonRex]

11. I don't think it's cool at ALL to post that

picture of Obama morphing into ANY white guy. Not at all. Saying he's Bush is one thing. Changing his RACE is quite another. It's not just the skin tone. Look at the hair. President Obama is an African American man. Proudly so.

This makes a statement about the racial issues of our time, not just whatever else you're thinking of in addition. You need to delete it.

[MineralMan]

13. A jury has decided to hide that offensive photoshop.

And rightly so.

[DevonRex]

16. Thank goodness.

They must've deleted at the same time as I posted. Or a millisecond after. Perhaps I should delete my post now.

[MineralMan]

18. I posted the jury results above, in #15

[AlbertCat]

87. Obama is an African American man. Proudly so.

With a white mother.

[DevonRex]

91. Do you have a point?

We are all aware of that fact. You, however, did not address my point, which is that in this particular climate, when we are discussing the Trayvon Martin case and after Obama made some important remarks about regarding racial issues, the photograph was particularly offensive. Especially given the fact that certain idiots have said he's not really black, with all sorts of insinuations going along with that.

[AlbertCat]

93. We are all aware of that fact.

I could not deduce you were aware of it from your post.

And my point is he is of mixed race..... if anyone cares.... period. A much more poignant statement in these times of racial tensions, I think.

And another fact is.... what is the statutes of limitations on ancestry? If you go back far enough, we are all from Africa.

Frankly, I'm more offended that someone would morph Obama with an unelected fake president when he was clearly elected and actually tries to get something done.

[Puzzledtraveller]

67. Ouch

[bowens43]

79. You got that right.

[grahamhgreen]

85. Neither is Prosense. Far right ideology disquised as "it's the best we can do". To them, Torture is

necessary evil and need not be prosecuted, Gitmo is too difficult to close, Chained-CPI is good for granny, Single payer is just too far left, war is good, killing children is collateral damage, basically all the neo-con philosophy is OK.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

88. [citation needed]

You specifically call out ProSense, saying "To them Torture is a necessary evil".

Please cite such a statement from ProSense.

You can't by the way, because just like a Tea Party loon, you're pulling BS you made up straight from your ass. And worse, like a typical Tea Party loon, actually believing the BS you just said.

We really don't need a Tea Party of the left.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[grahamhgreen]

109. Sure

Here's a pro post defending Obama's stance on torture (which continues, evidence rendition, Bradley Manning, Gitmo)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021273667

Worse, Bush is an admitted torturer yet remains uncharged, making the administration complicit in the torture.

This, in my view, is a long, far, lonely cry away from Po's headline "No reports of extraordinary rendition to torture or other cruelty under [Obama's] administration."

[ProSense]

116. So posting the

Last edited Tue Jul 23, 2013, 09:35 PM - Edit history (1)

Here's a pro post defending Obama's stance on torture (which continues, evidence rendition, Bradley Manning, Gitmo)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021273667

Worse, Bush is an admitted torturer yet remains uncharged, making the administration complicit in the torture.

This, in my view, is a long, far, lonely cry away from Po's headline "No reports of extraordinary rendition to torture or other cruelty under administration."

...ACLU report is "defending Obama's stance on torture"?

Clownish.

[grahamhgreen]

118. Let's clear this up. Should torturers be prosecuted?

[ProSense]

119. Yes,

"Let's clear this up. Should torturers be prosecuted?"

...what did it say at the link you posted?

What are you trying to prove?

[polichick]

147. Too true.

[msongs]

2. yawn nt

[Mojorabbit]

53. I know. I wish they would get it that no one cares about Ron Paul! nt

[Capt. Obvious]

3. Back to Flooding

I'll give your Fail of a thread a pity kick in a little bit.

[Peacetrain]

6. Bingo.. you hit that one out of the ball park

I have seen a lot of confusion I guess.. people may agree with some segment or portion of Greenwald.. and because they self identify as left.. they assume then Greenwald must be left.. but Greenwald is anything but..

[struggle4progress]

84. It's always great to see newcomers drop by and accuse old members of being trolls!

[Cha]

111. Yeah, how damn dumb do you have to be? nm

[limpyhobbler]

7. Hi. I'm part of the left and think Glen Greenwald is great.

Glenn Greenwald Endorses Rush Holt for Senate in New Jersey
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017133753


While Wall Street Republicans and Donald Trump are funding that sellout Cory "Booker
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023321709

[whatchamacallit]

10. Funny, with your disdain for the left

I'd think you'd be more than happy to classify GG as a "lefty".

[Cleita]

17. What people don't understand about Greenwald is that he is a reporter and a

journalist. He digs for facts and whether they fall to the favor of the left or right doesn't matter. He can be equally hard on both if the facts are there. So to ascribe a party affiliation to him is either naive or disingenuous. He asks a legitimate question. In the same vein, we on the left wonder why a Democrat can be to the right of Eisenhower, a Republican.

[flamingdem]

20. His training is as a lawyer, and he uses truth as a lawyer

loosely to make his Left Libertarian points

[Cleita]

22. So because he's a lawyer, he's not a journalist in your mind?

He came to journalism through blogging. But that doesn't mean his not recognized as such among his peers.

Here's what NPRs's Mark Memmott thinks of him:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/06/11/190670954/he-broke-the-nsa-leaks-story-but-just-who-is-glenn-greenwald

— His passion may be an "antidote" to the way Washington reporters work, but also may constrain his work. Another columnist/blogger who's not afraid to share his opinions, Andrew Sullivan, exchanged emails with New York Times reporter Leslie Kaufman during her reporting of the Times' profile of Greenwald. Sullivan told Kaufman that Greenwald's "passion is a great antidote to the insidery access-driven village of Washington journalism, but at times, I think he has little grip on what it actually means to govern a country or run a war. He's a purist in a way that, in my view, constrains the sophistication of his work."

It's that last point that an old reporter such as this blogger finds fascinating.

Jay Rosen, journalism professor at New York University journalism professor and Press Think blogger tells the AP that Greenwald's clearly stated points of view on issues strengthen his reporting. Rosen notes that Greenwald has been critical of both President Obama, a Democrat, and his Republican predecessor. Some sources turn to writers like Greenwald because of the columnists' commitment to positions — putting "journalists whose professional stance is no commitment ... at a disadvantage," Rosen said.

Greenwald has been recognized by peers for his work. In 2009, he shared the inaugural Izzy Award (named for the late investigative journalist I.F. "Izzy" Stone) that goes to independent investigative journalists. Jeremy Stone, Izzy's son, said of Greenwald that he is "a fearless critic of government officials and complacent reporters."

You don't have to have a degree to become a professional. You could be a lawyer too without going to law school. All you have to do is pass the Bar. The same applies for CPAs. It's just easier if you go to school and get a degree. How do you think a lying slag like Ann Coulter became a "journalist". She too was a lawyer before she started writing right wing screed. At least Greenwald takes it seriously.

[OilemFirchen]

129. Greenwald is not a journalist.

Ann Coulter is not a journalist.

That's a useful comparison, though.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

19. Fuck Greenwald and anyone that reposts his garbage.

If they want to know what's 'wrong with the left,' they need only to look in the mirror.

They are either too ignorant to know that there are people and groups out there deliberately trying to divide us or they're in on it.

[Spazito]

21. Glenn Greenwald is as left as Ron and Rand Paul are....

and they are NOT left at all, imo.

[MjolnirTime]

23. He's a Paulite. Too much of a scumbag for either party, really.

[Apophis]

24. And it starts.

[ProSense]

25. What? n/t

[last1standing]

26. And you are?

Has it now become a trait of the left to smear those we don't agree with by using out of context quotes and half-truths? Is honesty a trait of the right?

I don't think so.

[ProSense]

29. Not,

And you are?

Has it now become a trait of the left to smear those we don't agree with by using out of context quotes and half-truths? Is honesty a trait of the right?

I don't think so.

...a hypocrite.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023321846

I mean, I'm not a fan of Greenwald, a constant defender of Ron and Rand Paul, both liars, hypocrites and racists.

You know what that makes me, not Third Way or a Dick Cheney fan. You know what that makes Greenwald: not the left.

[last1standing]

32. So if Grennwald and I have some similar views I'm a supporter...

But when you and Dick Cheney have similar views you're not.

What's the definition of 'hypocrite' again?

[ProSense]

35. You make no sense, and I made no absurd claim. n/t

[last1standing]

54. So when you rec'd Flamingodem's 'convergence' thread you weren't supporting it.

Gotcha.

[Maedhros]

42. To quote Jonathan Swift:

"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."

[Maedhros]

38. The most notable trait of Greenwald's writing style

is that he digs for the truth and provides links and citations that support his assertions.

This stands in stark contrast to ProSense's screeds, which provide recursive links to her previous screeds as well as carefully edited excerpts of Greenwald's articles that supposedly "prove" whatever misleading point she is trying to make. For example, posting Greenwald's discussion of Ron Paul's anti-war rhetoric without including the paragraph Glenn wrote stating how he abhors the rest of Paul's policy platform.

I've been reading Greenwald's column since the Bush years, and he has been consistent in his views on civil liberties and in his criticism of those who would abrogate them in favor of imagined security. ProSense, in her own mind, somehow thinks that she is providing some kind of erudite take-down of Greenwald. Quite the opposite. Her arguments are easily countered - and have been, multiple times - but like the other members of the shout-down-the-critics cabal, ProSense is in no way interested in participating in a good faith argument of the merits and shortcomings of any issue. She's here to try and spin the issue in favor of the Administration, and this becomes rather obvious as she spams every single thread that questions the actions of the Administration.

[ProSense]

46. Here's

"This stands in stark contrast to ProSense's screeds, which provide recursive links to her previous screeds as well as carefully edited excerpts of Greenwald's articles that supposedly "prove" whatever misleading point she is trying to make. For example, posting Greenwald's discussion of Ron Paul's anti-war rhetoric without including the paragraph Glenn wrote stating how he abhors the rest of Paul's policy platform."

....another.

This is Greenwald's debunk of his support for the Iraq war?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023134060

And, I'm still waiting for Greenwald to wake the fuck up and recognize that the demagogue he supports isn't anti-war.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023205539#post6

[Maedhros]

49. Other than this short note, I won't respond directly to your posts.

You do not approach discussions with integrity.

[ProSense]

51. I suppose

"Other than this short note, I won't respond directly to your posts. You do not approach discussions with integrity."

...your little personal attack because you disagree with my criticism of Greenwald is your idea of "integrity"?

Laughable.

[Maedhros]

58. I've provided responses to your ad hominem attacks on Greenwald multiple times in the past.

You simply post what you believe to be zingers, out of context. You do not engage in good faith.

[ProSense]

65. Your claims are bogus.

"You simply post what you believe to be zingers, out of context. You do not engage in good faith."

Your point is a lame attack and an attempt at deflection. You cannot say that Greenwald hasn't defended Ron and Rand Paul time and again. You cannot refute the OP so you make bogus generalizations using mischaracterizations.

[Maedhros]

72. I'm putting you on ignore. Nothing personal. [n/t]

[ProSense]

76. .

[bahrbearian]

64. Right ON

[A Simple Game]

89. I quit responding to her posts quite a while ago.

I rarely even click on her OPs.

I don't want to give her an excuse to increase her word count. By all of her copy and pasting it appears she benefits from increasing her word count. I would feel bad if I benefited someone so far to the right in any way.

[ProSense]

90. You clicked on this OP.

"I don't want to give her an excuse to increase her word count. By all of her copy and pasting it appears she benefits from increasing her word count. I would feel bad if I benefited someone so far to the right in any way."

Thanks for kicking the thread, but the self-rigtheous deflection is pretty lame.

Frankly, how does anyone know you're not "far to the right"? Maybe you're just pretending to be on the left.

[A Simple Game]

94. Please don't be flattered by this rare response. It will probably be the last for a long time.

But if I am "far to the right" I must hide it much better than you do.

Most here know you aren't here to debate the merits of any positions. You are here to propagandize, so there is no need to respond or even read most of your posts. I will admit your OP title did intrigue me, you caught me in a weak moment.

What's your word count up to today?

[ProSense]

97. Oh

Please don't be flattered by this rare response. It will probably be the last for a long time.

But if I am "far to the right" I must hide it much better than you do.

Most here know you aren't here to debate the merits of any positions. You are here to propagandize, so there is no need to respond or even read most of your posts. I will admit your OP title did intrigue me, you caught me in a weak moment.

What's your word count up to today?

...my!

[Maedhros]

114. I've responded to every one of her smears, in detail, more than once.

Then she shows up again, posting the same disingenuous and misleading arguments as if they are somehow decisive and relevant.

My point in responding was to give readers an alternative viewpoint so as not to be catapulted by the propaganda. But, having watched the never-ending circular argument propagate itself, I've become confidant that any reasonably-educated visitor to the site will see through the smoke screen.

When one side of an argument presents little more than personal smears and invective, plus a few derogatory smirks with accompanying emoticons, it's pretty easy to tell who is trying to have a conversation and who is obfuscating, distracting and misdirecting.

[ProSense]

115. Stop being disingenuous, and

"My point in responding was to give readers an alternative viewpoint so as not to be catapulted by the propaganda. But, having watched the never-ending circular argument propagate itself, I've become confidant that any reasonably-educated visitor to the site will see through the smoke screen. "

...cut the self-righteous act. Your point is silly and designed to pat yourself on the back for your attempted deflection.

[Zorra]

27. Your "Third Way Worldspeak" linguistic framing might fool a few seriously reality challenged idiots,

but even a blind possum with half a brain could see through your disingenuous attempts to paint right as left and left as right.

In Third Way World, Greenwald is a rightie, war is peace, freedom is slavery, and laissez faire capitalism is a left wing economic system, cutting social security is a left wing idea, etc, ad nauseum.

[Zorra]

28. Guardian's Glenn Greenwald endorses Holt POSTED: Friday, July 19, 2013,

2:21 PM WASHINGTON -- Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian writer near the center of the storm over leaks of U.S. surveillance programs, endorsed U.S. Rep. Rush Holt in New Jersey's Senate race Friday and took a shot at front-runner Cory Booker. "Anyone concerned about mass spying or Wall-St-controlled crony capitalism candidates (Cory Booker) can back Rush Holt," Greenwald wrote on Twitter Friday. He later told Politico: "I've long been an admirer of Holt for reasons going way beyond his unusually firm defense of civil liberties and opposition to secrecy. He's one of the few members of Congress who understands the evils of crony capitalism and its corrosive effect on Congress." He also reiterated his criticism of Booker's ties to Wall Street.

Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/capitolinq/Guardians-Glenn-Greenwald-endorses-Holt.html#EDbgxSGqAFamWuwc.99

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

34. Booker.

I was deeply troubled by recent revelations of the scope of the National Security Agency’s domestic data collection. We failed as a nation to thoroughly debate and create public oversight before this highly questionable data collection began. It is time to bring this program to light and fix that error.

It is a basic principle of our founding that laws be open to public debate and inspection. We must update the rules that permitted this program to exist and ensure Congress, the courts, and the people have access and oversight. We need to vigorously guard our 4th Amendment privacy protections while still protecting Americans from terrorism. There are serious questions about whether this program successfully does that, and we cannot ask these questions after the fact again.

http://www.corybooker.com/vision/safeguarding-civil-rights-and-civil-liberties

Leave it to Greenwald to campaign against a Democratic shoo-in.

[Maedhros]

40. What have you got against Rush Holt?

Seems like he'd be an excellent candidate.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

44. I have absolutely nothing against Holt,

and if I were to run for office, my platform would look a lot like Holt's...

but Booker will likely be the winner.

[Maedhros]

56. So you are criticizing Greenwald for supporting a candidate

that you, yourself, actually prefer?

We can only support those candidates that have been pre-approved by the party machine? Greenwald is throwing his support behind Holt because he believes that Holt will be the more progressive candidate. I cannot find fault with that.

[Zorra]

45. Booker is Third Way rightie, Holt is a progressive lefty. nt

[Zorra]

41. Cory Booker's defense of Wall Street may hurt his status with liberals, but it won't hurt his bank

account

NEWARK — Cory Booker may have riled liberal factions with his support of Bain Capital on "Meet The Press" last weekend, but his defense of Wall Street is more than just high-minded discourse.

The Newark mayor has taken at least $491,000 in political contributions from the financial services industry in the last nine months — more than a third of his total fund-raising this election cycle, according to campaign filings with the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission and the Federal Election Commission.

No one is certain what Booker’s next political step is going to be. Speculation ranges from a run for governor against Chris Christie, to a run for U.S. Senate against Frank Lautenberg, to even another term as mayor. But whatever move he makes, it’s clear Booker is going to rely on Wall Street to get there.

Firm names like Moore Capital Management and Northwoods Capital Management dot his campaign filings with donations ranging from $1,000 to $13,000 a piece.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/05/bookers_defense_of_wall_street.html

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

50. From the same article:

"Traditionally liberal groups such as trial lawyers, unions, and Hollywood moguls have also spent lavishly on Booker."

[Zorra]

66. The point here is: Greenwald is a left progressive, who is supporting a left progressive

against a center right conservative in the NJ Senate race.

The OP has claimed that Greenwald is not a lefty, in the face of a mountain of evidence contrary to her POV.

Rush Holt: I'd be a 'one-of-a-kind' senator
Monday July 22, 2013, 8:24 PM
- See more at: http://www.northjersey.com/news/216516931_Rush_Holt__I_d_be_a__one-of-a-kind__senator.html#sthash.6aCVcRNV.dpuf

Should he win the Aug. 13 primary and, later, the Oct. 16 special election, Holt said that he envisions working with current senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin as a progressive. Holt counts universal healthcare, lowering student interest rates and fighting climate change as traditionally progressive ideals that he plans to support in the Senate. - See more at: http://www.northjersey.com/news/216516931_Rush_Holt__I_d_be_a__one-of-a-kind__senator.html#sthash.6aCVcRNV.dpuf

[Luminous Animal]

77. First we are told over and over and over again to do the work of supporting better democrats then,

when the opportunity presents itself, we are told that it is no use.

[Zorra]

78. Exactly. The whole Third Way MO is smoke and mirrors. nt

[frylock]

63. Obama nominates Chuck Hagel for Defense, John Brennan for CIA

[ProSense]

31. Fuck Third Way and Paul supporters. n/t

[quakerboy]

108. Holy Irony, Batman.

[quinnox]

37. Greenwald is one of the best journalists working today, and I'm a huge fan!

I say that as a strong liberal Democrat.

[Maedhros]

48. If he wasn't on to something with his series of articles on the NSA

then we wouldn't see so many people desperately attacking him for it.

If he is wrong, he would just be ignored.

[backscatter712]

43. GOLDSTEIN!!! n/t

[Puzzledtraveller]

70. You know it

I am glad I am not like that.

[Android3.14]

47. Just stopped by to snicker

I see we still have the folks who are going to whine endlessly until someone somewhere gives them the police state they deserve.
It's a bit like watching the Mean Girls at their table in the high school cafeteria holding court with their Queen Bee sneering at the folks who refuse to recognize their awesomeness.

[stonecutter357]

52. K&R

[AgingAmerican]

55. This is what "Support Obama" has degenerated to

Attractive, isn't it?

[D23MIURG23]

57. Ad hominem isn't an argument. n/t

[ProSense]

60. Cricitism is criticism n/t

[Vinnie From Indy]

59. Death by a thousand BLUE LINKIES

The sentence to blue linkie ratio from the OP is increasing. I have no idea what that means, but I am sure means something!

Cheers!

[ProSense]

61. Yeah,

"Death by a thousand BLUE LINKIES

The sentence to blue linkie ratio from the OP is increasing. I have no idea what that means, but I am sure means something! "

...I've read your case against "blue linkies": http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023087676

[Puzzledtraveller]

74. "If it bleeds, we can kill it"

[Scurrilous]

62. K & R

[MNBrewer]

68. oh, my sides!!!

[War Horse]

71. Haven't commented on this before b/c I don't quite know what to make of it...

I've started to type comments but stopped, as this seems to be all black or white with no shades of gray to most who post here, and it always devolves into name calling.

The surveillance troubles me. I think Snowden may have done something good here. I also think he went too far. I don't see him as a hero in any way. I think he should, ideally, be extradicted and stand trial. But after seing the treatment of Manning I kind of hope gets asylum somewhere, though.

I'm also very troubled by the whole libertarian bent on this. Even before this thing started a lot of leftists seemed to be buying into (at least parts of) the Paulian thing. These folks are not allies of the Left, people...

[B Stieg]

73. Greenwald is an Ur-fascist

ala Umberto Echo

He also seems oblivious to some of the pratfalls of classical liberalism.

However, I am grateful for what he re-revealed.

But really, I think we have far more important things to think about...

[kenny blankenship]

75. Lol. Let us know when you are invited to speak at a Socialism conference.

[ProSense]

81. Does supporting the Pauls make one a socialist?

[Arctic Dave]

80. The photo that dipsydoodle posted seems to most fit Obama.

Too bad it was hidden considering Obama is a rightwinger.

[dogknob]

83. If it is discussed in the MSM, it ain't the left.

It is the MSM's token, fettered, stabbed-in-the-kidney-by-the-emperor-before-the-gladiator-duel illusion of the left.

The "liberal media" is a myth... except on the Internet, but the TPP will take care of that.

[ProSense]

92. You mean,

"If it is discussed in the MSM, it ain't the left."

...like Greenwald on Fox:

Glenn Greenwald To Fox News: 'The World Will Be Shocked' By New NSA Stories
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014525228

[dogknob]

101. FOX has been portraying themselves as "alternative media" forever.

Everything in the MSM is a pro-corporate POV.

The Rachel Maddow Show might as well be shot on the set of Lockup.

Our media is owned by 6 corporations. That is a fact, not some Dorito-stained affront to spelling and grammar about the Illuminati.

Any liberal opinion presented in the MSM is just part of their show. If you start to take it too seriously, watch Lockup.

I love people who look down their nose at you and proclaim "We don't have a television" while failing to recognize that the only reason they can make that claim is because they have an alternative, the Internet.

The 6 corporations hate that we have that alternative.

[BornLooser]

98. Wait a second, is this the Democratic, or the Demagogue Underground?

This circular argument has too many obtuse angles, predictably filled with cherry picking, throwing "quotes" back in poster's faces perpetuating self serving gravitas, followed by the tastelessly hysterical rolling with the dogs on the floor avatar. Don't like G.G., cool. Wanna love B.O., far out! Be supportive of your' choices, agree to disagree, argue as adults and suss it out. Scolding good people, playing gotcha with over-the-top obstinance will never sit well with reasonable Democrats. Same goes for the other side of this wedge. Respectful Democrats should behave, as Democrats, and this is the antithesis of said behavior. All this accomplishes is further fracturing of our core, a chip at a time, giving valuable aid to the con artists, and it serves no one...here. Peace....already.

[ProSense]

99. Welcome,

"Wait a second, is this the Democratic, or the Demagogue Underground?"

...and enjoy your stay at "Democratic" Underground.

Enjoy the variety of opinions.

LOL!

[on point]

102. He is the center. Just because he DLC and pukes have moved to the right does not mean reality has

[LiberalLovinLug]

103. Who cares about labeling?

If he doesn't check all the boxes we should all just ignore all his journalistic work?

How far do you want to take that?
psssst.....I actually agree with Ron Paul on his anti-war stance as well

I also agree with grampa McCain at times like his stance on campaign finance reform and his questioning of Florida's stand your ground law.

This black and white, you're either with us or for the terrorists thinking is archaic and backwards.

[Savannahmann]

104. So what is the Left?

Apparently Civil Rights is no longer the area of the left. So will we join with the Rethugs in cheering Zimmerman now? After all, Civil Rights aren't exactly our core belief any more.

What is the left now? As far as I can tell, it is power, for the sake of having power. It is winning elections, for the sake of winning them. We don't want to do anything with that power, with those victories. So how do we sell our ideals to the People? You know, the ones we hope to have vote for us next year as we try to take back the house?

Will we campaign on Gay Marriage? On what grounds? Will we be so hypocritical that we claim we must fight for the civil rights of a few, while ignoring the abolishment of the civil rights of the many? We'll get eaten alive by the RW for that one. Will we campaign for National Security? We watched Bush, McCain, and Romney lose on that platform. Perhaps we'll win though, times do change. Of course, we can't exactly tell anyone what we're up to, because that leads to questions we just don't want to answer. So our National Security platform is going to be Trust Us, we're not reading all your emails. We're not listening to every phone call. Not exactly a winning platform IMO.

So what exactly is the left to stand for? We have sold out our belief in Civil Rights. We've just handed that over to the fringe of the RW party. Civil Rights, the topic that nearly half the population thinks is important, and we are washing our hands of it daily. Oh don't worry, if we keep the character assassination up long enough, perhaps a few of them will come back. But every couple weeks, a few more shift to my side, the side that thinks the issue is important.

So what do we as Democrats stand for? What do we on the left stand for? If Civil Rights are no longer the standard under which we gather, then what principle are we to champion? Because from where I sit, we are slitting our own throats, chasing the tired worn out excuses into the fires of self immolation.

Go ahead, cut a line out, and pretend it was all I had to say. It's your normal operating procedure.

[ProSense]

117. OK,

"So what is the Left?...Go ahead, cut a line out, and pretend it was all I had to say. It's your normal operating procedure. "

...pro civil rights:

Thanks, Obama >> updated, Edith Windsor reacts
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023101179

That hopey changey thing at the Department of Justice
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022933401

Lunacy:

Death Penalty For Gays: Ron Paul Courts The Religious Fringe In Iowa
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100281161

[Union Scribe]

105. Lol.

It's awesome watching the number of people who take you seriously drop like a rock.

[ProSense]

106. Why

"It's awesome watching the number of people who take you seriously drop like a rock."

...how many was it before?

I mean, you're taking pleasure in this alleged event. Please share your findings.

[ucrdem]

107. No he isn't. He's a big-L Libertarian. But no amount of evidence will concince the faithful.

Greenwald hates taxes, hates government, hates tax-and-spend Democrats, hates Obama most of all. He works for the Kochs, has a dishonest and obnoxious media personality, and opportunistically exploits other people. A more improbable "leftist" you couldn't ask for, but he's promoted as a leftist on the internet, and so that's what many take him for.

Strange.

[RetroLounge]

110. Only 38 recs?

Must suck to have such a small group of fans, when Greenwald has 1000s.



RL

p.s. Irony much?

[ProSense]

113. I know,

this one got 100 recs (http://www.democraticunderground.com/100251866) and this one got 150 (http://www.democraticunderground.com/100219446), and Obama won by a landslide.

BBI

[Scurrilous]

130. LOL

Nailed it.

[Bobbie Jo]

132. Well, there it is.

Brilliant, no?

[Quantess]

120. I thought it wasn't about Greenwald. But here you are, making it into a personality.

So alright, let's say that Greenwald isn't "left"
Is resistance to the invasive NSA surveillance on private citizens "left" or "right"? Does it matter?

[ProSense]

121. It isn't "about Greenwald" unless it's to praise him. n/t

[Quantess]

123. No, you can't have it both ways.

You made the title of your OP to indicate it was clear it's about Greenwald.

[ProSense]

124. My comment was snark. The OP is clearly about Greenwald. n/t

[AgingAmerican]

122. This is the sort of OP that is posted

when the poster can not argue on the facts.

I am still perplexed how OPs like this one help Obama? How does driving away people who voted for him help his case?

[OilemFirchen]

131. My turn!

[sheshe2]

125. K&R!

[99th_Monkey]

126. So What?

All you have "proven" is that Greenwald tends to think as a free agent in his
political views, and is not overly fixated on a "Democrats right or wrong"
point of view. <-- a big mistake.

I see that as a strength, and speaking of the "Left" .. I only wish the Left were
a bit more adroit and descerning in lending it's support to candidates, regardless
of the candidates party label.

[OilemFirchen]

133. A fine blast from the past.

Thanks, ProSense.

For the record, I don't think Greenwald's much of an ideologue; rather, he's a simple huckster. He's never really written anything noteworthy, and he's never actually grasped the concept of journalism as a discipline. Instead, he uses his ill-gotten position as a platform for the only avocation at which he excels: Greenwald promotion.

He's the Amway of reportage, and I note that many of his recruits are unsurprisingly enamored with the stinky shit he sells.

[Fearless]

134. By that logic neither are you.

Making generalizations and claiming they're absolutes is the lowest form of argument.

[ProSense]

137. "Generalizations"?

Greenwald actually defends the Pauls.

[Fearless]

148. You prove my point

[Gravitycollapse]

135. And neither are you.

Cha-ching.

[ProSense]

138. Yeah, you must be the left because you said "Cha-ching."

I suspect that I'm far more left than you are.

[Douglas Carpenter]

136. Glenn Greenwald addresses Socialism 2013 conference in Chicago

[ProSense]

139. I prefer

socialist who don't think Rand Paul should be defended.

Glenn Greenwald defend Rand Paul against "Democratic myths"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022485711

[Douglas Carpenter]

140. Like David Sirota and many progressives he was opposing the Obama drone program and on that

specific matter

[ProSense]

141. Um

"Like David Sirota and many progressives he was opposing the Obama drone program and on that"


...David Sirota is a clown: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023273419

[Douglas Carpenter]

142. why does it not surprise me that you think that at?

[ProSense]

143. "Why does it not surprise me that you" agree with his drivel? n/t

[Zorra]

146. But, you see, in *Third Way World* socialism is a RIGHT WING ideology! Left is Right.

Just like War is Peace.

Therefore, Greenwald is not left.

Don't you get it?

[AgingAmerican]

144. Are you the left?

Are you saying Greenwald is center right? Do you consider yourself, "Left?"

[Blue_In_AK]

145. Left , right, libertarian, anarchist, whatever.

I'm not big into labels. I often agree with him, sometimes I don't. So what?