Liberals Without A Conscience

[michigandem58]

...

If you find it morally repugnant that the government conducts surveillance operations within the law and the Constitution as a tool to fight threats in a dangerous world but find yourself worshiping at the alter of racists, fascists, and traitors who take shelter in our adversaries, your conscience is failing. If you trumpet yourself as the champion of open government, freedom and free press but feel an irresistible compulsion to sing the praise of a ruthless ruler who poisons dissidents, suppresses free press and jails gays, you may need to retrieve your conscience from the pit of a very dark hole inside of your mind.

But most of all, you are a liberal without a conscience if your focus is on being such a perfection troll that you cannot see, or close your eyes to, the most effective liberal to have entered the White House in nearly a century. If compromise is such a dirty word to you that it prevents you from seeing why it is necessary and what a given compromise does to help the ordinary person, you are an elitist liberal who needs to confront the demons of your own conscience (or lack thereof).

At the core of liberalism is community - the idea that we look out for our neighbors, or fellow Americans and ultimately, our fellow humans - and if your ideology is getting in the way of seeing the greater good, the common good, then it's a problem with your conscience.

Think about it.

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2013/09/liberals-without-conscience.html

[11 Bravo]

1. This should be fun.

[creon]

133. yes

It is too funny.
a real meltdown

[WorseBeforeBetter]

143. If sitting on my big ol' deck enjoying a beautiful sunset...

Last edited Fri Sep 13, 2013, 08:21 PM - Edit history (1)

with a refreshing margarita in hand (while THOROUGHLY enjoying the lame defense of the Crappiest of Crap Blogs) constitutes "real meltdown" in your world, you need to get out more.

Cheers!

[NRaleighLiberal]

225. having a Sierra Nevada Porter here....

[WorseBeforeBetter]

226. Hello, NRL!

Still sitting out, but will be heading inside to watch "Side Effects" soon. 75 and sunny in Raleigh tomorrow... can't wait!

[NRaleighLiberal]

231. I will be at West Point at Eno Park doing a garden talk 10-12 tomorrow!

looking forward to nice weather!

[WorseBeforeBetter]

234. Nice. We'll be riding the Neuse River Greenway.

I hear it's open to Clayton and want to check it out.

http://www.traillink.com/imagehandler.ashx?id=57987&t=640

(Aaaah, good use of tax dollars!)

[daleanime]

2. If you pick your house because of your neighbors.....

Your settling for a building not a home.

[Rex]

3. I wonder why the blog owner refused to vote for Obama?

What purpose would he have to vote for Mitt Romney?

[Electric Monk]

6. The OP quotes that shitty blog so much, I wonder if it belongs to them?

[Rex]

11. No idea. Just think it is funny that a liberal hater that didn't vote

is pretending to be the authority on liberals! Of course this OP will get recs from the left bashing crowd.

[struggle4progress]

182. Election Night Liveblog, Through Twitter (Tuesday, November 06, 2012)

Posted by Spandan C at 2:42 PM

... WE DID IT FOLKS, WE DID IT. YOU DID IT. Thank you to everyone who kept faith, called voters, knocked on doors, and kept on keepin' on throughout all the adversity. Congratulations to you, and Congratulations, Mr. President.

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2012_11_01_archive.html

[Rex]

185. http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2012_11_01_archive.html

"The president is in a fighting mood. Starting today, he's barnstorming the country, getting the American people to pressure Congress to extend the middle class tax breaks, and to do so now. Yesterday, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner presented the leaders of Congress with the Administration's opening offer. That offer is heavy on revenue, tax fairness, and Medicare savings without affecting benefits. Here's a short summary of what the president has proposed, from leaked details."

How did you get something different?

[struggle4progress]

194. Ask your Tech Support guy to teach you how to scroll down a web page: you may have a mouse button

for that

[Rex]

196. So in other words, you have no proof of anything just links.

THAT is all I needed to know. Have a great day playing CYA!

[SidDithers]

222. Are you seriously unable to find that quote at the link provided?...

Really?

Sid

[Rex]

235. Hey if the guy doesn't want to vote for Obama, yet merely endorse him

then that is his right. Can you find it?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

282. I found it...

Quite easily. On your keyboard, there is this button. It's called Pg Dn (which stands for Page Down). If you press that a few times, you will also find it. Also, your mouse may have a little wheel in the center. This is for scrolling, and will serve the same purpose of the Page Down key.

Here's a hint: It's a little over 3/4 down the page. Pretty hard to miss...

[Rex]

286. Kewl so you found proof that this guy voted for Obama!

Thanks for the link.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

294. Yes you are...

Oh wait, sorry, I was replying to the comic in your signature...

Also, how do we know YOU voted for Obama?

The voice in my head said you voted for Romney. Disprove it.

[Number23]

318. !!

[KamaAina]

77. Nope. The shitty blogger is in CA.

Not likely to be going by michigandem58.

[Bluenorthwest]

97. Why not? Not all people who use States in usernames are in those States.

nt

[KamaAina]

105. Usually that's because they've moved.

madinmaryland, for example, is now in Ohio (but presumably still mad).

[creon]

123. approval not required.

That is your opinion.
That is all that it is.
clear?

[HangOnKids]

189. clear?

And you are?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

183. It's his blog. The only reason he is here is to generate advertising hits on his blog. nt

[bunnies]

254. Youre absolutely right.

He wont even answer questions about his identity. This Spamden character is really something.

[msanthrope]

23. Can you cite where he says he voted for Romney? nt

[Rex]

28. No just where he wouldn't vote for Obama.

I can only assume he voted for Mitt instead or did not vote at all.

[msanthrope]

59. Still waiting for you to cite that......nt

[Rex]

66. I said I could not cite that he voted for Mitt.

Did you miss that part?

[msanthrope]

67. I did not miss that part. You made two claims, though. You cannot cite one, but what about

the other????

[Rex]

75. Sure thing! Here ya go! Nice Rec btw.

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2007/10/obama-lost-my-vote-general-election-too.html?m=0

Here let us just get down to the bottom of the article where he spells it out;

'Lest you think this is because I was personally offended as a gay man, you are right. But it wasn't only because of that that I made this decision. I draw the line in the sand when politicians pander to any group and sacrifice their stated goals of equal dignity under law and associate themselves, willingly, with known bigots of any kind, be they racists, sexists or homophobes. This is such a line. Obama has crossed it. Good riddance, Barack Obama.'


Good riddance, Barack Obama?

[deaniac83]

90. Just to set the record straight (or complete)

I don't plan on posting here again, but let me set the record straight.

You cited that article, which I did write at an emotional time in 2007, but you either did not read, or felt compelled not to cite, an update I wrote months later: BARACK OBAMA, A CAUTIOUS ENDORSEMENT:

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2008/02/barack-obama-cautious-endorsement.html

I guess the fact that you avoided mentioning it DOES speak to your lack of conscience. UPDATE - since you live in opposite land and think that 'endorsing' him doesn't mean I voted for him, just be completely clear, I did. And you have lost all credibility.

I'm going to update the original with the update, so that people like you aren't able to lie about me.

Someone was referring to my Linked In profile, which is no longer accurate as I haven't updated it in 5 years.

Also, I have never been banned from Daily Kos - I can still post there. I choose not to.

And no, I'm not the one that posted my article here originally, but I do thank the OP for doing so.

Okay, carry on being liberals without conscience.

[Rex]

93. Hey if you refuse to vote for Obama and say 'good riddance' then who am I to complain?

Just own up to your hypocrisy is all I am saying.

SO you are going to HIDE what you said...NP I and others have it saved and will paste it in here whenever that horrible left bashing blog is brought up.

Oh and have a nice day!

[deaniac83]

96. Nope not gonna hide it

I could have hidden it a long time ago if I wanted to. But I have no problem letting my reader see the path I came through. Go see it. So I just updated it with a link to the latter article, so that they aren't misguided by people like you who cherrypick the hurt but not the subsequent endorsement. I am perfectly comfortable letting people make their own judgment, as long as they have the whole story.

Alright, bye now.

[Rex]

98. No you seem desperate in getting caught.

Like I said, it will ALWAYS be posted in threads linked to that left bashing blog. Alright, bye now...until next time someone lets you know someone pointed out your rank hypocrisy in a blog!

THAT in itself is very funny...your buddies on DU got your back!

[Autumn]

110. Strange that he hasn't posted here till now. That's a long time to lurk.

[Rex]

115. IKR?

This entire thread has been so illuminating.

[Autumn]

117. Very illuminating.

[Puglover]

288. Good post.

Not surprising his fan that was haranguing you for the link has now disappeared. I love how these posters own up to their never ending bullshit.

[Bluenorthwest]

99. So you get a path, the rest get your wrath?

Pretty self serving prose compared to how you approach others. You want the whole story told, but you treat others to summarized characterization removed from any reality.
The path I came through. Community. It's rich, it's thick, it's creamy good.

[bvar22]

100. Thank You, Rex.

That is information that the readers of DU need to know.

I will also keep a copy,
and post it at the appropriate times.

The People's View is a sick place,
and an embarrassment to have links to DU.

[Rex]

101. I wonder who informed him so fast?

Notice how when proof was given, he showed up instantly. Kinda makes ya wonder.

[bunnies]

259. I think he finally became self-aware.

[PowerToThePeople]

108. You lurk these boards now?

If so, you are not reading very well. There are no Putin Lovers here.

"Obabmacare" without a public option is nothing more than a handout to big insurance on the backs of working Americans. There is nothing good about it.

Fuck, I could go on if it was worth my time. This is a piece of filthy writing that would come out of the Fox News Network.

[creon]

136. got it in one

[freshwest]

322. Progress is impossible without change and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything

Said George Bernard Shaw.

Which explains both sides of the question being raised here. Is a person allowed to evolve, to have feelings, to decide they are wrong and then steer to the better? Are those who claim offense, refusing to change?

We don't need to react to triggers like conservatives who go postal over words that can have more than one meaning. Try saying 'conservatives have no conscience' on a board with them and they lose their minds, trying to defend a word and not argue the issues raised.

Which is what is going on in this thread. Those who cherry pick the blog, are offended that someone finds fault with the way groups think. Isn't that discussing issues on DU?

There are different kinds of conservatives, just a there are different kinds of liberals. These kind of dismissive, out of hand and vulgar attacks remind me of Monty Python skits where a person makes the sign of the cross with their fingers in front of their face to protect them from the devil...

If we want progress, we have to accept that we are going into unknown territory, and that in doing so, we ourselves will have to change. This OP is not namecalling liberals as conservatives do. No one is calling liberals baby killers, sexual deviants, godless, socialists or the hate du jour of talk radio.

This is not an attack on all liberals, but those who don't have compassion. I have met some people who label themselves as liberals, but don't have empathy. Which to me means they aren't liberals of the kind I love.

JHMO.

[LondonReign2]

211. That's your craptastic blog? Thanks, I know who to ignore now

[WorseBeforeBetter]

219. No need. He said he wouldn't be posting anymore.

We'll see how long that lasts.

[LondonReign2]

246. And yet the same anti-liberal continues to link to that shitty blog

[WorseBeforeBetter]

250. Yep. And runs away rather than engaging.

And someone downthread actually suggested he was "courageous." Ha. Likely another one from the shitty blog...

[msanthrope]

276. 2007 with a later post explaining that he was voting for Obama in 2008?

That's your evidence?????

[Marr]

119. I thought not voting for Obama was the same as voting for Romney.

Huh. Not true now, eh?

[Rex]

126. IKR!?!?!

My my my...all those claims seem to be...gosh...conditional! Who would have guessed?

[struggle4progress]

141. You conclude from a 2007 post that the person voted for Romney in 2012?

[Rex]

209. Well there is no proof that they voted at all, but carry on!

[Marr]

267. Wow- it's amazing how forgiving you can be when it's someone you agree with.

Us 'emoprogs' are pretty regularly accused of not having voted for Obama, just because we offer criticism.

But a self-described 'centrist' can flat out state he's not voting for Obama, and he gets a pass because it wasn't actually an election year.

[struggle4progress]

269. I've never used the term emoprog

[WorseBeforeBetter]

261. Forget emprogs, Spandan's the emotional one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3663039

Such projection. Tsk.

I guess it was easy for Spandan to "take a stand" and withhold a vote in California. He needs to do time in North Carolina.

[msanthrope]

275. In 2007? nt

[panzerfaust]

45. I may be mistaken, but he did not say that he did.

I myself came very close to NOT VOTING at all this last time as it was clear to me that neither Obama, nor RoMoney, shared my liberal, left-wing, democratic values as to the nature and character of government and of society.



However, as I then continued to appreciate the (now sadly slipping) illusion of a free and democratic society provided by the Democrats to the open Fascism and totalitarianism of the Republican party I "Hoped" and voted for our current despot wannabe.

However my wife, having a clearer view of the future, spent the time I wasted on voting working productively in our vegetable garden. Her's was the wiser choice.

[creon]

137. voting is a civic duty.

full stop

[struggle4progress]

184. How Obama Turnout is Creaming Romney - Monday, October 15, 2012

... This, like every other election, is a turnout election. And looking at our turnout numbers, the Obama campaign is doing a bang-up job. Let's keep that up!

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2012/10/is-everyone-done-freaking-out-now.html

[MNBrewer]

203. What a Stalinist you are

with that sort of attitude. I agree that everyone should vote, even if they leave the ballot blank.

[7962]

277. I'll go against the grain here. Some are too stupid to be trusted with a ballot

I know it will piss off some folks here, but dammit I'm sick of people who don't even know who their own Senator is bouncing into the polls to cast a vote.
Everybody has the right to vote, and the right to own a weapon. Some should do neither.

[tomp]

278. I've said this before and i'll say it again....

....i am opposed to compulsory voting unless certain conditions are in place:

-a complete revamping of election security, i.e., paper ballots counted in the public square, digital transfers of final tallies only,
verified after transfer, etc.
-removal of corporate funding from campaigning
-public funding of campaigns, serious limitation on funding from other sources, including political parties
-mandatory extensive debate among ALL candidates with allocation of free media time
-a "none of the above" option, along with the requirement of obtaining an absolute majority of eligible voters for victory, no plurality
-simple and easily understood federal law governs all voter registration and eligibility, no state-by-state intervention
-conscientious objector status allowed, and objectors still count as eligible voters for determining absolute majority

I'm sure there's some room for fine tuning this but that's pretty much the gist.

[KamaAina]

79. Maybe he went third party.

Green candidate Jill Stein, or even Roseanne, who was on the ballot here as the candidate of the Peace & Freedom Party.

[Rex]

85. Or maybe he decided not to vote at all.

Which, really one has no right to complain if they don't vote...imo...

[bvar22]

106. Voting for "Liberals" like Jill Stein or Roseanne is not consistent with that site.

The People's View is a blog that despises "Liberals" and Old Tyme FDR/LBJ Working Class Democrats.
That place is ALL about the "3rd Way" Republicrats.



You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS.[/font]

[struggle4progress]

221. Jill Stein! Candidate for the 0.36%

[struggle4progress]

146. "I support President Obama because he is the most trust worthy politician I have come to see

in my life time"
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/07/stephen-marche-how-can-we-not-love.html

[creon]

131. did he?

prove it

[Rex]

134. See post #86.

Those are his own words.

[struggle4progress]

142. "I'm throwing my support behind Barack Obama"

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2008/02/barack-obama-cautious-endorsement.html

[Rex]

144. ...

Lest you think this is because I was personally offended as a gay man, you are right. But it wasn't only because of that that I made this decision. I draw the line in the sand when politicians pander to any group and sacrifice their stated goals of equal dignity under law and associate themselves, willingly, with known bigots of any kind, be they racists, sexists or homophobes. This is such a line. Obama has crossed it. Good riddance, Barack Obama. - Spandan C.

[struggle4progress]

149. "I support President Obama because he is the most trust worthy politician I have come to see

in my life time"
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/07/stephen-marche-how-can-we-not-love.html

[Rex]

150. ...

Lest you think this is because I was personally offended as a gay man, you are right. But it wasn't only because of that that I made this decision. I draw the line in the sand when politicians pander to any group and sacrifice their stated goals of equal dignity under law and associate themselves, willingly, with known bigots of any kind, be they racists, sexists or homophobes. This is such a line. Obama has crossed it. Good riddance, Barack Obama. - Spandan C.

[struggle4progress]

151. Your link is from 2007, mine from 2008 and 2011. He changed his mind, as (of course) you are aware

[Rex]

153. SO he says. And he still did not vote for him.

Lest you think this is because I was personally offended as a gay man, you are right. But it wasn't only because of that that I made this decision. I draw the line in the sand when politicians pander to any group and sacrifice their stated goals of equal dignity under law and associate themselves, willingly, with known bigots of any kind, be they racists, sexists or homophobes. This is such a line. Obama has crossed it. Good riddance, Barack Obama. - Spandan C.

[struggle4progress]

173. Your quote is from 2007. He changed his mind

[Rex]

175. Endorsing is not voting for

sorry, no he didn't.

[struggle4progress]

176. Link? Just repeating something again and again shows nothing

[Rex]

178. You mean just like you are doing over and over?

I get it, you are doing damage control for the guy. Have a blast!

[Capt. Obvious]

4. I love these threads

[Sand Wind]

5. BRAVO !!

Courageous post by this time when it's so cool to watch RT FSB-TV.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

12. Posting -- anonymously -- from a Crap Blog to another message board is courageous?

Really?

[Squinch]

87. Well. He saved a kitten from a tree this morning too.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

109. :-)

Me-ow.

[cyberswede]

7. Who is Spandan Chakrabarti (the author)?

I'm not familiar with this person.

[Rex]

17. Something from another poster.

Evidently it is a former DUer, Deaniac83 (have no idea with they got TSd or quit).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2639282

[Cali_Democrat]

29. He's a former DUer?

Well that's kind of cool!



He certainly has a way with words.

[Rex]

31. Yes the liberal bashers love him.

He fits right in since he refused to vote for Obama.

[Cali_Democrat]

37. Liberal bashers?

I think the blog poster is definitely a Dem, but I wouldn't call him a liberal basher. He has high praise for a number of policies including the repeal of DADT, ACA, Wall Street reform, economic stimulus, and other bills.

[Rex]

38. Then why not vote for Obama when he ran for office?

I think the blog poster is definitely NOT a Dem. He bashes liberals and that is good enough for some people here.

[Cali_Democrat]

41. Well it appears that he supports many of Obama's policies which I support

like the ones I mentioned above.

Not sure why he wouldn't vote for Obama though.

Did he offer some kind of explanation?

[Rex]

46. Yes he said it was Obama's view on LGBT

issues. Which is why I have a hard time believing a single word written on that blog site.

[Cali_Democrat]

51. Well that's interesting...

Did he say Obama didn't go far enough or too far?

[Rex]

52. Obama was not doing near enough and hence his refusal to vote for Obama.

Which sent red flags up for me, since Obama has done more for the LGBT community then any other POTUS before him.

HERE is a link to his statement; http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2007/10/obama-lost-my-vote-general-election-too.html?m=0

[struggle4progress]

214. He supported Edwards until Edwards dropped out, then switched to Obama; he had been angry about

McClurkin but decided Obama was the best candidate after all

[struggle4progress]

186. "... I didn’t decide to call myself a Democrat until I saw Senator Barack Obama on television

one day. But I’ve voted a straight Democratic ticket since my first ballot in 1968 ..."

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/12/vote-chasing-perspective.html

[Rex]

190. ...

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/12/vote-chasing-perspective.html


'The time has come for us to start concerning ourselves with how people will vote in 2012. I’ve noticed a fair amount of panic setting in online. Who hasn’t read this blog comment/tweet: "The Dems better get it together and get out the vote!"? It’s understandable given what happened in 2010. It’s important to remember, however, that 2010 was not a National Election. 2010 was 50 elections, and each State Democratic Party was responsible for their own GOTV efforts. I’m lucky to live in a safe blue State with a very strong Party apparatus that had a very good strategy revolving around one sub-group of voters referred to as ‘lazy voters’. We spent every single day leading up to the election reaching out to lazy voters, not to the exclusion of all others, but as a primary focus. We were successful on the Federal level and had mixed results on the State and local level. Far too many State races came down to fewer than 200 votes.

2012 will be completely different. Presidential elections are the headline election that many more people pay attention to as voters. Plus it is the one race that is not decided by the popular vote. There is only one thing that matters in the Presidential race: The Electoral College. 270 votes. When it comes to wondering if the President will win reelection, it honestly doesn’t even matter who the opponent is; all that matters is how do we get 270 Electoral College votes.'

Not even close.

[struggle4progress]

197. TLDR, eh? It's in the fifth paragraph

[Rex]

201. So you cannot just directly link to where you want to go?

And you say I need tech support?

[WorseBeforeBetter]

195. That's by Tien, not Spandan. (n/t)

[struggle4progress]

204. OK. Here: "... if we get this president's back as he has always had ours, if we vote, if we get

the vote out for him, if we give it everything we've got, an Obama landslide is more than possible ..."

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2012/10/why-obama-landslide-is-more-than.html

[WorseBeforeBetter]

212. Is that where that obnoxious "president's back" originated?

Barf.

I don't believe Obama has always had my back. In fairness, I don't believe the majority of politicians have our backs.

[Rex]

206. Ya but does it really matter anymore?

Let them play CYA it is making me LMAO.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

216. That they're so quick to defend...

this hack Spandan never ceases to amaze me. OK, not amaze, but yes, high entertainment value...

[Rex]

218. WillyT said it best in his thread on the topic.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

230. WillyT does have a way with words.

[MADem]

307. He posted IN this thread. He's not a former DUer. He's a DUer. Just doesn't post much. nt

[WorseBeforeBetter]

18. He's an Executive Assistant/Fundraiser pursuing an online degree...

from Kaplan University. At least according to his LinkedIn. A quick Google turns up many results -- he's all over the place.

Evidently he was deaniac83 at one time, and has been banned from reputable blogs. I guess DU is his last refuge.

[Rex]

26. So he is a former troll that is getting recs from current DUers?

Well he bashes liberals...and as we can see that is good enough for some here. Sad ain't it?

[WorseBeforeBetter]

50. I haven't done a DU search...

and am not sure if he actually posted here under deaniac83. But he did at Kos (and elsewhere) and was banned. Sort of like AngryBlackLady getting booted from the Raw Story blog roll. This Michigan dude could be Spandan, who knows. Regardless of the screen name, it's crap originating from a pudgy little scold. It's all manipulative bullshit, but the BOGers have hitched their wagon to him. Giddyup!

[Rex]

56. The BOGers are in love with a guy that refused to vote for Obama?

WOW. You cannot make this kind of shit up! Priceless!

[WorseBeforeBetter]

72. I know. That's what's so damn funny.

Ol' Spandan/deaniac83 has quite a flair for the dramatic. He LOVED Dean, until he didn't. Then he announced, with great fanfare, that he wouldn't vote for Obama. Guess since deep-pocketed librul Hollywood put the screws to Obama and he evolved on "gay marriage," he's off of Spandan's shit-list. Phew. How lucky for Obama!

[Autumn]

71. He posted on old DU. Here is his profile

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=252625

[WorseBeforeBetter]

91. Ah, there he is. Our little Spandan.

Username: deaniac83

Click to send private message to this author Send private message

Profile name Profile value
Member since Jan 05th 2010
Number of posts 163
Avatar Image
Gender male
Homepage http://www.thepeoplesview.net

Search feature isn't working for me -- something about high server traffic.

[Rex]

103. He showed up instantly and replied to me after I exposed his flippancy

toward the POTUS. I GUESS some here will believe him, dunno why.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

114. Wow. Spandan in the flesh...

so to speak. Wonder who tipped him off?

[Rex]

118. Someone in this thread no doubt.

And now he is going to alter what he wrote so I cannot cite his horrible, yet honest, feeling on Obama.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

121. Meanie.

It was an emotional time!

[Rex]

122. Well at least he came in here with a course correction.

To let us know he endorsed Obama! NOT voted for him mind you...but he got a nod so I guess that is half as good.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

125. Especially for Obama.

He was spared any further wrath of Spandan, armed with his mighty pen.

[Rex]

129. Yeah I bet the POTUS is breathing a sigh of relief.

[cyberswede]

32. Is the OP of this thread the same person (deaniac83)?

[WorseBeforeBetter]

53. Don't know. Perhaps.

Or perhaps the OP is just pimping for Spandan/deaniac83.

[Marr]

135. I expect so. He posts nothing but drivel from that blog. /nt

[Maedhros]

148. A pattern is developing in which michigandem58 puts up posts with links to The Peoples View.

The posts generally contain strong language that would likely result in an alert, since they insult a portion of DU's other posters. My theory is that he is using links to The Peoples View as a way to circumvent the jury system.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

165. Back in the good ol' days attacks on "the left"...

wouldn't have ended well for the person attacking. Now it's coming from (supposedly) within the Democratic Party, and it's A-OK. Must be that "neo-DU" I keep hearing about.

Amazing what a difference +/- 5 years makes.

[Starry Messenger]

22. A blowhard with a high opinion of his own thoughts.

[HappyMe]

49. So that's a new thing here?

[Starry Messenger]

55. Usually the other blowhards have some stature and gravitas.

[HappyMe]

57. A blowhard is a blowhard.

[Starry Messenger]

60. This seems to have come full circle. :)

[HappyMe]

65. Yes, it has.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

88. uh. no. NOBODY here has demonstrated much gravitas or stature

and I include the self proclaimed writers/journalists in that number.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

228. Sez the person with 13 hides.

Have you beaten that pretzel yet?

[KG]

70. scholar on social policy and barrista.

[nashville_brook]

264. HA!

[freshwest]

89. Here you go:

The People's View is primarily a political blog, published by Spandan Chakrabarti (that would be me). I have been participating in online and offline liberal activism since 2003, when Gov. Howard Dean ran for president. I am a proud liberal and proud American who believes in pragmatic solutions.

The word "view" in the name of this site is not meant to define "opinion." For any blog or blogger to claim to represent "the people's" opinion would be foolish. The word view here is view as in a "bird's eye view" - in other words, perspective. Our goal is to analyze issues with the primary perspective of how totalities policies affect ordinary people, and what it means from that view, or perspective.

This blog is devoted to examining issues from a liberal perspective, on factual bases and on fair analysis. This site is also deeply zealous about liberal Democratic activism. At The People's View, we are committed to giving readers as much additional resources (mostly via links) as possible to educate as well as activate. The People's View is also a public policy blog for reasoned debate and discussion. At the moment, it is primarily covering issues of economic policy, health policy and civil rights issues. However, other issues of local, state or national interest will also be addressed. I am based in Silicon Valley, California; so Bay Area and California state issues may sometimes be of interest.

With respect to other areas of interest, one of the strategies we will pursue is asking guest bloggers with expertise and interest to blog here. You can see a list of current contributors to this blog on the right column, under the heading "contributors." If you are someone who would like to contribute, please choose a following method of contact:

Send an email to:

[e-mail]

The archives of the site dispells the charges that The People's View is a homophobic or hate website:

Support Marriage Equality: Exposing the Bullshit of iProtectmarriage.com

...One, the most insidious of their lies: that homosexuality is a choice, that people can change it and as such the prohibition against same sex marriage should not be seen as akin to the prohibition against interracial marriage. The first counter on this is that this is a flat out lie.

I am gay, and I can tell you emphatically that it is as engrained in me as my race (Asian Indian), my gender (male) and my number of toes (10)...

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2008/09/exposing-bullshit-of.html

Other same sex issues at this link there:

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/p/search.html

Many bought into the assumption something is wrong with this blog or the author, that posting from it is wrong, without checking the blog out.

I understand this motive. Just like I take the word of the SPLC, who I have been familiar with for many years. They have lot of hate blogs, groups and leaders:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organizations_designated_by_the_Southern_Poverty_Law_Center_as_hate_groups

http://www.splcenter.org/what-we-do

No one wants to be associated with anyone against the equal rights here at the DU.

And I make no apologies for attacking groups that do not support full rights in every regard, such as the Pauls, Tea Party or the Libertarians or GOP who seek to restrict who is a citizen or deserves full rights, knowing that I and those I care about are in their crosshairs.

I hope that answers your question and I feel strong opinions such as this man's are needed and required for full debate. We're here to discuss as Skinner says.

The TOS is clear that the mission of DU is to work within the system to elect more Democrats to office as a good thing.

Supporting Democrats in office, running for office, and the Democratic Party is to be expected at a site named Democratic Underground.

The owner of the blog does that, even if some think his language and tone is rough. See you later.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

155. Any links for Spandan's attacks on Krugman, Kuttner, Stiglitz, Baker, et al.?

Seriously. Think about that.

The mighty Spandan v. Stiglitz.

To borrow from the BOG:

[sheshe2]

268. Well said, freshwest. Thanks!

[SwampG8r]

270. i dont know if you noted it

but deaniac himself appears upthread in a convo
I am not in it but to summarize it went
duer:i have links to your archives that show you saying exceptionally over the top things about president Obama
deaniac:i have been changing them and will change the ones you cite

this is of course not verbatim but I think it shows that at the blog linked history is shifting to fit the narrative
I don't understand why anyone would give credence or support to such a one as this
this blog has no credibility and is a political ad trap

[freshwest]

273. IDK what convo you are talking about. Also, the OP author is not the blog author. It is not spam.

And due to the way you formatted your reply, perhaps because of the device used, I cannot make heads or tails of who said what.

And you are still making the assumption that the OP author is the blog author. Deaniac is not here on DU.

I've gone over there to research this. The 'cash trap' accusation is in error, no matter how many times it is repeated.

I wonder why it is being brought upm instead of discussing the topic. It seems that posters are running away from the questions raised in the blog article.

It is the ideas in the blog that interest me, and the topic of the OP, not the personas. You responded to my answer to a poster who said they did not know who that was, and I answered with what I found on the blog itself. I spent a while, thinking about the ideas, going to all the embedded links and following those out.

Several serious charges have been made about the OP writer and blog writer, who are not the same person. One, that it is spam and being posted for money; two, that the blog author is a bigot, that is, a homophobe, when he is gay; and if you go to the link, there are comments where the blog author explains he had a change of heart over anger from Prop 8 passing in CA. I'm unsure if that is what you are referring as changed.

The blog author and the OP author have distinct writing styles. They are not the same person and the blog author lives in CA, not MI. Even if they were the same, and I have written and they are not, will we be calling Thom Hartmann and Alan Grayson spammers now for posting?

I will add an additional point, that the OP writer knows better than to post more than four paragraphs. The blog writer would post all of his material, if he needed the views. He was at Kos for a long time until he decided to start his own blog.

I contend it is the ideas at the link that is found objectionable, not these other things. No one has spoken seriously to them it has just been dismissed out of hand. He's not a RWer but is a pragmatic Democrat, just as Howard Dean was and still is. Dean has made statements as of late that might not be considered Left enough. But he is a pragmatist.

The blog expresses what DU used to be about, helping people through the Democratic Party and good governance.

The link in the article of the OP leads to many links he did not write and are not garbage. His conclusions are his own, and I agree with many, some I don't. They are all good food for thought.

We must get to the end result of actions, back to taking care of people and not be so much about ideology or winning as to disregard real people.

I have had to deal IRL with people on the Left and Right who were so focused on their win, or their ideology, that real people died. They felt they were correct and did not see the human beings that suffered from their rigid postitions. I cannot support this and I feel this is part of what the blog author means. Like the words here:

Easy To Be Hard

by Three Dog Night

How can people be so heartless
How can people be so cruel
Easy to be hard, easy to be cold

How can people have no feelings
How can they ignore their friends
Easy to be proud, easy to say no

Especially people who care about strangers
Who care about evil and social injustice
Do you only care about bleeding crowd...

I think Deaniac is much like Howard Dean. And Barney Frank said:

Understand that the more deeply you hold your ideals, the more you are morally obligated to be pragmatic... Idealism without pragmatism is just a way to flatter your ego.

When I was very young, that word pragmatism seemed like a cop-out. And when I first read that statement, it was mildly offensive to me again.

Then I thought of what I'd seen and how the 'idealism' of some cost lives of those who they thought were worth the sacrifice for their utopian vision. I can't do that.

That is what the OP's link is about, compassion. It speaks of the millions who have been helped, instead of a perfect plan according to ideology. And what Obama did for women and others, that are real people.

No one seems to want to talk about ideas here now, just taking sides, making accusations and not talking about IRL solutions. It makes DU unproductive and is not why I joined DU or why I became a Democrat.

Peace Out.

[SwampG8r]

281. not here on du?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3663039

[freshwest]

304. You find one thing, and still don't answer my post, for whatever reason.

You address a subthread I didn't see, thanks, but it shows it was not DUer 'Michigan Dem' who is 'flogging his blog' here, as a 'cash trap.'

From the link:

And no, I'm not the one that posted my article here originally, but I do thank the OP for doing so.

The charges being made here are MichiganDem is spamming, that TPV is his blog and that the blog author is a homophobe and his blog a hate site.

You have not shown that MichiganDem is here to spam the board and make money off posting stories from TPV.

You have not shown that Deaniac is a homophobe or a bigot.

Posters are scratching the outside of the shoe to get to what is making their feet itch so much, which is because they have no answer to the charges made in the blog.

You disregarded my concern, looking for a 'win,' not a discussion of ideas and values. Most posts on this thread are about personas and unfounded allegations, and not about ideas.

Which is pretty sad at a board devoted to discussion.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

284. Actually, he said he was updating

them with LINKS to the blog post he made a few months later where he decided to put his support behind Obama. The original text was NOT changed, he added a link at the end. Because some people feel that cherry picking a blog entry from 2007 where someone didn't want to vote for Obama (and then later changed their mind in 2008) equates to voting for Mitt Romney in 2012...

Once again, the ORIGINAL text is intact. There is just a link added that leads to his post about changing his mind less than a year later. Rex would like you to think otherwise, however. If anyone had actually bothered reading these threads and the links provided, you'd have all the information.

[MADem]

308. +1 nt

[MuseRider]

8. That is a really crappy blog.

Why would you post anything from it?

[Cali_Democrat]

13. I think it brings an interesting prersepective

Although I don't agree with everything in the blog, it's nice to not have an echo chamber where everyone is preaching to the choir.

[HappyMe]

54. I agree.

It's interesting to read something a little different for a change.

[MuseRider]

62. Sounds pretty much like an echo chamber to me.

There is a LOT of preaching to the choir here and this fits right in with those who excel at it.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

63. Spandan's Crap Blog is nothing BUT an echo chamber.

Check out the Twitteresque comments -- there's never any dissent. Creepy.

TPV exists to name-call and bash libruls. Is that what's considered "interesting perspective" these days? I mean, I'd expect it from Freepers and cave-dwellers, but so-called Democrats? Yeah, something is very off about ol' Spandan...

[PowerToThePeople]

9. Unrec.

Straw Men all over that turd post.

It is not compromise when the right gets everything and the left gets tossed out with the trash.

[bluestate10]

10. Thanks for posting that. It is right on. I responded to a poster in another OP who seems

to have that moral blindness coupled with an inability to reason that there are more than one side to any story.

[cali]

14. Let me ask you something

Is Senator Leahy a "liberal without a conscience"? He is firmly opposed to the activites of the NSA that have have recently been revealed.

I like President Obama though I certainly oppose some of his policies, but calling him a liberal is ridiculous. He is not.

[Rex]

21. The irony here is that the blog owner refused to vote for Obama.

So I really don't see what authority they have on any political view that is between a voter and the POTUS. Since they decided NOT to vote!

I mean...who decides NOT to vote, then pretends to be a political guru? Besides freepers...

[struggle4progress]

169. Barack Obama: A Cautious Endorsement (Friday, February 01, 2008)

My #1 choice in the Democratic nominating race, John Edwards, has now withdrawn ... I thought I could never vote for Obama ... That said, what finally brought me to endorse Obama's candidacy is something more than his brilliant oratory. No, I was looking for substance ... Thursday night's debate was unusually substantive, focusing on the issues and what kind of president each candidate would be ... I have seen Barack Obama's clarion call ... I'm throwing my support behind Barack Obama, because I refuse to let cynicism win, even if it's my own.

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2008/02/barack-obama-cautious-endorsement.html

[Rex]

171. ...

Lest you think this is because I was personally offended as a gay man, you are right. But it wasn't only because of that that I made this decision. I draw the line in the sand when politicians pander to any group and sacrifice their stated goals of equal dignity under law and associate themselves, willingly, with known bigots of any kind, be they racists, sexists or homophobes. This is such a line. Obama has crossed it. Good riddance, Barack Obama. - Spandan C.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

285. You keep posting that tired, cherry picked statement

that was later recanted...

[Rex]

287. Dream on.

Keep trying somebody will buy it.

[Number23]

320. I am loving your posts in this thread!!

And the look on that woman's face in that video is absolutely PRICELESS!!!

[Dr Hobbitstein]

321. Thanks!

The first time I saw that video was on The Daily Show. And Jon Stewart kept up the "keep fucking that chicken" meme for awhile... I've just typed it here a few times and even had a post hidden over it (it was thought I was implying the poster was into bestiality). I was surprised that it wasn't more popular on this board, especially with the popularity of Jon Stewart here. I've decided to just post the video from here on out.

[SidDithers]

15. DU rec...

Good stuff again.



Sid

[Sand Wind]

16. I'm digging at people on the Left that have suddenly found the anarchist Rand Paul and the statist V

"I'm digging at people on the Left that have suddenly found the anarchist Rand Paul and the statist Vladimir Putin to be their concurrent heroes, and you'd be right about that, too"

[cyberswede]

27. Who are you replying to? Who are you quoting?

And finally, who here sees Putin as a hero? Can you point me toward some examples? Thanks!

[Sand Wind]

30. It's a quote from the source...

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2013/09/liberals-without-conscience.html

[cyberswede]

36. The sepcious source aside, do you feel that the quote applies to DUers?

Examples?

[Tarheel_Dem]

19. K & effin' R!!!!!

[ProSense]

20. Many members who voted for tough stance on Syria now oppose military action

Many members who voted for tough stance on Syria now oppose military action
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023662378

[michigandem58]

40. ^^^ THAT THREAD NEEDS REC'S

[freshwest]

164. WTH? There you go screwing with the magic again. Sigh...

[panzerfaust]

24. Cognitive dissonance and selective moral relativity: No other way to support president Obama

[SidDithers]

74. Nice...

Sid

[freshwest]

167. You shoulda seen the one before this one...

[MADem]

313. I am so pleased that, at long last, the admins "have your number".....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=105503&sub=trans

Don't let the door hit ya, and all that.

[freshwest]

314. Praise be to Skinner! Long overdue banning for an extreme Obama hater. Thanks for the link.

[Number23]

319. Shown the door for being an "Obama hater" as per Skinner

Please excuse my language but GODDAMN that is going to leave a mark!!!

Now that this has finally (FINALLY!! FINALLY!!!!) become a bannable offense, wonder what's going to happen next??

[MADem]

325. I don't know....

I suspect some very vocal people will tone it down once they pick up the vibe--I hope so, anyway. I'm tired of the vitriol.

[Comrade Grumpy]

25. More straw man trollery from that crap blog.

[Rex]

34. It is funny watching supposed hardcore Obama supporters

REC someone that refused to vote for Obama! Oh what a tangled web they weave.

[Bobbie Jo]

68. You have posted the same thing

repeatedly throughout this thread. Do you have a link, or are you just relying on sheer repetition?

[Rex]

76. Please, here ya go...twist away!

http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2007/10/obama-lost-my-vote-general-election-too.html?m=0

[Bobbie Jo]

80. Was that so hard?

I have a suggestion for that involves twisting for you as well.

[Rex]

83. Of course you do, hurts don't it?

Last edited Fri Sep 13, 2013, 05:49 PM - Edit history (1)

You getting all excited and then the letdown...

EDIT - *crickets?*

[Bobbie Jo]

104. No, not in the least.

Sorry to disappoint.

To the OP:

K&R

[Rex]

107. Yep you keep up with the narrative.

nt.

[Bobbie Jo]

160. ?

What does that even mean?

[Marr]

138. I've noticed you always go straight to playground insults when someone calls your bluff

or proves you wrong.

No real response to the fact you demanded proof for, eh? Still like that blog?

[Bobbie Jo]

166. Are you taking notes too?

I've noticed some things about you as well.

You're pretty selective with the self- righteous indignation.

But then again, who gives a shit. Make a note of that while you're at it.

[Marr]

193. And again, no answer.

Just another spasm of belligerence.

[Bobbie Jo]

224. What "answer?"

The poster I was responding to has been posting snide remarks up and down this thread.

I asked for a link to back up for the 15th version of the same damn post.

WTF is your deal, exactly? I dared to question the Heathers circling this thread?

There's plenty of "belligerence" to police on this forum, take your squad car on up the road.

[Marr]

238. Try to calm down.

I asked you if you still like that blog, even after discovering the owner doesn't support Obama.

[Bobbie Jo]

248. I'm not into gotcha game playing.

I'm perfectly calm, I just have a low tolerance for passive aggressive nonsense.

If I thought you were the least bit interested in what I thought....about anything, we wouldn't be having this ridiculous exchange.

Calm down.

[Puglover]

289. Double ugh.

Not worth my time.

Not you Marr. The subject at hand.

[cali]

33. he/she is certainly not a liberal, but the writer of that shitty blog has no conscience

he/she lies constantly.

[Douglas Carpenter]

35. Please explain how your commentary is any different at all than Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity?

Let me get this straight - you assume mainstream liberal Democratic civil libertarians actually love Assad and Putin?

[Cali_Democrat]

39. The blog author supports:

- Repeal of DADT
- Economic stimulus
- Wall Street reform
- Affordable Care Act

Would Hannity or Coulter support those policies?

I think not.

[Rex]

42. The blog owner did NOT support Obama.

Funny how nobody wants to bring that up...I understand it would kill the narrative.

[Cali_Democrat]

44. You told me that above.

Let's continue our conversation up there.

[cali]

43. the blog author is a serial liar and no liberal.

and reportedly didn't even vote for Obama.

the author of that blog is vile little troll.

[Cali_Democrat]

47. He supports those policies I mentioned

That's a good thing IMO.

[Rex]

58. Just not the man that came up with the policies.

Sorry, not buying it.

[treestar]

73. merely trying to smear the blogger without

talking about the issues.

And yet it was so wrong to attack the messenger when it was Snowden.

[Andy823]

92. Excellent point treestar

I don't know anything about the author, but as you mentioned it was "wrong", according to some here, to attack the messenger, Snowden, who was a Ron Paul supporter, because it was the "message" about the NSA spying on "everyone" in the country that was important.

Well this guy does make some good points about those who don't want compromise, but instead want everything "their way", pretty much like the tea party seems to be, no compromise. I find it hard to believe that anyone could think that a president, any president, could get thing done without compromising when there are people in both parties that are not going to agree with everything a president wants to do. Republicans used to be pretty much in lock step, but now with the extreme right tea party members that is not true anymore, nor would it be true if a republican was in the WH and tea party members were still in office.

I know from experience over the years the compromise gets more done than the "my way or the highway" attitude. It may not be exactly what a person wants, but it is usually better than nothing at all. I know that people are angry we didn't get a single payer system for health care reform, but since there was no way republicans would have voted for on, and some democrats would not have either, we got the best thing we could, which I believe to be a foundation for a real universal health care program in the future.

[creon]

127. prove the lie

you make the accusation
you prove it

[Bluenorthwest]

111. Dick Cheney and the entire Log Cabin Club were early supporters of marriage

equality, does that make them liberals? I think not.

[Cali_Democrat]

113. What about the ACA

Wall Street reform and the economic stimulus?

Would Cheney support those policies?

I think not.

[Bluenorthwest]

229. I think Cheney and other unscrupulous folks would mouth 'support' for anything

to deliver the larger message 'Liberals are bad, bad and war is good, good'. Anyone bad mouthing liberals is not a liberal nor a friend to liberals.

[Cali_Democrat]

240. So why hasn't he or other republicans mouth supported those policies?

[bvar22]

233. Romney and the Republicans designed it,

...and LOVE the implementation of the Mandate to BUY Health Insurance without a Public Option.
Wall Street LOVES it too.
Stock in most For Profit Health Insurance Corporations has MORE than DOUBLED in the past 3 years.

So, there is that!

[Cali_Democrat]

239. So why is every Republican in congress opposed to it?

[LondonReign2]

257. Because Republicans are reflexive assholes

This, I am sure, we can agree upon. If Obama came up with a bill saying puppies were good, McConnell and the other dickless weasels on the right would oppose it.

So while I'm glad ACA was passed in the sense that it was far better than nothing, all you have to do is remember that this was the fucking Heritage Foundation proposal in answer to HillaryCare.

That's how far right our Democrats have allowed this country to move-- when we pass a Republican backed proposal from the 90's we call that a victory, rather than fight for actual Democratic ideals.

That's where we disagree Cali_Democrat. I don't see warmed over repuke ideas like the ACA and NSA spying on Americans as great Democratic victories, no matter the letter behind the the name of the current occupant (or his race) of the White House.

[Oilwellian]

48. This is just so stupid, it's not worth debating

How many hidden posts are allowed, before one gets shit-canned around here?

[ocpagu]

61. Come on...

"If you find it morally repugnant that the government conducts surveillance operations within the law and the Constitution as a tool to fight threats in a dangerous world..."

As a tool to fight threats? Which threats are they fighting by phone tapping presidents of sovereign countries, spying allied governments, collecting data of regular citizens, of private companies?

"...but find yourself worshiping at the alter of racists, fascists, and traitors who take shelter in our adversaries, your conscience is failing.

Yep. It's terrible to wake up in the morning worshipping at the altar of racists, fascists and traitors...




...who take shelter in our adversaries.

[warrant46]

132. This D Bag in the Curly Hair is the one who turned Chile over to the fascists

[sagat]

64. Awesome post.

[Rex]

81. The blog owner sure seems to have a flipant view of politics.

"Lest you think this is because I was personally offended as a gay man, you are right. But it wasn't only because of that that I made this decision. I draw the line in the sand when politicians pander to any group and sacrifice their stated goals of equal dignity under law and associate themselves, willingly, with known bigots of any kind, be they racists, sexists or homophobes. This is such a line. Obama has crossed it. Good riddance, Barack Obama."

Sure, that sounds like someone that supports Obama...NOT...

[treestar]

69. Good point about the executive orders

that was just ridiculous.

[hfojvt]

82. bloggers without a brain cell

"the most effective liberal to have entered the White House in nearly a century"

Ooookay.

"a given compromise does to help the ordinary person".

Right. it's all about the ordinary person for Obama and this jackweasel blogger.

[Maedhros]

84. Meh. It's a screed that insults a bunch of DUers, posted as a link to another blog

so the OP won't get alerted on for being a jerk.

[bvar22]

112. Nailed It!

Exactly!

[Rex]

86. A liberal without a conscience.

Lest you think this is because I was personally offended as a gay man, you are right. But it wasn't only because of that that I made this decision. I draw the line in the sand when politicians pander to any group and sacrifice their stated goals of equal dignity under law and associate themselves, willingly, with known bigots of any kind, be they racists, sexists or homophobes. This is such a line. Obama has crossed it. Good riddance, Barack Obama. - Spandan C.

[demosincebirth]

94. Ah, if only this were a perfect world we wouldn't have to discuss this

[OnyxCollie]

95. "...conducts surveillance operations within the law and the Constitution..."

That is some funny shit right there.

[zeemike]

147. I was searching my mind for a word to describe this post.

And all I could come up with is disassembling.

It is an attempt to disassemble what a liberal and a progressive means...and make DU safe for the anti liberal wing of the party.
Shocking to me that so many here find it something to be recommended.

But for me it is not so and more like

[OnyxCollie]

181. It's harvesting low-hanging fruit.

By using frames which appeal to conservative/authoritarian personalities, it can capture the many who lack true understanding of liberal/conservative ideology, and as such, misidentify themselves as "liberal."

Only the really stupid will agree with that garbage, so it's not like it's a great loss.

[MNBrewer]

102. Starts out with a lie as a premise and gets worse from there

"If you find it morally repugnant that the government conducts surveillance operations within the law and the Constitution as a tool to fight threats in a dangerous world"

You want to build community, as a "true" liberal? Look in your own trashy back yard. Start there, hater.

[creon]

124. fail

post is ignoble

[HangOnKids]

210. You are so funny!

What a cutie!

[Bluenorthwest]

116. The irony level of the words about community coming after a divisive screed like

that has a certain sachet about it. A bullshit sachet.

[MNBrewer]

128. OP is all about building community

a gated community

[creon]

120. I agree

Got it in one.

[MNBrewer]

130. fail

non sequitur

[WorseBeforeBetter]

139. Are you supposed to be the mythological ruler of Thebes...

or the Rx that aids digestion?

[QC]

145. Actually, that's a typo.

It's supposed to be Crayon, for his favorite writing implement.

[MuseRider]

152. :-)

Sorry but this is just funny. QC!!!

[QC]

158. Hi! Good to see you again!

[WorseBeforeBetter]

159. Well, he did use "ignoble" upthread...

sounds like something someone who spends too much time gaming in the basement might toss out.

But Crayon works, too.

[99Forever]

140. Worst Fucking Blog Ever.

And a poster of equal value.

[another_liberal]

154. If you don't support our NSA and the war on Syria one hundred percent . . .

You're nothing but an egg-headed, panty waist chicken, chicken, chicken!

[stupidicus]

156. if you buy garbage like that you might be stupid

tossing chained cpi onto the table wasn't as I recall, part of any compromise, nor was this http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CD4QFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Farticles.washingtonpost.com%2F2013-09-07%2Fworld%2F41852332_1_obama-administration-americans-search-authority&ei=QpIzUsi1F9CUqwGw0IDAAQ&usg=AFQjCNG4jr30yjo3nFhotrT4NiX7BgvlwA&bvm=bv.52164340,d.aWM Gee, are you saying that all of the charges of illegality and/or unconstitutionality are completely meritless where the NSA are concerned?

And who's "worshiped at the alter of racists..." or "sung praises of a ruthless ruler..."?

Oh, that's right, that's merely the same kinda distortions/exaggerations the common rightwingnut would employ/deploy when they don't have a real argument.

That's what most of us find repugnant.

How long has this author been a kissing cousin of that crew?

[DeSwiss]

157. Remember the old saying about pointing fingers?

- Apparently not.

[center]Depleted Uranium Deformities



White Phosphorus Deformities
[/center]

[Bjorn Against]

161. This sounds an awful lot like the right-wingers who accused us of loving Saddam Hussein

All you have to do is replace the name Obama with Bush and Assad with Saddam and the People's View sounds pretty much exactly like Free Republic in the lead up to the Iraq War.

[joeybee12]

162. Wow...is Obama up for re-election again or something...

Trashing liberals seems to be a campaign theme...more crap from the homophobic rgh known as the peoplesview, probably a DNC-run rag, funded by the Koch brothers.

[Sand Wind]

168. Obama for 2016 !!

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[AgingAmerican]

163. Bizarre rant

A big ol' steaming pile of Strawman.

Oh wait, it's from "the peoples view" third way propaganda website.

[freshwest]

170. Those who call Democrats spineless, well, there's the liberal with a backbone you said you wanted!

Talk about principles and values, there it is, and badly needed.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

172. OP/author writes "troll". "troll"? OP is blog owner wanting advertising hits, hence provocation. nt

[Bernardo de La Paz]

174. Notice how the OP-troll-blogger posts provocation and doesn't reply.

OP is not interested in debate, just advertising dollars.

[Rex]

177. Funny how he got some supposedly hardcore Obama supporters to rec this thread

when the blog owner himself, couldn't bring himself to vote for Obama and said "good riddance" to his presidency. Funny that.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

180. He spams DU mailboxes for recs.

For some reason I don't see his spam in my Inbox any more and I don't get spam from him. I don't think I've ignored him because I don't think I've ignored anybody and my Ignore list seems empty.

Were his emails deleted system-wide? Has his mailing privilege been revoked?

[WorseBeforeBetter]

191. Wow. How tacky.

And a bit desperate.

[Rex]

199. Got to keep the chattering class outraged at their own party.

Learned that one today - chattering class - gonna use it, but not in the way it was intended.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

208. I've heard that, but don't remember who coined it.

Wiki to the rescue!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chattering_classes

[Rex]

213. Well imagine that, it is a slam at liberalism!

And from a supposed liberal...tsk tsk tsk I will have to bring that up. Thanks for the history lesson, it was NOT used properly in the OP I saw it and THAT is not a surprise either!

[WorseBeforeBetter]

223. They don't care if it's used properly...

they just want to get in their little digs.

They've been tossing out "nattering nabobs of negativism," too.

Agnew was known for his scathing criticisms of political opponents, especially journalists and anti-war activists. He attacked his adversaries with relish, hurling unusual, often alliterative epithets, some of which were coined by White House speechwriters William Safire and Pat Buchanan, including "pusillanimous pussyfooters," "nattering nabobs of negativism" (written by Safire) and "hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history."[21] He once described a group of opponents as "an effete corps of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals."

Agnew was often characterized as Nixon's "hatchet man" when defending the administration on the Vietnam War.[22] Agnew was chosen to make several powerful speeches in which he spoke out against anti-war protesters and media portrayal of the Vietnam War, labeling them "Un-American". However, he did speak out publicly against the actions of the Ohio Army National Guard that led to the Kent State shootings in 1970, even describing their action as "murder." Agnew toned down his rhetoric and dropped most of the alliterations after the 1972 election, with a view to running for president himself in 1976.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nattering_nabobs_of_negativism#Vice_Presidency

My guess is very few of Spandan's minions even know who Agnew and Safire were...

[SwampG8r]

271. nattering nabob of negatism

was used in a reply and I was jealous of the person it was aimed at
if you were there when agnew said it you knew who he was talking about

[marmar]

179. The core of liberalism is NOT blindly supporting militarism and corporatism.......

Nor is it attacking actual liberals with PNAC talking points. ....... This OP is a rancid pile of mierda.

[Rex]

192. Look at how hard he supporters are playing CYA in this thread!

Funny shit!

[WorseBeforeBetter]

187. Not bombing Syria is for "the greater good, the common good."

My librul conscience is just fine.

And it's "altar," not "alter," genius.

[HangOnKids]

198. The B team is out to prop this up

Hilarious!

[Rex]

202. B? Hell they on the F team by now.

The rest seem to have fallen silently ill (wink wink) with buyers remorse.

[HangOnKids]

205. Well shit I was trying to give them SOME credit

the new ones with the military commands caught my eye

[fascisthunter]

242. I think this OP is vindication for we on the left

I'm having a sweet Heffe Weissen beer to celebrate... I'd share one with ya if I could friend.

[HangOnKids]

243. I'm laughing my ass off at some of the replies directed towards me

People digging through other postings of mine trying to fish. It is amusing. Baiting is not their gig it appears. They try hard though.

[fascisthunter]

245. they are dishonest unconscionable goofballs

who have very little brain matter between their ears... perfect programmable tools.

[Bobbie Jo]

256. While the Heathers are passing notes in Social Studies.

Are you going to Janie's locker after Math? I heard she called you a....... lol lol

Hilarious, indeed.

[SidDithers]

295. "B" for Binka...

Sid

[rury]

188. K&R!!

You speak the truth and I thank you for that, michigandem58!!!!!!!!

[Scootaloo]

200. Ah yes, "The Peoples' View"

I'm just going to roll my eyes at the source , the material , and the poster before moving on and letting other people explain why.

[LondonReign2]

207. Oh, ShitBlog again?

Trash thread

[alsame]

215. ROFL. nt

[raouldukelives]

217. Exactly like Wall St investors.

Propping up the very corporations destroying our neighbors. Funding climate change deniers. Funding takeover of our government. Getting in the way of the common good for the chance to share in the proceeds.
People without a conscience are scary enough. Add in someone who claims to be for the 99% but then proceeds to fund attacks against them, the depths of hypocrisy astound.

[SidDithers]

220. Pissing off all the right people...

WE DID IT FOLKS, WE DID IT. YOU DID IT. Thank you to everyone who kept faith, called voters, knocked on doors, and kept on keepin' on throughout all the adversity. Congratulations to you, and Congratulations, Mr. President. - The Peoples View, Nov 6 2012

Sid

[Rex]

237. ...

Lest you think this is because I was personally offended as a gay man, you are right. But it wasn't only because of that that I made this decision. I draw the line in the sand when politicians pander to any group and sacrifice their stated goals of equal dignity under law and associate themselves, willingly, with known bigots of any kind, be they racists, sexists or homophobes. This is such a line. Obama has crossed it. Good riddance, Barack Obama. - Spandan C.

[Octafish]

290. If by ''right people'' you mean Democrats sick of the status quo, yes.

These are the voters who believed voting for the Democratic presidential candidate would mean the end of welfare for the wealthy and wars for profit. They've waited five years and things remain the same.

Here in Detroit, it's going on 45 years.

How long have you waited in Toronto, SidDithers?

[LWolf]

227. Ah yes.

Five years of purging.

The teachers, unions, labor, seniors, women, the "professional left..." all under the bus. Now it's time to go after liberals.

Interesting to note that DU USED to be the "premier left-wing discussion board on the web," which changed with DU3 and, not coincidentally, the election of a centrist Democrat to the WH; now DU is for liberals, rather than the left.

Until, apparently, it's time to throw liberals under the bus as well.

Who will be left?

The BOG echo chamber, Chuckles and the "pragmatic liberals," the neoliberals, and who else?

[Fumesucker]

232. Aww.. Someone needs attention so much even negative attention will suffice

[LanternWaste]

236. I've never been accused of being very perceptive, and rightly so.

I've never been accused of being very perceptive, and rightly so.

So if *I* can see how both you and your audience of low-post-count cheerleaders have outed yourselves, you may want to collect any chips you think you posses, and leave the table before the pit boss takes you into the basement.

[HangOnKids]

249. Lousy Gamblers

They are so trite.

[fascisthunter]

241. thank you for outing yourself and those cheerleading this

we always knew, but for those not sure, well there it is. I love it!

[shenmue]

244. It's impossible to please some people

There exists a portion of the community that seems to have one purpose: to rant and shriek that the rest of us aren't liberal enough. Instead of actually doing something, like voting, they bleat that we haven't got good enough candidates. Well, we've got to work with what we have.

I am not a perfection troll. I will go forward and make something new if I need to.

[NuclearDem]

247. How would Spandan know how a liberal thinks?

[scarletwoman]

251. I have only one thing to say about "the peoples view" blog:

[markpkessinger]

252. A blanket accusation that those who arrive at opinions that differ from yours ...

. . . are lacking in conscience is truly the epitome of a dishonest, bad faith argument. It is nothing more than a cheap attempt to quash serious discussion of dissenting views without substantively engaging those views. Rational adults understtand that other rational adults can, and often do, arrive at different interpretations and opinions about tbings, and so conscientiously and in good.faith.

The 'heart of liberalism' is the informed, rational person who brings to bear a full xomplement of intellect, experience a.d compassion as he or she evaluates an issue, while remmbering that 'community' is a far more profoumd concept than a mutual admiration society of the like-mimded.

[xfundy]

253. I also got "rec?"-spammed by this poster.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

258. I wonder if the Admins support that.

Begging for recs...how tacky.

[xfundy]

262. Doubt it.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

292. I guess I could ATA, but I imagine the response will be...

to use the ignore email function (block function, whatever it's called...).

[eridani]

255. Apparently his conscience tells him that the way to deal with evildoers

--is to do even more evil.

[neverforget]

260. Ah the People's Spew.....

[grahamhgreen]

263. If you think that torture should not be prosecuted, you're sick.

[Eko]

265. all I got from this

(post and comments alike) was that you were bad if you were too liberal or bad if you weren't liberal enough. But no T-shirt. Kind of reminds me of what is going on in the conservative party right now. Them, they have a reason but what about us?

[Precisely]

266. this writer's "community"

is gated

[SwampG8r]

272. i doubt you would

recognize a liberal or a conscience considering that you constantly link to this pit of evil
what a disgusting world view the blog shows and what a seriously poisoned mind it must take to write such shittery on a regular basis
if you are influenced by contact with this site I doubt it is to your better good

[blackspade]

274. Another OP for the compost heap.

Why does this right-wing bullshit get posted on DU?
This is a feeble attempt to redefine liberals, yet again, by the wingnut blogosphere.

[Rex]

280. Because there is a contingent here that loves to rec

anything that bashes liberals. You never noticed before?

[QC]

283. Very few wingnuts hate progressives more passionately

than our very own Pep Squad does.

Funny how that works, isn't it? And it's nothing new.

[Puglover]

291. And they keep coming back even when TSed.

Isn't that rice?

[QC]

293. And they're apparently allowed to come back,

even when banned for doing shit like referring to LGBT equality as "a fabulous pink pony."

[Sand Wind]

297. If you look at the profile of rec, you will see a lot of old DU...so maybe you should not

be judging them so fast...

[Bluenorthwest]

302. Old tired and well known to us

Same old crap. They are reccing venomous right wing bullshit. Feel free to join them.

[Puglover]

303. I haven't the slightest idea

what your word salad is all about so what can I say? Except cheers!

[Sand Wind]

306. Ok I will try to rephrase

Ok I will try to rephrase : if you look the profile of those who clicked on "rec", we find that many are members of this community for a long time, so maybe we should not judge them so fast...

[Puglover]

309. I have been on this website for over 10 years.

Believe me, the people that clicked this "rec list" have been judged by me and about 85 percent of the members of this site a long long time ago.

Thanks for rephrasing.

[Sand Wind]

310. What mean Tsed ?

[Puglover]

311. It's actually a colloquial term from DU2.

TS=Tombstoned=booted off the site. Your profile showed a granite tombstone that said, "He disrupted poorly." Very clever.

A little more amusing and creative then the now used PPR. Posting Privileges Revoked.

[Sand Wind]

312. Ok I see, but most of the people who "rec" are long time DU'ers, some with hundred of

Participation in jury, and some are hosting forum and group...

[Fumesucker]

323. There have been people banned for being trolls after tens of thousands of posts

I can think of a couple right offhand, LoZoccolo and OperationMindCrime.

And LZ was a major contributor to the Obama pep squad so you never can tell.

[Sand Wind]

324. Ok, I see, thanks ! Nt

[Safetykitten]

279. What a steaming pile of horse shit.

[Maven]

296. Holy trolly.

[Raksha]

300. Yeah, I just noticed who the OP is.

I should have saved the outrage in my last reply for a more deserving object, and just settled back with a bag of popcorn like everyone else.

[Raksha]

299. To whoever wrote this: SHAME ON YOU!

YOU are a "liberal without a conscience" if you attempt to whitewash Obama's record by cherry-picking Putin's sins or Assad's while ignoring his.

Obama isn't "the most effective liberal to have entered the White House in nearly a century." He isn't any kind of a liberal at all, nor any kind of a democrat (not the small-d kind anyway), nor any kind of a humanitarian. He is a puppet for the oligarchs and the warmongers and that's all.

Granted, he's an amazingly effective puppet, to have fooled so many people for so long. But once the blinders are off, they aren't going back on again. So take your fake outrage and peddle it somewhere else--or better yet, stick it where the sun don't shine.

There isn't one goddamn fucking thing wrong with my conscience, no matter how much you wish there were.

[MADem]

315. What are Obama's "sins" pray tell, and are you sure you're in the right place? nt

[Deep13]

301. "the most effective liberal to have entered the White House in nearly a century"

Nah, we all love FDR.

[Scurrilous]

305. K & R

[Hell Hath No Fury]

316. Yum yum yum...

[Number23]

317. DAYUM!!