General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLeft bashing, hippie punching and red-baiting is ok it seems
as long as one gives even the faintest of praise to Obama, Hillary or others politicians that want to hold their hands out to Republicans to get spit on and slapped away, its fair game to kick, discredit, attack, and spread propaganda against anyone who actually supports Democratic policies and ideas.
When the hell did droning people, ignoring Bush's war crimes, and supporting for profit charter schools and banksters criminal activity become "Democratic" ideals?
Something is very wrong

cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Right?
reddread
(6,896 posts)New world order, American style!
Recursion
(56,582 posts)It was young southern Democrats who felt they were being shut out of the party and that we had to stop nominating people like Mondale.
On the plus side, Jesse Jackson's reaction to the DLC had a lot to do with his excellent primary performance in 1988.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)its been a long time since we've had a real left in this country
Rex
(65,616 posts)It seems to be okay everywhere. Not just on DU.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)


LWolf
(46,179 posts)whenever I feel particularly marginalized.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Last edited Sun Feb 9, 2014, 09:32 PM - Edit history (1)
It's corruption from sea to shining sea.
frwrfpos
(517 posts)along with electronic voting
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
reddread
(6,896 posts)you forgot racism.
RichGirl
(4,119 posts)STAND OUR GROUND and kick them in the balls! I'm against killing...but neutering I'm ok with.
reddread
(6,896 posts)heard Hall and Oates mention you today.
gLibDem
(130 posts)And Hillary is inevitable so get on board or get out of Dodge, you misogynist.
SidDithers
(44,295 posts)
Sid
uppityperson
(115,902 posts)SidDithers
(44,295 posts)
But being banned over and over and over doesn't seem to matter to some people.
Sid
uppityperson
(115,902 posts)
Response to SidDithers (Reply #57)
Name removed Message auto-removed
SidDithers
(44,295 posts)sorry for being such a pain in the ass.
Sid
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Touché, Sid. Touché!
TheMathieu
(456 posts)wears one thin and makes it harder to tolerate from supposed allies.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)Even more so, if one counts the non-American blood shed by these leaders to engorge the Corporations.
Cha
(306,795 posts)Last edited Mon Feb 10, 2014, 10:26 AM - Edit history (1)
that it righteously gets HIDEs.
frwrfpos
(517 posts)Im not an ally with those that support politicians such as Obama and Clinton that go along with right wing republican policies such as the TPP and Keystone pipeline
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)joshcryer
(62,513 posts)mainly because the detractors lack substance, they amuse me
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)They're actually conservatives/libertarians.
red dog 1
(29,815 posts)n/t
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)
Cha
(306,795 posts)
snooper2
(30,151 posts)over 81+ million views!
Cha
(306,795 posts)I love Imon Crosson/Barack Obama
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)someone inciting divisiveness.
Open your eyes.
frwrfpos
(517 posts)reject the right wing propaganda
you post reeks of it
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Exactly why I had to call you out on this BS.
frwrfpos
(517 posts)your post solidifies right wing propaganda..keep it up...continue to defend right wing garbage
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)frwrfpos
(517 posts)I missed it. Post again about how Democrats should embrace right wing shit. I missed it the first time
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Why are you picking a fight?
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Are you the arbiter of what is acceptable?
And no. But, I'm the one who expresses my opinions.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I meant tobe replying to the OTHER. Guy, but fat fingered it. I was replying in support of you. Sorry!
Cha
(306,795 posts)Cha
(306,795 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)antilabor activists" who gave McGovern the nomination and "lost" the election: Scoop Jackson and Moynihan's Coalition for a Democratic Majority was created to crush the party's liberal wing and frankly bring back the Dixiecrats (and supplied a lot of the neocons that've plagued us since the mid-70s)
total control of only one out of two parties has never been enough for these rich bastards (and goes well with the right-liberts the fundies and Hunts invented)
http://americablog.com/2010/08/koch-industries-gave-funding-to-the-dlc-and-served-on-its-executive-council.html
frwrfpos
(517 posts)good link
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)the Globetrotters. When only two teams are allowed to play, buying both ensures it makes no difference who wins.
arthritisR_US
(7,721 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Same song, different singers, today.
frwrfpos
(517 posts)
MisterP
(23,730 posts)(and note that Kirkpatrick also said the world needed "stability" and "development" before it could be permitted democracy)
marble falls
(62,892 posts)frwrfpos
(517 posts)Warpy
(113,131 posts)and most of us who comprise "the left" are quite willing to return the punches, baiting and bashing.
One of my pet hates here is the way Blue Dogs so glibly toss out "the left" as the malcontents to blame for the defeat of conservative Democrats or the inability to get legislation past obstructionist Republicans.
The truth is that the blame belongs to conservatives. It's been long known that people will vote for a real Republican than a Democrat trying to sound like one. It's been long known that Republicans are balking at passing any legislation that would be over and done with in an hour when more sensible people from both parties were in Congress.
"The left" is not enough of a monolith to have accomplished much of anything in the last 35 years. It's a pity, we've been right about all of it.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)Small quibble, it's just a point I'd like to make, don't see it represented here much:
"The truth is that the blame belongs to conservatives. It's been long known that people will vote for a real Republican than a Democrat trying to sound like one."
So I think this is a myth. It's long been apparent that people will actually support and vote for a Dem who positions themselves just to the left of the Republican they are running against. It's the slightly better lessor of two evils thing. If people always chose the real Republican rather than a Dem who supports their policies, the whole third way would have collapsed from unelectability.
Sadly, enabled by the "crazy" right-wing, the third way strategy of getting a lot of corporate money, using it to setup a a formidable campaign machine, claim the "center" while punching the left to establish your cred, is often a successful electoral strategy. Fake Republicans running as Dems can and do get elected. Many people think they're doing something a little better by voting for the Dem corporatist rather than for the Republican corporatist, and there's some truth in that.
The problem isn't that it's a failed electoral strategy, the problem is that when these candidates win, they don't represent us, they represent their large campaign donors, the corporations. Ultimately it does our party, and our citizens, great harm. The policies these corporatist Dems get behind taints our party in the eyes of the electorate, they think Dems are the same kind of crooks as Republicans, and perhaps our reps are a little better but the people for the most part have it right, most of our elected Dems are selling us out in the same way the Republicans are, as directed by the oligarchs that support the whole rotten machine.
What we really need to be looking at is how to win elections without corporate money. Running on policies that actually help the average person, speaking truth to power, doing it like Bernie does, that can make up for some of the advantage the better funded corporatists have. We should be exploring mechanisms to help candidates overcome the huge obstacles they face in elections. Money is a powerful thing, but there are other sources of power, such as truth and sincerity. With the internet, there should be ways to amplify and raise awareness about good candidates who are going up against the beast.
Your final statement, about the left's impotence despite being correct on policy, is dead on, and has been for a long time. We only matter when someone wants to blame us. The corporations have created an entire culture of superficial values, consumerism, conformity, glamor, violence, selfishness, and greed. Their media outlets are incredibly powerful in doing so. The left has nothing comparable, left out.
What we do have is a lot of people in pain worried about their future, and we have the truth that our policies are what is needed to address our problems. There's intrinsic power in that. But we have to learn to win elections without corporate money in order to reclaim our party and restore its good name.
Roughly half of Obama's 2008 campaign funds came from small donors. So, when he got into office, did he dance with us, or the corporations? Obviously the corporations. The half of the money coming from small donors was for the most part not aggregated, so as far as leveraging policies from the president, it carried little more weight than the average size of those donations, which was quite small. Besides, as the third way types will tell you in a candid moment, "where are they (the left) going to go?" We'll see the same thing if Hillary is elected. With no credible threat on the left flank, the people are ignored, mostly without consequence for the corporate politician. That's why something like Occupy was so important, and why it was so brutally crushed.
The corporations who wrote huge multi-million dollar checks were the ones Obama listened to (although I think their world-view for the most part aligns with his own). These people have specific legislative agendas their money supports, and they have a direct line to the elected politicians they "bought". One wrong move, and their support vanishes, they'll take their money to the other party, or they'll destroy the politician some other, more immediate way. Small Mom and Pop donors or their proxies in various NGO's aren't even allowed in the room. We get lip service, they (the corporate donors) get legislation.
Is aggregation of small donations the answer? It could help, so long as the aggregator is 100% representing the people rather than some interest of its own. A credible threat of upheaval or revolution would also get their attention. A serious and determined third party on the left would also help. Personally I favor working within the party, possibly using a far-left socialist wing under the Democratic Party tent, whose candidates would be forbidden from taking corporate money. Whatever the answer is, it doesn't involve electing candidates who share and validate the world-view of the corporatists and the Republicans.
Warpy
(113,131 posts)Blue Dogs took the biggest hit.
While I doubt a Socialist like Bernie Sanders could get elected outside New England, I also know that a man who ran as an unabashed progressive in an ultra red state won the governorship and was re elected four years later. That was Brian Schweitzer.
I honestly don't believe red states are looking for business as usual. It's killing them along with the rest of us.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)I don't agree that that proves shows that people will choose a real Republican over a Dem championing their policies every time. I wish it were true, and I think other people wishing it was true is why the meme is so pervasive. But many of the elected Dems are like that precisely because it works, as shown by the vast majority of our elected Democrats being corporate sell-outs. 2010 was odd in many ways, some unique dynamics playing out then, I don't claim to fully understand them.
Frame it like this and see how it feels, if you're being interrogated by two cops, who do you relate to, the good cop or the bad cop? The good cop, of course, and by design. Is the good cop sincere in his/her concern for your welfare? Not particularly, and you can sense that, but the other cop terrifies you beyond imagination, so you choose the good cop despite your reservations about his/her sincerity. That speaks more to our situation than the real/fake Republican/Dem meme IMHO.
From reading your posts over the years I pretty much agree with them, our world-views are similar. Maybe I should have left this alone, I just think it's incorrect that people will always choose the real Republican over a fake Democrat, though I can see how it's a useful idea to promote, we need more real Democrats.
I agree with your last line, we can reach people in any part of the country, crisis is opportunity.
Americans are ready for policies from the left of the spectrum, issue-specific polling backs it up. Socialism as a word has been tarnished by the corporatists, so let's use a different word for the far-left Dem caucus (we have the Progressive caucus, for what it's worth, mostly good people corrupted by a bad system, they spend a lot of their time on the phone calling corporations for campaign donations and the corporatists have little to fear from them).
Wealth redistribution, a functional safety net, reduced militarism, fighting climate change as if our lives depend on it (they do), regulation of corporations, social change (gays and pot for example), good-paying local non-corporate work, most or all of this will play fine in red states. The biggest exceptions are gays, abortion, organized religion, maybe guns. Economically, we're all in the same Titanic, 99% of us anyway.
How we get there, given the corporate capture of the two main political parties, is the question. If good cop/bad cop is all that is on the ballot, we're screwed. It's about the primaries, we have to learn to defeat the party's chosen corporatist with less money and worse organization (nothing helps organization as much as a well-paid staff), and fighting the "unelectable" tag they use as an excuse to support the DINO (we have the polls that show we're not crazy, and as we keep fighting for change while the country keeps going to hell, progressive policies will look better and better). And it's about reaching out to people we have little in common with who are also getting screwed by corporatist policy, because after we win the primary we have to beat the Republican in the general election.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)frwrfpos
(517 posts)giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)this thread. It's just another bullshit flamebait thread about why Obama is sooooo bad & evil with absolutely nothing to back it up.
frwrfpos
(517 posts)feel free to ignore the content of my post..waste some more time please
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)a thread you would find on yahoo.
Cha
(306,795 posts)is throwing a tantrum.. right here on DU.
giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)Apparently whining & bitching is what gets the fan club excited. It's astounding to me that so many OPs that consist of nothing more than the same shit we hear from Fox & the rest of the RW gets so much support.
Cha
(306,795 posts)


If it's Hatin' on Obama you got a guaranteed captive fan club.

DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)They don't mean to slander us. To beat us down with their words and deeds, and to always talk mean to us. And I know if we just give them one more chance, love them a little harder and give them just a little more of our blood, they'll come around and see things our way.
- Being a Democratic party leader today means never having to say you're sorry for kicking your own member's asses. It's one of the perks......
K&R
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)
frwrfpos
(517 posts)it never gets old.
put in a left bashing rant for good measure.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)I'm sure you won't be racking up those hides again.
"Welcome" to DU, in any case.
Cha
(306,795 posts)


joshcryer
(62,513 posts)
frwrfpos
(517 posts)you do remember that, dont you?
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)you have surely come to defend progressives and fight the tyranny of the third way! divisiveness be dammed!
delrem
(9,688 posts)the US overthrowing democracy in Central America yet again?
It's what would be expected from a Reagan/Goldwater Democrat.
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)But Hillary Clinton definitely condemned it
funny thing is that Zelaya was being used by the USA, just read the cables
delrem
(9,688 posts)As with Reagan/Goldwater, there are words and there are "words".
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)you don't get more clear than that
people were annoyed the USA didn't send in the marines to reinstate Zelaya
delrem
(9,688 posts)OAS isn't Hillary Rodham Clinton, that's for damn sure. And it isn't just the US and Canada.
And you betcha the Central/South American people were pissed off at the US and HRC w.r.t. the Honduran coup of 2009.
Following a *long* history of similar complaints of US activity in the US's so-called "backyard".
That's one reason for things such as this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_Latin_American_and_Caribbean_States
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)I think it's cute that you link CELAC when it was created in direct response to the power the US had over the OAS.
If OAS, an entity controlled by the US, dumps Honduras over the coup, don't you think that's a pretty clear message that the Obama administration sent?
Again, this is about the US not sending in marines to reinstate Zelaya, nothing more.
delrem
(9,688 posts)I can't do that work for you, esp. since you're a "3rd way" type in every instance that I can recall trying to discuss matters with you.
You prefer "3rd way" and HRC type Republican Lite politics, fine -- but don't pretend that HRC wasn't anything but an enabler of the Honduran coup of '09.
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)You just characterize and insult me nastily on every single topic you ever care to respond to me on. Acting like I am some ignorant fool who needs to be educated, not even trying to be considerate.
HRC didn't enable anything beyond saving Zelaya's ass when he was about to be taken out and drawn and quartered by Inestroza (of course, the asshole Zelaya was, he claimed the US was responsible for his illegal get away; I say get away because had he stayed in Honduras to face charges, then he would have likely went to jail).
Read the damn wikileaks cables, Zelaya was "our man" in Latin America.
And try next time to have less than 80% of your post insulting me and making shit personal, OK?
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)Let's see, where have I heard that before? Saddam, Noriega, actually a very long list. They're our man until they're not, then they're road kill.
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)delrem
(9,688 posts)And yes, joshcryer, HRC is total DLC third-way.
delrem
(9,688 posts)"...
Secretary Clinton, in the press conference the day after the coup, "Remarks at the Top of the Daily Press Briefing", refused to commit the United States to restoration of the democratically elected President of Honduras. She refused even to commit the U.S. to using the enormous leverage it had over the Honduran Government to bring that about. Here was the relevant Q&A:
Mary Beth Sheridan. QUESTION: Madam Secretary, sorry, if I could just return for a second to Honduras, just to clarify Arshad's point - so, I mean, the U.S. provides aid both under the Foreign Assistance Act and the Millennium challenge. So even though there are triggers in those; that countries have to behave - not have coups, you're not going to cut off that aid?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Mary Beth, we're assessing what the final outcome of these actions will be. This has been a fast-moving set of circumstances over the last several days, and we're looking at that question now. Much of our assistance is conditioned on the integrity of the democratic system. But if we were able to get to a status quo that returned to the rule of law and constitutional order within a relatively short period of time, I think that would be a good outcome. So we're looking at all of this. We're considering the implications of it. But our priority is to try to work with our partners in restoring the constitutional order in Honduras.
QUESTION: And does that mean returning Zelaya himself? You would insist on that in order to -
SECRETARY CLINTON: We are working with our partners.
She refused to answer the question, even though Zelaya had been an ally of the U.S., a progressive democrat. (Though Republicans decried Zelaya for pushing land-reform, the fact is that Honduras is virtually owned by two dozen families, and drastically needs to drag itself out of its feudal system. Doing that isn't anti-American; it's pro-American. It's what Zelaya was trying to do, peacefully and democratically. Our nation's Founders fought a Revolution to overthrow feudalism - British - in our own country. Hillary was thus being anti-American, not just anti-democratic, here.) This is stunning. The U.S had even been outright bombed by fascists, on the "day that will live in infamy," December 7, 1941; and, then, we spilled lots of blood to beat those fascists in WWII. What was that war all about, if not about opposing fascism and fascists, and standing up for democracy and democrats? A peaceful democratic U.S. ally had now been overthrown by a fascist coup in Honduras, and yet Hillary Clinton's response was - noncommittal?
..."
And so on.
Hillary Rodham Clinton and her husband Bill are total DLC third-way corporatists.
They have the big-money corporatist backing that they do because they're both totally owned.
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)The US descends upon Honduras to return the guy that they'd just saved from prosecution if not death?
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)I do not support that the US flew Zelaya out of there using our own military base to keep him safe.
I do not support that Honduras was withdrawn from OAS because the US were instrumental in the ouster, when instead he should've gone to jail and been tried.
I do not support extortion to get back into OAS for amnesty for Zelaya.
Neither Zelaya or the US acted properly in that situation, the US should not have protected him, and he should not have been able to return with amnesty for his crimes so that an entire country could get back on a strong footing.
Now we got Zelaya looking primed to take power again, and he'll be right there, just as the wikileaks cable showed, doing whatever we tell him to do.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Unfuckingbelievable.
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)I think that was pretty clear.
What, you don't think Zelaya was about to face charges and armed mobs if he didn't get out of dodge? You should read up on the coup then.
delrem
(9,688 posts)End "discussion".
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)delrem
(9,688 posts)http://prospect.org/article/our-man-honduras
So you can learn some tricks in becoming what you aspire to.
joshcryer
(62,513 posts)I can analyze the situation without someone telling me how I should treat it. Zelaya is a crook and he tried to take over Honduras by constitutionally illegal Referendum. Had the US not rescued him he would've been tried and convicted on the charges. Assuming the mobs didn't get to him first.
Too many brain dead commentators just think "Zelaya is against the US, Zelaya good." Of course, they don't read the cables where Zelaya was going to get the US into other Latin American trade zones. It's too convenient to overlook that fact.
You lack credibility on this issue.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Not many species of animals don't. The question is, how you use it: and I can't tell a difference between your so-called arguments and Lanny Davis's on the same topic, and Lanny Davis's arguments only fly when he couples them with big money donations from fascist donors eager to use him as middle-man. Like the fascist donors who paid him to promote their little putsch in Honduras, 2009.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)It's hard when you've absolutely never ever been in a community, like, ever ever before and you're just getting used to those, y'know, community standards?
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)He does seem to have some "familiarity" with the senseless trash talk.
creeksneakers2
(7,631 posts)After all, if you're persecuted, that makes you heroic. Doesn't it?
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Response to blkmusclmachine (Reply #58)
Cali_Democrat This message was self-deleted by its author.
SidDithers
(44,295 posts)
Sid
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)
Sigh....
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)
Cha
(306,795 posts)


Whisp
(24,096 posts)and you know what it is?
It's the same old ratchet up the misery and whinging before the midterms to try to demoralize. It's normally pretty bad here for bashing the President and every friggen thing he does, with no recognition at all for what he does get done under the circumstances but tis' the season again. Hamsher and her crew were on it like shit to a blanket last go round.
same as last time but with different names.
SidDithers
(44,295 posts)accurate in so many ways.
Sid
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Last edited Mon Feb 10, 2014, 02:36 AM - Edit history (1)
This thread is merely abusing the membership and those of us who give Obama a fair shake, I have given this poster a fair shake when he first started posting and was supportive but he doesn't seem to be willing to do the same. Disappointing.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Cha
(306,795 posts)epic fail.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)...bankrolled by Third Way and the DLC....with the blessing of Obama of course!
struggle4progress
(121,093 posts)I think you're just bottom-dragging for reactions
TBF
(34,983 posts)I told him about our progressive socialist group. It's a quieter group where we post about the type of future we'd like to see. It's a protected group with no red-baiting allowed. Many of our members are Trotskyist or Anarchist in philosophy. It's of course not GD and we are not focused on beating down other politicians - we discuss other economic systems, the ills of capitalism, how to move forward with our ideals etc. I was hoping he/she might be interested but no luck.
struggle4progress
(121,093 posts)TBF
(34,983 posts)I think you may be right.
I always try to welcome folks when I think they might have something to add to our socialist group. There are plenty of us with stronger leftist tendencies who vote democrat because it's clearly our best option. We may like to see policies that are further left but we still have to deal with the reality of this country and a 2-party system.
struggle4progress
(121,093 posts)TBF
(34,983 posts)and I vote for democrats because they usually do the least damage to working folks. I am in Texas and rarely even see local socialists on the ballot. I do the best I can ... but I really feel like the advocating and organizing are the things that affect change long term.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)going on in this thread:
http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4465983
and it's not leftist!
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
OilemFirchen
(7,184 posts)Fuck Rand McNally.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,443 posts)


lob1
(3,820 posts)when they should be blaming the Supreme Court.
JI7
(91,257 posts)
They both want Democrats to lose!

JoeyT
(6,785 posts)but because they profess love for Him, it's totally cool.
We've even got a handful that recently popped up with the "WE NEED A STRONG MILITARY! TERRORISTS! WHY DOES YOU HATE AMURRICA!" shit.
So every shitty right wing talking point is represented, and to disagree with them means you're being "divisive".
A-Schwarzenegger
(15,650 posts)harder to troll.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)QC
(26,371 posts)countryjake
(8,554 posts)is red-baiting!
But hey, welcome to DU, frwrfpos!
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)What decade are you posting from?
TBF
(34,983 posts)I know several leftists who will tolerate "hippies" but really want to focus on economics as opposed to extraneous issues.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)TBF
(34,983 posts)in the "analysis" ... every other stereotype was bandied about.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)'reds' but Big Business Capitalists, Oligarchs and oppressors. I think your translation program needs an update, your lingo is very 1971.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)
A couple of decades late.