General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsObamabots: Not Our Enemy: Cut Them Some Slack
There is a lot of trashing of the good people who have the singular vision of Obama being the 'One'.
In this day and age, given the incredible tension in the global environment, some folks need to believe that there is someone, some 'One' person, who can fix it all and make it better. Certainly our history books have trained many to believe just that: That 'One' can make all the difference in the world.
None of you would disagree that Obama has made a difference. We just disagree on the degree of difference Obama has brought to a struggling global environment.
All around us are true enemies who would love to jail us if they could. The leaders of the RW have said as much in public. Obamabots are not like that. They are our friends, so please, quit hurting them. Instead encourage our friends and together we may just be able to change the world for the better.
Thank you, and good day.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)certainly doesn't seem helpful.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Too many blame Obama for the world's problems.
It is weird how some think Obama should have already altered the globe and since he hasn't, well.... he's no good.
Just goes to show the schizoid society we endure.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)It is weird how some think Obama should have already altered the globe and since he hasn't, well.... he's no good.
I look at the aggregate effect of such policies (which is no simply equation). I thought the "Obamabots" simply look at policies they appreciate and ignore the general direction we are headed in aggregate. For example, they may applaud the increase in payrolls under Obama, but ignore the future gutting due to enhanced free trade, or they may applaud investment in green technology while ignoring Keystone, drilling expansion and the ever climbing GHGs we see in our atmosphere.
In the end, Obama is no King, but if his policies leave the world 1 step forward and running two steps back, then, well, it doesn't matter how good he talks or looks in pictures.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)My message is that attacking fellow travelers for not engrossing themselves in the aggregate big picture gains nothing for any of us in the aggregate.
That we have real enemies who we should be attending to. It is only through unity that we make any forward progress.
Politics, the way some are playing it, makes politics suck. If we want people to vote for our party, we need to show a united and more fun party face.
Complaining about people who would vote for Obama no matter what, is ugly.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)so FDR wasn't "the One"? so Kennedy wasn't "the One"?
Is this what you are trying to say.....because I think they ALL were the ONE that changed the face of politics of their day....
Were the people that loved, supported and followed the leadership of all of those men treated so derisively? Would you have called their support "worshipping the One"?
Yes the first step is to not call them "obamabots" and not tell them they are trying to "worship the One" would work...
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)You are talking here about men who LITERALLY put their lives and fortunes on the line to fight for their principles. Literally, as in you win or you die. Forget fighting for others, Obama won't even fight for the things he claims he believes in. The guy is as shameless as an Army Recruiter.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)Not quite. But he is damn sure no Washington or Lincoln.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)YOU are going to be saddened...sorry...YES he is...
But do note....I added FDR, and Kennedy and YOU left those off the list...
I repeat myself yet again:
but if you do NOTHING else on DU but condemn him for ANYTHING he does because he hasn't addressed your pet issue to your satisfaction...then YES you are a hater.
Number23
(24,544 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...then you might get somewhere.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Please enlighten me...
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Last edited Wed Mar 26, 2014, 01:27 PM - Edit history (1)
PUHLEASE....
ODS no DOUBT about it...
for example:
Lilly Ledbetter...
I know that means NOTHING to you....but we women think it is a BFD! He did that for his daughters...
Also the ACA is the BIGGEST legislation for the women's movement since Roe V Wade! Yeah there is you "won't fight for what he believes in" right?"
So screw your Beiber analysis sideways....What has Beiber done for the women's movement lately?
Do you even know what choosing your battles means? Its called LEADERSHIP!
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)about Obama's policies that you find negative, or incorrect, refute it.
I believe the insulting and petty bickering stem from the fact that you are unable to refute it. I believe they are the result of frustration.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)that's just stupid and SHOWS the where the poster stands..
I can refute it very easily....Affordable Care Act. When was the last time Beiber improved Healthcare access?
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)By showing otherwise. By giving a counter example.
sheshe2
(97,626 posts)
OilemFirchen
(7,288 posts)Jefferson never saw combat and Roosevelt was never in the military.
How did any of these individuals put their fortunes on the line fighting for their principles?
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,288 posts)Same with Obama, I would presume. Except that he's not on a battlefield. Like Jefferson or Roosevelt. Or John Adams. Or John Quincy Adams. Or Bill Clinton. Or five other presidents.
Is military service a benchmark for being a leader?
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I think you have lost the debate... 
(although I certainly expect a rationalization the the otherwise to illustrate defeat as type of rare species of victory or some such...)
Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #123)
VanillaRhapsody This message was self-deleted by its author.
OilemFirchen
(7,288 posts)I think we're in general agreement here.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Sorry I thought you were dissing those Presidents....Nevermind! I will delete...
treestar
(82,383 posts)It was not possible during their presidencies, as they did not need to.
Better would be to compare legislatures and gee, the separation of powers works, so is that so bad?
Again, it is about personalities. They attack Obama's personality, because he is the The One they thought they would get.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)And how has Obama been called to?
They are all Presidents.
And the "fighting" meme is silly and tired. George Washington had so much political capital at that point, he was elected unanimously. Prove he had any legislative battle whatsoever, let alone had to face opposition. The system was brand new, not 230 some years old and the people were excited to have this new system. A Tea Party type opposition would not have existed.
If a state seceded under Obama, you'd be calling it his fault.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)He left office as scheduled. Today people would say, "Well of course he did!" but that was certainly not a given at that time. Washington literally fought, with people shooting at him and trying to kill him, for liberty. Obama is fighting to preserve the NSA.
It's easy to go back and point out flaws and failings in these men, that's what people do, but there is a reason that men like Washington and Jefferson and Lincoln and FDR are considered extraordinary. In three hundred more years children will still be taught their names, but if you ask them to name the first black President they wont have a clue what you are talking about. Who knows, they might even say Ronald Reagan.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Hardly fair. How do you know what anyone would have done in that situation?
False comparison that you set up yourself.
No President compare to Washington. OTOH, no President had Washington's advantages, of being the First, being in on the beginning of the Republic (only the first five or so have that).
Obama will always be special in history just for being the first black President. In a nation where blacks were enslaved 150 years before, that is quite an accomplishment. On par with Washington's, though not identical.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)The guy spent an entire year vowing that he was the leader who would protect social security. "Hands off!" they said, over and over and over again. But when he was reelected on that promise he didn't even wait until he was sworn in for his second term before offering it up for destruction to Republicans who weren't asking for it and did not want it.
If you want integrity and a willingness to bare any burden, look at Washington or Jefferson or Lincoln or even FDR. Comparing Obama to these giants is like comparing Saul Goodman to Thurgood Marshall.
Beacool
(30,518 posts)
DrDan
(20,411 posts)until then . . . .
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and I didn't write this post...but
If you come to DU with the sole purpose of berating ALL Democrats because YOU cannot get the Green Party or Libertarian Party or whatever party better suits you in the Whitehouse and you only vote for Democrats because said party can't win...then yeah...you are here to hate.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)None. And if you reach that point of recognition, then there really isn't a whole lot of reason to cuddle up to endorsers of one-step-forward-and-two-steps back. At the end of the day, they are just advocating one step back towards the cliff, instead of a mad dash there like the Republicans. We're still going over the cliff, and there is nothing in conventional politics and the old paradigms of yesterday that are going to change that. There is still no third way step to redemption, even if its wrapped up in lofty speeches, sealed with a pretty, tidy "D". So those advocating for a slower, kinder and gentler form of class--and now species wide--suicide are still asking me to at some point kill myself and my children (or surrender them to a world of horror) while smiling to the savvy chosen leader that we are no longer allowed to question, but merely support with the vote of ours that they own and are entitled to.. Fine, I wont call them enemies, but I'm not keen on inviting them over for cocktails.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)again I repeat:
but if you do NOTHING else on DU but condemn him for ANYTHING he does because he hasn't addressed your pet issue to your satisfaction...then YES you are a hater.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)(congrats, you made it off my full ignore list...for a few days)
And from fracking to clean coal to drilling expansion to Keystone to lack of a massive green revolution movement, yeah, I'm not entirely satisfied that were headed for a near term extinction level event in the anthropocene era.
Silly me. Fuck our posterity. He has one hell of a smile
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Just like I said....if you come here to do nothing but condemn democrats because YOUR pet issue hasn't been addressed to your satisfaction.....well you are not furthering the Democratic cause...WE are not a ONE ISSUE party....we don't do purity tests. We judge you not on ONE issue....but many issues...so you know. You just want a Green Party candidate....but you know they cannot win elections.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)When we're no longer here, there will be no one left to debate how good or shitty the ACA was.
My silly little pet issue sort of seems important to me. But thats just me. I guess he does have a nice smile and a D after his name. What else more do you need (besides a habitable planet)?
You little way to dismiss my level of satification regarding my silly little pet issue is a total FAIL in matters of science BTW.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Your pet issue doesn't trump everyone else's sorry....I advise you to start your own party if you are not satisfied with this one....
Good luck!
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)My little pet issue is about whether we survive the 6th extinction in the Anthropocene. And yes, that trumps everyone else's issues.
And you have to be pretty delusional and stuck in a political rabbit hole not to realize it.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)if that is what you think...then Democrats are NOT the party for you...we brag about our "big tent" remember?
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)If we cannot solve this (and we aren't trying and probably can't), then nothing else matters. Were dead. Starved and drowned. Our cities will crumble. Our ecosystem will fail.
Oh, what a silly pet issue that gets worse every day.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)peoples civil rights mean NOTHING to you...
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)sensitive are we?
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)Do you suggest this threat doesn't exist because it isn't mentioned in the Democratic Platform? Are you a political flat-earther?
DU was better when you were on full-ignore. Im going to make DU better. I gave you a few hours to redeem yourself
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)might i suggest the Green Party for you....you seem to be having issues with the Big Tent Democrats...
"redeem myself" Do NOT need YOUR redemption...
pppppfffffftttttt!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
Rex
(65,616 posts)It is not a threat, but a cycle our planet goes through and we are currently a million years overdue for another one. Many scientist already say this is the 6th mass extinction event. Nature would agree with them.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And by default neither does the Third Way®
The extinction of mankind = to the Third Way®
GoCubsGo
(34,914 posts)It's a derisive name to many of us, and calling ardent Obama supporters by that name isn't helping matters. Just sayin'.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)This message was not meant for Obamabots, it is meant for the people who attack Obamabots, so it used their terminology.
However, if being called an Obamabot bothers you, that is something to think about why. I'd like to hear why.
Being an Obamabot is nothing to be ashamed of, in my mind.
GoCubsGo
(34,914 posts)Because attaching "bot" to the end of anything strongly insinuates that those people are mindless--as in "Obamabots" are people who mindlessly follow Obama. I don't believe any of them are mindless followers. Extremely ardent, yes. Mindless, no.
And, yes, I know this was not meant for Obama's most ardent supporters. My point was that if one is calling for cutting them slack, one shouldn't be deriding them in the same breath. Perhaps putting the term in quotes would help.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)We live in a society of labels. Of naming things so that we can distinguish one thing from another.
Note that I have been mistakenly labeled, by some on this site, for speaking my mind about how I wished Obama could do better; even called a republican.
No one is innocent and no one is perfect.
Again, I see no harm in being called an 'Obamabot' if one is a fervent supporter of all Obama things. YMMV
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)do you also tell women, Black people and the LGBT communities what they should allow themselves to be called too?
See how that works?
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)politician worship.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)based on the letter after a politician's name is pretty much the definition of mindless behavior.
And that is the goal of the corporate propaganda: to replace assessment of policies based on political values and principles with visceral, knee-jerk, emotional loyalty to a party or politician. Look at how politics is covered on corporate cable TV: as a breathless, emotional horse race between your team and the other team, with only the most superficial, inflammatory issues on display.
There has been a deliberate and systematic attempt by the corporate One Percent, through their purchased propaganda, to detach party loyalty from the actual policies being pursued, and to attach it instead to team colors, logos, and politicians.
That's why we get the shameless spectacle of Democrats who abhorred spying and drone murders and indefinite detention under Bush but defend them under Obama, and Republicans who now lambaste Obama for the very same policies they defended under Bush.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Seems to me.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)It is not to be ashamed of by you because YOU aren't being called one YOU are the one doing the calling...
DrDan
(20,411 posts)GoCubsGo
(34,914 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)but use DU as a place to BASH Democrats instead....Just voting for them because YOU cannot get a preferred party to the White house....is not supporting them particularly if you then hypocritically bash all those that DO support them...
What do you call that?
GoCubsGo
(34,914 posts)What's with all the name-calling?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Do you have a problem with having a word to describe those who do NOT support Democrats but instead come to a Democratic forum to BASH Democrats and their supporters....I have a word for THAT and so do you!
Just because you vote for them because you can't get those you actually support into power....doesn't really qualify does it?
"I vote for them....but I don't actually like any of them" makes PERFECT sense...
GoCubsGo
(34,914 posts)I already said that I don't like the term "Obamabot". I don't like the use of "haters", either. Seriously, what is your problem??
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Do you have a problem with those who use Democratic Underground as a forum to bash all things Democrat? Or are you one of them?
GoCubsGo
(34,914 posts)It's a free country. If the admins don't want them here, they'll get rid of them. And, if you have any evidence that I am "one of them", I sure as hell would like to see it. Until then, go take your fight somewhere else. I'm not interested.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Gotcha...thanks for letting me know where YOU stand! If you have nothing at all good to say about Democrats...then I have NO use for you anymore than I have use for a Teabagger. PERIOD end of story...
GoCubsGo
(34,914 posts)And, quite frankly, I don't give a shit whether or not you "have NO use for" me. The feelings are mutual at this point. Take your baseless accusations and stick them where the sun don't shine.
As for why this site was created, you should ask Skinner, et al. They created it, not me. I have no say-so in the matter, nor does it matter what I think about it.
Good day.
treestar
(82,383 posts)when we have so many?
They whine about whatever name we can them. They are the first to claim victimhood. There's something very alluring about taking the victim stance. It means your opponent is being a meany just to oppose. They love to pose as "dirty hippies" and somebody out there called them that.
treestar
(82,383 posts)It does not describe them, but their feelings. They hate everything Obama does. They hide behind criticism, but their criticism is such that you can see it is a fact there is nothing Obama could do they would not "criticize." And the criticism are pretty lame. They usually criticize him for not controlling the legislature, as if any President could do that and it's a desirable thing. We know which posters will not find a single foreign policy response of the US to be the right one (they usually fall back on blaming the US for the problem in the first place, and finding the President's response to be "corporate."
They jump on any right wing bandwagon there is, saying we were against it when Bush did it, so we have a duty to turn on Obama for it, and when any differences come to light, they sneeringly dispose of them.
They do hate this country, and the President. Maybe they would whoever the President is. They claim one cannot even be President without being beholden to "the corporations" so it follows they would hate any President.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)
zappaman
(20,627 posts)
frazzled
(18,402 posts)a mindless insult that exists in the heads of a small number of holier-than-thou iconoclasts, whose incessant complaints about Obama stem mainly from their belief that, being "The One" who could have done everything, he has failed in every capacity imaginable. They invest inordinate amounts of energy in the belief that a president is all powerful in America, and has the singular capacity to change everything with the stoke of a wand, if only the will to do so were there, or if the evil corporate inclinations could be shaken off.
These appear to be the exact souls who are always placing themselves in the position of looking for the next "One," whether it is Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren or some other as-yet unproven quantity.
We should have compassion for these "bots," who prefer to live with their dreams of imminent utopias in preference to the imperfections of the real world.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)but they just cannot see themselves when the mirror is held up to their faces...
treestar
(82,383 posts)OP derailed his OP with that claim. It is silly. It's the (name we are not allowed to call them) who wanted "The One" and continuing looking for "The One."
Bernie says something (as a Senator) and they are like: "Bernie has my vote!" Over one thing he says.
Rex
(65,616 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)On DU I think we have people all along the spectrum from 100% support for Obama to 0% support.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)Obama being the 'One'. That is nothing less than insulting; the fact remains that most of us weigh the issues set forth by Obama and are not clueless automatons. Those that voice anger and throw needless insults at Obama could be considered 'angry whiners' or worse, but we don't see that sort of insult on DU but rarely if at all.
I have been a voting Democratic member for 65 years and have rarely been 'put down' in all those years by sneering and insulting fellow members who claim we are thoughtless 'Obamabots'.
Inexcusable !
GoCubsGo
(34,914 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Too many of us who voice our concerns about how our government is leading the country are labeled many derogatory names.
Doing so tends to paint those accusers into a corner. That corner is then labeled and a term applied to that group so that we can distinguish them from ourselves.
Again: In my mind, being called an 'Obamabot' is not necessarily a bad thing. What can make it bad is the nasty reactions from those so labeled.
My message here is for those of us attacked just let it slide. We need to quit reacting to labels and instead turn our attention to our real enemies. 'Obamabots' no matter how they appear, are not our enemies, right?
lumpy
(13,704 posts)from those who are so labled, you say. So it ends up "Obamabots' do a bad thing for resenting the slur and are supposed to believe it is not a slur and let it slide.
I hope you can take your own advice and cease labeling fellow Dems Obamabots ,etc.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Hey, I've been labeled worse by some who could be called 'Obamabots'.
So, if you are one, is there another label you'd rather have?
If you are not, then no problems, eh?
lumpy
(13,704 posts)What would you prefer as a label? I don't have a label for you ( I assume you are a Democrat)
It will remain a problem if his sort of derision is continued. And if you think it hasn't been a problem for others, you are wrong. I'm sure many posters have quit posting DU because of this.
And you are spot on noting that it is a problem for others.
greatauntoftriplets
(179,005 posts)KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)I'll add + 10 billion on your +10 billion. This place is like walking into a grade school lunch room these days. Hope all is well...
greatauntoftriplets
(179,005 posts)I'm okay but wish that spring would get here. Hope you're doing well.
KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)...even a week in Arizona didn't help. Even with the cold the trees are budding, so it's just a matter of time. Back into hiding I go...too easy to get in the crossfire around here...
greatauntoftriplets
(179,005 posts)Hope you come out of hiding again sometime. I hide in plain sight in MIRT these days.
KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)...so I can't play there anymore. Been posting in places I'm a better fit in these days. Always a pleasure seeing you. All good things and more!
greatauntoftriplets
(179,005 posts)Saw some old names I hadn't seen for ages in some contentious threads recently. Best wishes to you and let's beat Rauner so he retreats to one of his multiple out-of-state houses.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)It is the use of derision in all of its many forms that have been making DU suck.
How nice of you to assume I, too, am a democrat. Just what I fucking need, again, someone calling my democratic creds into question. Way to go. Thanks, friend.
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. If you are not and can never be labeled an 'Obamabot', then what is your problem? Did I call into question the so called 'Obamabots' democratic creds? No. In fact I want them welcome in the big tent and not derided. 'Obamabots' are not our enemy, they are as far as I can tell, good democrats. Is that not been made clear?
lumpy
(13,704 posts)you are a Demo.. I probably shouldn't have assumed...forgive me. I know there are posters who deeply resent being called 'PomPom' wavers, Obamabots etc. and I am one of them, apparently, since I don't join posters in their anger against Obama for not accomplishing all that could be. No I don't believe less verbal posters will cease being Democrats, they will just continue to quit speaking on DU. Democratic posters are not the enemy, but we do like to be respected and being labeled as blind clueless followers of Obama is counter productive.
Thanks for your efforts, sincerely.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)call them Democrats....People who support the Democratic Party are Democrats. If you HATE the Democrats (just as much as rightwingers) but merely vote for them because YOU cannot find a way to make candidates YOU want win the primaries or start a third party altogether...then maybe you are a Democrat in name only...
What you said.
We need to stop labeling each other here at DU. 
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)thank you very much...Supporter of the President could be another one...it it is not hurled at them like a pejorative...
Some people DO see nuance and never EXPECTED the President to fix ALL 30 yrs of bad politics in this country....THEY know that you will NEVER find "the One" that you RobertEarl dream of....it is not THEY that expect "the One".....YOU do!
babylonsister
(172,759 posts)
LibAsHell
(180 posts)It's clear that not every Dem who supports Obama is an "Obamabot." Having said that, they exist, and, while I do not consider them an enemy, I do consider them willfully ignorant, blind, and a detriment to the liberal movement.
Number23
(24,544 posts)I think the bots run shit a hell of alot more than their counterparts... whatever they are calling themselves.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)States that build surveillance machines also build propaganda machines:
Obama taps "cognitive infiltrator" Cass Sunstein for Committee to create "trust" in NSA:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023512796
Salon: Obama confidant’s spine-chilling proposal: Cass Sunstein wants the government to "cognitively infiltrate" anti-government groups
http://www.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/
The US government's online campaigns of disinformation, manipulation, and smear.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024560097
Snowden: ‘Training Guide’ for GCHQ, NSA Agents Infiltrating and Disrupting Alternative Media Online
http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/02/25/snowden-training-guide-for-gchq-nsa-agents-infiltrating-and-disrupting-alternative-media-online/
The influx of corporate propaganda-spouting posters is blatant and unnatural.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367
U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News To Americans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023262111
The goal of the propaganda assaults across the internet is not to convince anyone of anything.*
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023359801
The government figured out sockpuppet management but not "persona management."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358242
The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4159454
Seventeen techniques for truth suppression.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4249741
Just do some Googling on astroturfing - big organizations have some sophisticated tools.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1208351
The influx will continue
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4216987
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)so we're back to square one.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Nobody buys the garbage of the propaganda crew here anymore.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)Some DUers are attracted to either pole but most are in the middle.
*In fact maybe not even a crew, just one or two on either side.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Honestly, the over-the-top Orwellian chutzpah would be funny if it weren't in the service of devastating millions. Psst....Third Way and Koch = the very same economic/war/police state policies and goals.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4156659
Apparently the "propaganda machine" and its targets have been misidentified....In fact, we have had it all BACKWARDS!
It is a jaw-dropping revelation, as alarming and earthshaking as the threads a week ago that revealed that impoverished Americans' rage at looters and profiteers is wholly justified, but that we have had the wrong target in our sights! We have tragically misidentified the REAL threat to us.....a cunning Goldstein by the name of....wait for it....
Glenn Greenwald.
Yes, Greenwald is the REAL looter and profiteer that Americans need to fear. Not the tentacled NSA, not the rapacious One Percent, and certainly not the corrupt, purchased politicians who have been driving millions into poverty through predatory corporate policy. No, it is Greenwald. He has power!
Glenn Greenwald is impoverishing me!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4031540
And now thank god we have you and your compatriots to identify the REAL propaganda machine, too.
Thank goodness you are here on a daily basis to defend the beleaguered NSA, the struggling global banks and corporations, the quivering and impoverished government of the United States, and the bedraggled One Percent against the Massive, Orchestrated Juggernaut of Propaganda being wielded against them by....poor Americans, Glenn Greenwald, and Julian Assange... (cough).
Obviously the dramatic influx of pro-corporate, pro-police state, pro-Third Way, pro-everything One Percent mouthpieces at discussion sites across the internet has NOTHING to do with propaganda. It is merely a fluke of nature that they have swarmed into sites across the internet and shifted the political balance of DU and other discussion forums in just a few short months or years. It is merely an accident that they predictably and reliably swarm *every single discussion* that implicates this administration in the persecution of whistleblowers and journalists and assaults on the Constitution for the benefit of the One Percent. It is merely a bizarre accident that they evidence an influx and constant growth in their numbers that is unnatural to the point of being ridiculous**. And it is wholly a coincidence that they share a consistent set of rules and tactics for smearing liberals, disrupting liberal discussion, and fervently defending, minimizing, or denying *every single aspect* of the growing corporate authoritarian state.
How in the world will the voiceless US government, the helpless surveillance and corporate media machine, and the defenseless banks and corporations of the One Percent *ever* hope to overcome the dread power of the vast propaganda machine wielded by the people against them?!
__________________________________________
**
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023359801
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)If one wanted to destroy democrat party unity and make it easier for the republicans to continue to win elections, one would do well to embrace all your articles and rants.
It must be neat feeling all perfect and non-contributory to the system, as you seem to be. Good for you. The rest of us merely struggle to make some progress.
Our enemies are not often found on this website. Very few in actuality, but some here do get their cookies on causing dissension.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Nobody is buying anymore. Nobody wants your Third Way poison.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)The majority of people who call themselves Democrats, liberal Democrats or liberals generally approve of President Obama and the Democratic Party. Of course some of these people are going to be attracted to *DemocraticUnderground*.
A minority of people who call themselves Democrats, liberal Democrats or liberals generally disapprove of President Obama and the Democratic Party. These people are attracted to DU because they want to tell the other Democrats and liberals where they're going wrong.
The majority of people who don't call themselves Democrats, liberal Democrats or liberals generally disapprove of President Obama and the Democratic Party. They want to come to DU to talk down Democratic policies and disprove liberal ideas.
Now, in theory the first group should be much larger than the second group here on DU, but that's not the case. Why is that?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)they are loud...but they only represent a small minority overall...that is the truth they are trying to cover up!
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Right on cue: approval, not of democratic values and principles, but of Obama. The predictable deflection from issues to party and personality. Again the drumbeat of propaganda to attach loyalties to politicians rather than principles and policies.
It's a slick manipulation when the issues are as clear and devastating as NSA mass spying, criminal looting by banks, environmental assault, corporatization of schools, drone slaughter of civilians, "Kill Lists" and indefinite imprisonment without due process, imprisonment for profit, and the looting and impoverishment of millions: all policies long associated with the corporate, Wall Street One Percent.
The same corporatist, Wall Street One Percent that owns the Republican Party and that has now bankrolled the DLC/Third Way infiltration of the Democratic Party.
The Third Way and their corporate politicians have never been a grass roots, naturally occurring part of the Party. They are a deliberate, Koch-bankrolled infiltration with a goal of hijacking the Democratic Party to serve corporate interests rather than the interests of voters.[font size=2]When your child, or your party, is gravely sick with a malignant, infiltrating tumor, you don't pledge loyalty to the tumor because it is a part of your child now. You excise it. [/font size]
When the DLC connections to the Koch Bros. became well known, they just rebranded the infiltration
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4165556
When you hear "Third Way", think INVESTMENT BANKERS
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024127432
GOP Donors and K Street Fuel Third Way’s Advice for the Democratic Party
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101680116
The Rightwing Koch Brothers fund the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414
Same companies behind the GOP are behind the DLC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1481121
"Heavily financed by the most powerful corporations in the world" they sat 54 floors above
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4704681
Behind the DLC Takeover
http://archive.is/gdEuS#selection-285.207-285.270
Psst. You can *always, always* tell which side the propaganda is *really* on by watching the policies that have been defended
The behavior, the history, and the goals of the propaganda brigade at DU are eminently clear in this regard.
.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)You are entitled to your opinion but others might disagree with you.
That's going to happen on a discusion board.
FWIW I've been here on DU since 2002 criticizing Republicans and neocons and I don't apologize for it.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Again, that is the relevant and important point: not loyalty to a politician. When it becomes impossible to criticize vicious, predatory policies without eliciting a Valkyrie-like swarm of vitriol and accusations of being disloyal to a politician, there is a serious problem...and an agenda.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)is he also supportive of "vicious, predatory policies" and does HE have an "agenda"? (your words)
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Exhibit A.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Here is just one statement for your Exhibit B:
President Obama’s budget provides major investments on rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, expanding community health centers and improving the lives and educational opportunities of our children. It includes smart investments in pre-school education and job training. It calls for expanded tax credits for 13.5 million low-income workers. At a time when the wealthiest Americans are doing phenomenally well, it asks some of the richest people in the country to start paying their fair share of taxes. At a time when the country is still struggling to recover from a terrible recession, the president’s initiatives would benefit Vermonters and all Americans by improving the economy and creating of millions of decent-paying jobs.
As the founder of the Defending Social Security Caucus, I am especially proud that the president did not renew his proposal to cut Social Security benefits. With the middle class struggling and more people living in poverty than ever before, we cannot afford to make life even more difficult for seniors and some of the most vulnerable people in America.
As a member of the Senate Budget Committee, I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate to build on the many positive proposals in the president’s budget and address those areas where the president’s proposals fall short.
~Bernie Sanders~
Sure sounds "supportive" to me!
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Last edited Tue Mar 25, 2014, 10:12 PM - Edit history (5)
As usual, your gleeful attempt at a "gotcha" only illustrates my point. No honest observer has any doubt about Bernie's position on issues ranging from the outrageous protection of bankers under this administration to the use of threatened SS cuts to implement vicious austerity. Bernie has repeatedly, strongly, and publicly disagreed with the president for bargaining with the subsistence income of the elderly. He has repeatedly and publicly exhorted the president not to do so, every single time he has done it. Look it up. And he will express his disagreement again when the president does it again.
That is the essence of true support for democratic values and principles: encouraging actions that move in the right direction, and holding feet to the fire when the president is viciously wrong. Propaganda with an agenda, by contrast, is about attaching loyalty to a politician no matter what he does.
Of course Bernie extends support to the president when he appears, however briefly,* to move in a better direction. But only in the twisted, manufactured reality of the propaganda machine does your inane comment here erase Bernie's longstanding, publicly critical stance toward the corporate predation that currently drives policy in both parties...to the point that he has indicated that he will run for president if no other principled politician steps up to reverse it.
______________________________________
*Interestingly, right after Obama removed SS cuts from the budget for this election year, he turned right around (no pun intended) and suggested that they will be on the table again after the election year. Not only that, but he also repeated the disgusting Republican/Third Way lie of suggesting that SS is responsible for the deficit.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Myopic!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts) 
11 Bravo
(24,310 posts)of the Obama presidency in every poll extant. You have made it abundantly clear that you believe you and you alone are able to discern the incontrovertible truth that all of those individuals who proclaim their support of this President really, really DON'T agree with his policies, they just like his smile.
And of course you are an expert on the matter because you have "science" in your username ... or something.
And when it becomes impossible to defend a Democratic president on a Democratic message board from a not quite Valkyrie-like ... but perhaps more of an annoying little gnat swarm ... all of them wailing and decrying the "worshippers" and "bots", then perhaps there's a serious problem ... and, yes, an agenda.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Nailed it!
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)Because a loud minority of discontents have squatted on this web site for years and have a death grip on the most populated forum here (GD) where they use their numbers to drown out all discussions of the many, many, MANY polls that show how tiny their numbers are in the real world and the Dem party as well as any positive stories about Democratic politicians, the Democratic Party or the United States which they denounce (endlessly and maniacally, I might add) as "propaganda?"
Marr
(20,317 posts)Glitterati
(3,182 posts)would resolve their problems.
Not every disagreement with Obama is ODS. One CAN disagree with the man, his policies and his opinion without losing their respect and admiration for the man.
When my husband of 31 years was alive, we disagreed occasionally, but it certainly didn't make me deranged, nor disrespectful to him.
Rex
(65,616 posts)they are doing what I want them to do - support my party and vote for candidates I vote for. I am beginning to think I am asking too much for critical thinking. Some people just lack the gene. I should just be happy they support the same politicians I do, even if no thought is put into it. The outcome is the same and one that I want.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)Sorry, but you don't win VOTES that way.
Just ask the freepers.
Rex
(65,616 posts)As for the abuse, I expect that out of black and white thinkers. I mostly just ignore the RAH RAH threads, a waste of time since they are not open for discussion.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)waste of time.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)is SOOO productive on a Democratic forum!
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)I guess you're going to have to find a different "victim" since I'm not an Obama basher, nor an Elizabeth Warren supporter......
Oooops! Bless your pea pickin' little heart!
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Who DO You support? If you don't support Democrats....what are you doing on a Democratic Forum if not being a troll?
My heart doesn't pick peas...
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)It really might do your "cause" some good.
You know, like try to find out who the hell you're even talking to? Yeah, research.
Accusations with no basis in fact makes you look like a fool.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)tell us please....if you are not here for nefarious reasons perhaps you can tell us once and for all. It is just a simple question....true Democrats can easily answer.....You just said Elizabeth Warren wasn't it....
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)why it is you think you have the right to make such a "demand?"
You really need to grow the hell up if you think I'm going to even ATTEMPT to have a conversation with you.
brush
(61,033 posts)
dflprincess
(29,341 posts)And you can bet they won't show up in 2014. But the Bots on DU will blame the left.
treestar
(82,383 posts)we do not need "one" who can fix all - that is simply not true.
In fact that's more likely to be the attitude of the "disappointed" who now want to put their faith in someone else.
We just think he has done a good job as President, that's all. We're the ones arguing for the constitutional limits on the Presidency and saying he can't wave a magic wand. It's the haters who keep saying if he were just tough enough or twisted more arms or did things differently, we'd have single payer, etc. That's putting faith in the person - finding the person inadequate just means they think there is some other person who can do it all in spite of Republicans.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Calling some of us 'Haters'.
Called haters because we wished Obama would do more. 'Obamabot' as a label, is so much kinder than the label you use for some here.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)President that will EVER satisfy you if that is your position....but if you do NOTHING else on DU but condemn him for ANYTHING he does because he hasn't addressed your pet issue to your satisfaction...then YES you are a hater.
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)concern trolls.
treestar
(82,383 posts)So quick to claim to be the victim!
Yet you are the ones who described us as looking for "the one."
Yes, you are haters. You are the ones calling us Obamabot.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)
cui bono
(19,926 posts)no one "hates" Obama. We can hate his policy without hating him.
Rex
(65,616 posts)It is a broken down one trick pony by now. Also the lie that nobody believes; that there are more 'Obama haters' on this site than 'Obama supporters'. Almost comical the timing. If they keep us divided up long enough, they will get to complain about losses in Congress...a funny trait I've noticed too.
treestar
(82,383 posts)You cannot whine about being called hater when you call people cheerleaders or Obamabots, etc.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Far less.
Go ahead and check. I'll await your results.
treestar
(82,383 posts)I'm talking in general.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)You don't get to do what you tell others they don't get to do.
Well of course you do, but then you're just a hypocrite.
840high
(17,196 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and are on DU just to bash about the head anyone who dares proclaim support for them....on a Democratic Forum no less? (because they think they can beat democrats into submission supposedly)
I call them haters....
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Any true Democrat could easily answer that...doesn't even have to hurt your precious "critical thinking" doing it!
and what do YOU call those that are on DU who do NOT support Democrats...but are here to bash them all?
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)you need to grow up before I even attempt to have a rational, adult discussion with you.
You behave just like my right wing relatives on Facebook when I dare to counter their stupidity. Screeching, screaming, temper tantrum, foot stomping invectives thrown all around the room.
This isn't Facebook, honey, this is where ADULTS come to have conversations about politics.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I am not your honey...save that for your significant other...
I am repeating because YOU refuse to answer WHO do you support? JUST voting for democrats because you cannot get your preferred party into the Whitehouse is not very supportive is it? AND if you come to DU JUST to bash democrats who do support them....what would YOU call that...certainly not "supportive".
Any real Democrat could easily tell you which Democrats they support....
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)but I don't believe you deserve a response to your DEMANDS.
You see, if you attempted to have an adult conversation, without accusations thrown around like a 10 year old throwing a temper tantrum, folks just might attempt to speak with you.
In the meantime, I'm just following your example.......by throwing out accusations, innuendo and bad behavior. Once you STOP throwing a temper tantrum, I might attempt to have an adult conversation with you, but you'll have to lose your bad habits and cheerleading uniform first.
Oh, and honey is what I called my daughter when she was throwing a temper tantrum.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I don't throw temper tantrums...I don't have to...I am on a Democratic forum and I support democrats...why would I throw temper tantrums about most people here agreeing with my support of them...
whats your excuse?
Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #170)
Post removed
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and its not a temper tantrum to ask you not to use sexist terms on DU.
As I said...why would I throw temper tantrums when most Democrats (even on DU) agree with my support of Democrats.
But I understand your projection....If I were you I would throw tantrums too!
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Are you going to say which Democrats you support yet? (that assumes that you actually do)
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)I have no intention of responding to your demands.
I don't treat wayward children, throwing temper tantrums, with respect.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and I have no choice than to consider you exactly as I described! Thanks!!!
I don't throw temper tantrums....if you ask me what Democrats I support I could....but I understand your temper tantrum at being asked to actually detail your "support" for Democrats... (or in this case lack thereof)
lumpy
(13,704 posts)of us.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Or do you find there something inherently wrong on positively supporting anything?
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)On Tue Mar 25, 2014, 02:57 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
Obamabots: Not Our Enemy: Cut Them Some Slack
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024724920
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Mar 25, 2014, 03:11 PM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Leave it. If you are incensed enough to alert, you had better give a better reason than copy and paste.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If the BOGers can't stand criticism, then stay out of GD.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: WTF? Ridiculous alert, only explained by reiterating "this post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate." How about actually explaining what motivated the alert instead of restating "Step1"?
Frivolous alerts should result in some sort of "time out" for the alerter.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)means the alerter is shut out of the thread. VERY cool.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Glitterati
(3,182 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)0-6!
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Many of the people on DU who are disparaged as 'Obamabots' have the most realistic expectations. They're the ones who realize Obama isn't a dictator who can get legislation through Congress by himself. They're the ones who have reasonable expectations and realize he can't fix it all by himself.
It's his critics, especially those on the left, who think he's a dictator that can wave a magic wand and make it all better.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #34)
Post removed
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)about as 'fucking dumb' as the post I saw claiming Obama could have got single payer if he wanted to, but he didn't try.
Even Bernie Sanders said single payer had only 8-10 votes max in the Senate. That left it about 50 votes short when you consider the filibuster.
mcar
(46,056 posts)He doesn't do enough!!! He does too much!!!
Bully pulpit. Talk is cheap.
Use executive orders more. Executive overreach!
I support President Obama. I never expected to agree with him 100% (I bet he doesn't agree with me 100% either) but considering the unprecedented obstruction and hatred he's dealt with, I think he's done a damn good job.
I am a Democrat. Thank you.
Response to RobertEarl (Original post)
Skittles This message was self-deleted by its author.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)You are placing all blame on one "side" and pretending that "Obamabots" (your term) are the only ones getting picked on.
In fact, "Obamabots" (your term) are the ones who are using the over the top name calling way more than others are. The critics of Obama make posts criticizing policy - not the man, but his policy - and get a bunch of insults hurled at them such as "ODS", "Paulbot", "haters", "Putin lovers", "Libertarians", etc...
Also, their name calling is so over the top and has no relation to what the poster had said at all. Their name calling responses usually have no discussion of policy in them and when they are asked their position they usually resort to more ridicule and name calling.
Is there that on the other side? Some name calling yes, some ridicule yes, but the critics are trying to discuss policy while the apologists are trying to suppress that discussion because they don't want to hear not one word of criticism. Suppressing discussion and criticism is a very dangerous thing to do and is the antithesis to what a democracy is supposed to be about.
If you want things to change this is absolutely NOT the way to go about it. Change begins at home.
I have been toying with the idea of writing an OP about DU getting along better and I can tell you it was going to be two-sided and towards all DUers. It was not going to be a divisive OP such as yours. Nothing will change until BOTH sides change and until people start just discussing policy without letting their emotions drive their respoonses and without making any asides towards other DUers.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts) cui bono
(19,926 posts)Clearly I must be completely wrong.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)but I WILL repeat this...
"...but if you do NOTHING else on DU but condemn him for ANYTHING he does because he hasn't addressed your pet issue to your satisfaction...then YES you are a hater.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)In this thread, for instance, you go on a screaming tizzy, yowl about "ODS," accuse someone of being an anarchist, and finally end up comparing him to Lyndon laRouche.
over here, you go after the poster Autumn, in a way that honestly reminds me of a rehearsed episode of Jerry Springer. You accuse her of hating Obama (out of nowhere,) of calling him "sordid names" (also out of nowhere,) and finally end up claiming she was "personally insulting" you... if you guessed "out of nowhere," congratulations, you have average human-level pattern recognition abilities.
In this thread here you make a spirited attempt at running rhetorical circles around rhett o rick - but let us note that spirited doesn't mean successful. You end up throwing Rand Paul and Daryl Issa at Rhett, all while ranting about "purists" and claiming that Cali is "threatening you." Were you channeling Beavis or something?
Cui Bono has you nailed like a carpenter's bench, Vanilla. To say nothing of the other clowns packed in the car.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)As usual, we are exhorted to deny what is patently obvious.
neverforget
(9,513 posts) 
QC
(26,371 posts)neverforget
(9,513 posts) VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I said they need to find a candidate even further to the left of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders (because they support President Obama)
I suggested Ralph Nader or Lyndon LaRouche...
Don't twist what I said to fit YOUR bullshit narrative.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Sorry...You know you can actually link to posts....no one is going to read through all that to see if you are right or wrong....
but then....you knew that!
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)But you offer so much gibberish of this variety that doing so would take far more time than i feel like spending on you.
So you get the OP and can find your own damn subthreads
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)The BOGers have lost their collective mind.
Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #50)
Marr This message was self-deleted by its author.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)A conversation cannot be had when one side screams nothing but ODS ODS!
Rex
(65,616 posts)I find it cosmically ironic that one side complains about the other bragging about having liberal street cred, when they themselves are ordained (by themselves) to decide who is a hater or lover on DU!
It is like...gee...didn't really think that one out did ya?
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)Yet, they continue to spew it over and over.
If these people were my kids, I'd quickly do some instruction on how to apply critical thinking to their behavior.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)invectives and derision against the Pres. of the US.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Since DU doesn't offer a trash by smiley option - fuck it, they're all on ignore.
However, I have to find that sweet spot of when the 2016 primary starts to heat up so I can remove them all. That group is going to turn on each other something vicious and I don't want to miss that.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)is that you cannot serve on juries for the the most vicious and dishonest of their attacks.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Not worth it.
Marr
(20,317 posts)
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Marr
(20,317 posts) ™
The Obnoxious, Laughing Asshole © 2014, The BOG. All Rights Reserved.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts) 
^ I am legally allowed to use the above. It's in my contract.
Indeed.
treestar
(82,383 posts)It's just the policy. Except, he never does seem to have a good policy, does he?
And some of them have called him weak, etc. He does get attacked that way on here all the time.
They are clever and insidious about it, usually holding up some other Democrat as stronger and better, etc.
It's obviously him when there is NO policy whatsoever they can agree with.
And they want to have primary wars during this year of off year election where no one has declared for 2016. Because they know that's divisive. Real Democrats would not do that.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)You complain about divisiveness. You entire post is divisive.
Real Democrats wouldn't have a BOG that bans people for even the slightest perceived disagreement with Obama's policy.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Bookmarking so I won't forget to pay up.
QC
(26,371 posts)
Skinner
(63,645 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)is ludicrous. 99% of the people I've met on DU support the POTUS! Does GD really look that way? Maybe I don't see it, but I sure don't believe it.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)shock and disbelief some days...
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)that their is a huge contingency on DU that hates the POTUS. There were some, but I think most of them are called Name Removed.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)But then again, if you define "hate Obama" however you want then those numbers go through the roof.
Rex
(65,616 posts)I think it is a matter of objective reasoning over subjective reasoning. Some people have a hard time parsing the two. I think we find binary thinkers to be more subjective, whereas multitaskers seem to be more objective. I also believe we have a small contingency of ego-centrists. Their opinion is the gold standard. Anything else is discarded.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Sometimes he starts a thread that everyone should in theory get behind - but it immediately goes down the tubes in a hateathon. And you can set your watch to which posters will be the first ones in to add nothing.
His other trolling threads well hilarious to me produce foaming at the mouth and efforts to get him banned. A subthread in his latest piece is rather amusing as a group is piecing together that Manny did it, with the candlestick, in Free Republic.
I give him props though - he gets rage instead of
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)(hating Obama/loving Obama) in which approval of a politician carries greater importance than judgments about policies that affect the lives of millions. We should always bring the discussion back to actual policies and principles, because that is invariably what is being diverted from in these conversations.
One particularly slick tactic/goal of the corporate-bankrolled Third Way messaging has been to try to detach party loyalty from the policies, principles, and goals that the party pursues, and attach it instead to the team colors, logo, and politicians.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)if you come here to do nothing else but bash the President and all democrats not named Elizabeth Warren....then yes that is hate.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)
G_j
(40,569 posts)and the Koch bros, who are systematically destroying this country.
>>>> 2014
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)They come at you with fucking pitchforks and in numbers. They're like a swarm of flies to a pile of dog shit.
So they get the shit flung at them. They earned it.
Now, hows about a new thread entitled, Hey Obama####, the anti-Third Way Crowd is not the Enemy: Stop Being So Hypervigilant
Then we all can have a big group 
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)Lots of "yeah, what he said" even on this very thread.
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)You mean like you just did?
Good grief, the hypocrisy is knee deep up in here.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)but, then again, the Obamabots are not big critical thinkers.
BTW, just for your edification, I added another dimension to the post that I was replying to.
Here ya go, just so you can try to understand:
swarm noun
1. a body of honeybees that emigrate from a hive and fly off together, accompanied by a queen, to start a new colony.
2. a body of bees settled together, as in a hive.
3. a great number of things or persons, especially in motion.
4. Biology . a group or aggregation of free-floating or free-swimming cells or organisms.
5. Geology . a cluster of earthquakes or other geologic phenomena or features.
gang noun
1. a group or band: A gang of boys gathered around the winning pitcher.
2. a group of youngsters or adolescents who associate closely, often exclusively, for social reasons, especially such a group engaging in delinquent behavior.
3. a group of people with compatible tastes or mutual interests who gather together for social reasons: I'm throwing a party for the gang I bowl with.
4. a group of persons working together; squad; shift: a gang of laborers.
5. a group of persons associated for some criminal or other antisocial purpose: a gang of thieves.
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)Simply....
You said: "Lots of "yeah, what he said" even on this very thread."
Which amounts to "yeah, what you said"
You really went to a lot of trouble to demonstrate how you missed the point completely, professor.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)anything you say.
Waste of time and energy.
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)iro·ny noun \ˈī-rə-nē also ˈī
-ə r-nē\
: a situation that is strange or funny because things happen in a way that seems to be the opposite of what you expected
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4725417
means the alerter is shut out of the thread. VERY cool.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4726405
lumpy
(13,704 posts)fellow Democrats so you'll get replies to your posts. Well... this is the last one you'll get from me until you quit trying to divide Democrats using insulting references.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)fault, no I am not blinded to this theory. What I can say is when I think of what the alternative presented by GOP, Obama can be the most wonderful event. It is the whiners, oh, Obama did not say exactly what I wanted on some certain day so I will bash him every chance I get, this is what we have GOP RWNJ's to do.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)They get to make their own choices... and they don't owe you a thing... so ya might want to get them on your/our side... without threats.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)After a response like yours, I wish I bought stock in the strawman industry.
The folks who like to scream about "ObamaBots" also tend to be those more likely to claim that Dems aren't any different than Republicans.
They tend to be those who will claim they want a 3rd party or that they plan to vote 3rd party.
They tend to claim that if Hillary wins the nomination in 2016, they won't vote for her.
They don't owe me, and I certainly don't owe them.
But, folks like me will be voting to put as many Dems in office as possible.
I can't say the same about the perpetually disgruntled. I simply encourage them to help put as many Dems in office as they can. What they actually do is totally up to them.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)That's why the truth hurts, eh ???
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)project in what ever manner makes you feel better.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)TO vote for.
But, you know, facts get in the way some times.
CUMMING -- Qualifying for the May 20 primary ended Friday with no Democrats qualifying in Forsyth County. That means all the local races will be decided well ahead of the General Election in November.
http://www.forsythnews.com/section/1/article/22820/
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)You run. Find one.
Or sit home and pout.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Additionally, I have never lived anywhere that has 'ticket voting' where one can vote for the entire or 'straight' ticket. That terminology is limited to a few regions. As such it is not useful terminology in the areas that do not use such a ballot option.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)lumpy
(13,704 posts)
DireStrike
(6,452 posts)Hero worship is a flawed method of thinking that leads to all sorts of problems.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)and LIFE don't mix. Inevitably, your hero falls off that pedestal you put them on and your whole world shatters.
We are, after all, only humans - not worthy of hero worship. Right?
DireStrike
(6,452 posts)It's pretty close to religion, IMO.
I wonder if it can be fixed, or it just morphs to something else when you get rid of one form.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)The freepers are probably a good group to use as an example.
While he was in office, Bush was the best thing since sliced bread - as you say, their religion. And, then his term was up.
Today, he's the Devil Incarnate over there - it's Bush (spit!) every time the named is mentioned.
ROFL, I think we can see where hero worship goes. I wonder what the Supremes who gave him that office think of him now.....
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)party needs to remain the party of integrity and justice. If we simply become apologists for any given administration we might as well be republican. If we act like the president's spin-doctors we only justify those anti-government, apathy inducing twerps who would point out at every occasion that all politicians are the same and all politicians are corrupt. Policing our party is a good thing for the long-term life of the party.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Too many times a nuanced argument gets shouted down by those stepping up to lob the "personality cult" meme. The deeper discussion of political process and possibilities gets lost in flames and no progress is possible because of it. The claim that the President's supporters are not capable of self-reflection and are "dangerous" is offensive.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)the cheer-leading stop and the thoughtful analysis start?
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)administration is by extension not a supporter to be equally offensive. In fact, my best friends are the ones who tell me when I have some parsley in my teeth.
I guess they do it in private, but that's why most of my criticism takes place here and not in the wild like on Facebook surrounded by republicans.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)One can not simply claim that the NSA should be reigned in. Not nearly enough.
One must claim that the US government is basically just like the Stasi, or like Hitler's SS, and we all now live in a police state. Anything less is insufficient.
You also need to use lots of curse words. Call the President a corporatist, or a fascist ... call the first lady clueless.
Much of what gets called "criticism" here is little more than Hair-on-Fire nonsense.
I hope the folks who do voice their "criticism" in that way (pegging their outrage meter at 11 on a daily basis) stay here on DU and rant, and never go out to help with GOTV efforts. They'd suck at it.
flamingdem
(40,891 posts) woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Chained cpi, tpp, race to the bottom, kxl, domestic spying, and the other turd way policies. People voted against all that stuff in 2008, and are not going to vote for it now just because a dem president is selling it
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)lunatics and bullies to very intelligent people who have a lot of good points to make about policy issues. The same goes for people that are generally disappointed by Obama's presidency. Personally, I find more smear tactics and obnoxious behavior and poor reasoning skills among the defenders rather than the critics. But my perception may be biased by my own dissatisfaction with many of Obama's positions and actions.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)the outsiders, and the great privileged and knowledgeable and wiser ones (some who shit on Obama's head from day 1 of their existence here) should shower their benevolence upon us weirdos.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)which requires at the least the assumption that the other person is truthful and is motivated to improve the common good.
Calling someone an "Obamabot" conveys utter and complete disrespect. It says that this person is weak and deluded, that his or her opinions are false and of no value, that they lack any intellectual strength or integrity, and that they're not capable of independent reasoning to arrive at conclusions which are their own.
It has no place in a respectful discussion of ideas.
Either challenge someone's argument or make an argument of your own.
Calling names only makes the name-caller look stupid, IMHO.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)thing to get response to their posts.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)lumpy
(13,704 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)and some of the best exchanges I have seen a long time.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)
politicman
(710 posts)The reason we use the word Obamabot is because as long as Obama is the one doing it, then many liberals and progressives will get behind it even if they were condemning it when it was done by Bush.
Serriously, if someone was condemning the use of drones by Bush but are now supporting it because it is Obama doing it, then they are an Obamabot.
If someone was condemning the fact that Bush let the CIA run rampant but are now supporting it because it is Obama doing it then they are an Obamabot.
If some calls Repukes the party that is beholden to the 1%, but denies that Obama is also beholden to them as he has let them get away with crashing the economy, then they are an Obamabot.
If someone supported whistle blowers when Bush was in office, but now call Snowden a traitor because he blew the whistle while Obama is in office, then they are an Obamabot.
In the end, progressives and liberals are the base that got Obama elected, they elected him because he promised to change the country, yet even though Obama has done some good things, he has also carried on many things that Bush put in place.
Politicians like Obama (and those in Congress) will only do the things that their base elects them to do when their base is no longer an automatic vote for them, politicians need to learn to earn their votes and not just rely on votes because the other side is worse.
Obamabots make the above concept all but meaningless when they back Obama no matter what.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Obamabots: Not Our Enemy: Cut Them Some Slack...None of you would disagree that Obama has made a difference. We just disagree on the degree of difference Obama has brought to a struggling global environment."
...what the FDRbots had to put up with? You can tell the effectiveness of a President by the caliber and determination of his critics.
http://www.rooseveltinstitute.org/policy-and-ideasroosevelt-historyfdr/new-deal
<...>
http://books.google.com/books?id=vC5HJloBWugC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA159#v=onepage&q&f=false
Bedrock Consumer Protections Once Were Flogged as ‘Exceedingly Dangerous,’ ‘Monstrous Systems’ That Would ‘Cripple’ the Economy
WASHINGTON, D.C. – As the nation approaches the first anniversary of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law, opponents are claiming that the new measure is extraordinarily damaging, especially to Main Street. But industry’s alarmist rhetoric bears striking resemblance to the last time it faced sweeping new safeguards: during the New Deal reforms. The parallels between the language used both then and now are detailed in a report released today by Public Citizen and the Cry Wolf Project.
In the decades since the Great Depression, Americans acknowledged the necessity of having safeguards in place to prevent another crash of the financial markets, including the creation of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and laws requiring public companies to accurately disclose their financial affairs. Although these are now seen as bedrock protections when they were first introduced, Wall Street cried foul, the new report, “Industry Repeats Itself: The Financial Reform Fight,” found.
“The business community’s wildly inaccurate forecasts about the New Deal reforms devalue the credibility of the ominous predictions they are making today,” said Taylor Lincoln, research director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division and author of the report. “If history comes close to repeating itself, industry is going to look very silly for its hand-wringing over Dodd-Frank when people look back.”
<...>
In fact, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is designed to prevent another Wall Street crash, which really made it tough on everyone by causing massive job loss and severely hurting corner butchers and bakers, as well as retirees, families with mortgages and others. The Dodd-Frank law increases transparency (particularly in derivatives markets); creates a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to ensure that consumers receive straightforward information about financial products and to police abusive practices; improves corporate governance; increases capital requirements for banks; deters particularly large financial institutions from providing incentives for employees to take undue risks; and gives the government the ability to take failed investment institutions into receivership, similar to the FDIC’s authority regarding commercial banks. Much of it has yet to be implemented.
- more -
http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2011/07/12-0
Elizabeth Warren:
http://www.warren.senate.gov/files/documents/AFR%20Roosevelt%20Institute%20Speech%202013-11-12.pdf
flamingdem
(40,891 posts) ProSense
(116,464 posts)Left-wing naivete about right-wing radicalism
BY MIKE KONCZAL
A Democratic president’s economic agenda is a failure, lost to business class acquiescence, the embrace of austerity, and an overall lack of vision.
This was the conclusion of The New Republic, summarizing Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal in May 1940. Though there were “extraordinary accomplishments” to acknowledge, the magazine understood that the New Deal was a “failure in the central problem.” That central problem was the economic question, and there, the Roosevelt administration had “fail[ed] to discover or apply a genuine remedy for the stagnation of our economy and for unemployment.” Beyond the failure of vision, it “heeded business advice, at least in part, by trying to cut recovery expenditures” and engage in other forms of austerity...In other words, being disappointed in Democratic presidents is what opinion editors refer to as “evergreen” content. It’s always ready to go, and always applicable with a built-in audience. With this in mind, political scientist Adolph Reed has a cover story in the latest Harper’s, Nothing Left (ungated), making the case against President Obama and for the idea that liberalism is currently exhausted.
Much of the text is focused on the well-rehearsed argument that President Obama is much more conservative than people understand...But Reed is making an argument that goes beyond the current Democratic Party, and there are three points worth exploring further.
Reed: “With the two parties converging in policy…”
This is the kind of stuff that drives liberals up the wall, and for good reason. The two parties at this point are pushing two very different, ideological visions of the role of the state and the market. Ignore, for a second, cuts and expansions. Conservatives want to privatize Social Security, while liberals want it to remain a public program. Conservatives want to turn Medicare into a coupon to buy health insurance on exchanges, while liberals want to use Medicare’s footprint to control health-care costs. Liberals see a greater role for the federal government, for instance in absorbing the costs of a major expansion of Medicaid. Conservatives want to turn everything over to the states where it will be easier to starve and replace with private control. These aren’t minor differences...States taken over by conservatives have waged an all-out war on workers, reproductive health, and public goods. Meanwhile liberal states and cities have moved to expand paid sick-leave, minimum wages, and reproductive health. Even the so-called culture wars have a hard economic edge. Reed dismisses feminism as a set of fake cultural politics. Yet health-care reform has eliminated “woman” as a pre-existing condition, and minimum wage hikes, which disproportionately benefit women of color, and equal pay are in the forefront.
<...>
Reed: “....the areas of fundamental disagreements that separate (the two parties) become too arcane and too remote from most people’s experience to inspire any commitment, much less popular action.”
No. Just a casual glance out the window shows that the differences in policy have created massive popular actions. From the Tea Party organizing against expanding access to health-care and efforts to fight the recession, to undocumented workers organizing to pass immigration reform, the actual differences in play get people on the street.
There’s a genuine issue here for liberals. One positive thing that the New Republic saw in the New Deal back in 1940 was the idea that the changes in social insurance and labor laws were self-enforcing, and that “it is improbable that these more permanent changes will be or even can be destroyed by any new administration.” (They were half-right; labor was decimated seven years later under Taft-Hartley.)
- more -
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116962/adolph-reeds-harpers-essay-about-obama-naive-about-tea-party
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Obamabot has a negative vibe. Everyone knows that. With the many inaccurate claims you have made over the past few months I would think you would avoid name calling.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)For all the good Obama has done he has undone much of it with fomenting the most un-transparent and anti whistle blowing government that we've ever had. Drones now kill innocent people in the name of ...what? A never ending war on supposed terrorism, an ever expanding security state, threats to SS and more possible job losses. Yea we have some health care, peace? and security? ....at what cost? I don't believe politicians can or will represent the people anymore. The few that do will always be marginalized ...because they make the others look as bad as they are. Greed and power has corrupted democracy and capitalism beyond redemption IMO. ....but you can still count on my zombie Dem vote ...for all that's worth ...as most people will fight death.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)the other way around. So, it's the Obamabots who need to give the non-Obama bots a break. Just because some duers are not part of the hard core fan club, where Obama has the golden touch, and never makes mistakes and is an amazing, progressive wonder of a president, they get attacked by certain hard core fan club members who are pretty nasty about it, and use McCarthy-like tactics in using name calling and guilt by association. Its like they consider those duers not "of the body" to be heretics, and have a great deal of zeal to set the "heretics" straight. It's pretty weird, to be honest, the kind of zeal and blind support that is shown by some of them.
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)Swarm behavior:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4620281
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4693125
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4647193
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4562807
Massive swarm:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023775248
Sheer repetition of this misrepresentation does not make it so. I could certainly provide more examples of the swarming this clique engages in, as it has been a daily occurrence for some time now.
Perhaps the "swarming" you're accusing others of in your post is simply an example of long, overdue pushback. I mean one can only sit back and allow this kind of viciousness to be hurled at them for so long....
peace13
(11,076 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)peace13
(11,076 posts)An OP starts a call out thread and 268 posts later it's the OP who is the victim. I just love it.
DU has become the upside down world. If one supports the president they are subject to ongoing attacks while the attacker is defended by the system.
peace13
(11,076 posts)you got your desired response.
I would be interested in what scab picking, circle thinking folks out here would be called in your world?
Your OP is a fine reminder of what is wrong with DU.
If one can't add to a discussion or propose a solution to a problem they open a thread bashing people who are, up until the point of your posting this...minding their own business.
A+ for your efforts!
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Who's the fairest of them all?
Not peace13, that's for sure.
You just outed yourself as being against discussion, not being able to read and understand, and really, just a reactionary.
It really is disturbing to see words like yours with the word 'peace' attached.
I love Obamabots. I was one, once upon a time, back when i campaigned for him right into the faces of the rednecks around here. It made perfect sense to do so.
And it is quite clear in my OP that I want others to cut them some slack and quit fighting them. Y'know, make peace. Something you might try?
peace13
(11,076 posts)Lashing out at strangers, name calling and relentless disruption.
You are missing the point. Referring to people as OB's is inflammatory. Why not start a thread about how cuddly fat people are and then say that you were complimenting them? You have missed the point and are unable to understand.
I apologize for wasting your time and mine.