For anyone who thinks its okay to bash POTUS

[darkangel218]

Last edited Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:30 PM - Edit history (1)

Go spend a week on Yahoo comments. You will see the vile and disgusting shit RW is posting.

I am not saying we shouldnt criticize our administration. But it is a huge difference between criticism and vile hateful comments I've seen on here lately.

Lets try to be civil. We need each other and we need to be United this year.

And like I said in another post, united we stand, divided we fall. Think about it.

Think how and what you would have felt and went through today if McCain or Mittens were in power.

Do you really want to support the RW? Because that is what some of the posts here are doing. Even if indirectly so.


.

[jakeXT]

1. We would talk about war with Syria and Russia /nt

[darkangel218]

2. I think we would have already been at war.

[treestar]

3. None of it is constructive criticism

And some of them definitely oppose everything he does and can't stand to hear anything positive about him without posting for the hundred millionth time the Teddy Roosevelt quote (when no one said they could not criticize, and Teddy didn't say you always have to criticize and that support is wrong in itself) or playing the poor little victim for having anyone post anything in opposition to their latest "find" for true outrage.

You get these posts like "I'm sure the cheerleaders will be along to argue against this" when "this" should be the reason we all finally admit hey you are right! Obama sucks!

Really I think we should all just do that and see what they do. Because they really don't have any constructive or positive points on what should be done. Only criticism.

[antiquie]

5. I am a scumbag because I criticize policy; YOU claim that is President bashing.

Last edited Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:43 PM - Edit history (1)

YOU have made DU suck so badly for me that YOU win and I will leave. Yes you are correct, every single policy of one of the greats, President Barack H. Obama, is perfect and anyone who disagrees with YOU is a stupid Roosevelt-quoting asshole.

Yes, go ahead and have me banned. I don't care now that YOU make the rules.

edit: treestar was offended

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. I'm reminded of the French monarch who, when told the people were not criticizing him but rather

the state he replied, "I am the state!"

What's sad about this policy = Obama / Obama = policy defense is that I think even the President would reject it because does not see himself as The State.

[treestar]

21. Most of it is not constructive criticism of any policy

It's mostly "disappointment" that he didn't somehow get single payer out of that Congress. If only he "fought" harder. That's not constructive criticism. Your comments about Louis are not relevant, as no one ever said that, not even me. Another straw person.

You are so right - Obama is the worse President we've ever had. Now what do we do?

[antiquie]

27. Just when and where did I even say he was a bad president?

This is how YOU are driving people away. If *I* (unlike Repubs, I don't make US and THEM divisions) criticize a POLICY, that is constructive to our democracy -- your position that I must not only accept, but like all of the President's policies or you will label me and put words in my mouth is not democratic. I like our President. I support our President. I do not support a number of his administration's policies that I believe to be poverty-inducing or anti-environmental.

[treestar]

36. I am not driving anyone away

There are more critics than you can count and none of them are driven away.

In fact it is supporters who are driven away.

What POLICY is getting criticized in any constructive way?

I am not talking about you but about the posters who have nothing good to say and what they have to say is not anything they have any constructive criticism about and who cannot brook any pushback.

For example appointees - they have to be approved, so with the present Congress they cannot be ideal. At least they have to carry out a job under the Democratic President. The opposition that is dealt up to the President on the simplest of things means the offices would just be empty. Even a "neocon" in such an office has to enforce the laws the office was meant to enforce.

[antiquie]

40. Until your last couple of posts you were addressing me.

You lumped every one of us together and that is why I objected so strongly to your position.

I don't have the energy to argue with you, I use my energy encouraging generational Republicans to first learn the facts, and then make up their own minds.

[treestar]

49. It's so easy to offend!

We get lumped together all the time! We get broad brushed. You did it yourself with the Great One comment.

[Katashi_itto]

58. Lol! That is truly funny

It's your opinion you posit thats the only truly acceptable one.

[treestar]

61. That's just false.

Or, anyone feels that way about their opinion, so what?

Yes, we do get broad brushed here, so complaints about that are silly.

[newthinking]

77. they *want* to drive people away. It is a minority who want the forums

to be a PR board.

This game has been played for a long time.

[totodeinhere]

72. If I sincerely believe that he could have fought harder and didn't then saying

so can be constructive. How hard he should be fighting against the GOP is a legitimate point of discussion. If you believe that he has fought as hard as possible then that's fine and you can say so. But just because I disagree with you on that doesn't necessarily make me non-constructive.

[Marr]

140. I've never seen you acknowledge any criticism of Obama as legitmate.

Can you cite an example? Your complaint that 'most of the criticism is not of policy' and insistence that it's nothing but unfair character assassination would seem more reasonable if you had a history of being critical when it's called for.

[treestar]

150. You're assuming there has to be criticism that is legitimate

I thought the two ferns thing was dumb. It didn't come off as satire and looked like a true argument, and Obama looked petulant in it.

But I'm not going to dwell on it and do an OP. I suppose you think I should make the most of it? Do an OP and not only criticize that spot but discuss how Obama was stupid to do it? I don't dwell on the negative, so it's not something I will bother with.

It is easier to cut down than build up. Easier, but it gets one nowhere.

And I don't see you questioning those who see nothing as right. I think you may be one. I doubt you can name anything positive.

The one about defending the Iraq War and the one about the formularies were both stupid and they were not called for. I don't have to agree with every single criticism.

I also have the humility to know when I don't fully understand an issue and don't assume criticism is fair just because it is criticism. Seeking to understand the issue leading to someone calling me a corporatist or Obot seems to me that the "critic" just wants to tear down the Democratic Party, not really criticize a policy.

[Marr]

154. Of course you don't have to agree with every criticism.

What I'm saying is that if you never acknowledge any criticism as legitimate, then your denunciations of such ring hollow. They seem more like an automated response or simple marketing than a considered opinion.

For the record, I think there've been plenty of criticisms that have been unfair or unrealistic. To cite an example, I think the president's remarks in Brussels have been unfairly framed as support for the Iraq invasion, when it was really more of a diplomatic statement, not aimed at domestic audiences at all.

[treestar]

155. I haven't seen a lot of good ones for the DU dust ups

They are usually based on something like that Iraq Declaration or Pitt's absurd meltdown.

The ones on the TPP and bankster prosecutions might have some legitimacy but I'm not sure of that. Not being sure of that should not result in declarations of Obamabot-ism. And some of it seems to be a really big demand, the TPP may be something that just has to be unless the world is going to be made over which isn't happening.

The ones about foreign policy could be legitimate but I'm not sure all the time. But I don't see why we have to go along with something just because it is critical. Some people just favor being critical of others. Where I know those people in real life, I don't find they really add all that much value.

I'm also not one of those corporations/banksters/they are all evil people. There's not much value to it. Just makes people seem like cranks. And hopeless, since it's fairly well entrenched and won't change quickly.

[treestar]

20. Really?

Why is your opinion so much more valuable, especially when we supposedly support Democrats? And your language about The Great God, etc. is unacceptable to me.

You are right, Barack Obama is the worst President ever! Now what do you propose we do?

[antiquie]

30. Your language is completely unacceptable to me.

YOU are the one putting out your opinion as the only acceptable one. I do not accept you telling me what I think nor do I accept the horrid words you put in my mouth that I have never thought, written nor spoken. You are making DU like the rest of the web.

[treestar]

38. You can't claim to be better with that language about The Great One

I don't see how you think you can talk here! If you really can't stand people disagreeing, this is not the place for you. I'm not the only one who will disagree with you.

[antiquie]

47. You're not driving any one off.

And you welcome discussion of diverse opinions.

[treestar]

60. Yes, I do

I am disagreeing here and not saying you have to leave.

You're the one who indicated you might because you can't take it when someone doesn't agree with you.

You seem to want me off, and I make DU suck, so how are you any better?

[Caretha]

130. You are right

Black & white thinking as Treestar & others exhibit makes this place suck. They have no concept of actually discussing the issues - or the ability to think outside the "box" and in many nuanced ways actually support the right wing talking point of "you are either with us or against".

Myopic is to kind a word for their inability to think and reason.

[In_The_Wind]

23. Don't you dare leave!

[G_j]

25. +10000

Last edited Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:23 PM - Edit history (1)

don't be bullied! stand up for yourself!

[lumpy]

52. What is being criticized is the manner in which is done. No probem in criticizing but calling Obama

names and using slanderous invectives is going beyond the pale.

[Bobbie Jo]

114. They know that....

They just want to stand on some dishonest, self-righteous bullshit to justify their freeperish behavior.

Nothing new here.

[Caretha]

136. Says who?

You?

Sometimes I just feel like cussin' the shit out of him. I don't hate him - I don't even come close to despising him. I know what despising is like - there wasn't a day I didn't get up and despair that Cheney and company were destroying US & OUR country....but I cannot and will not follow or support similar policies that Obama has adopted. AND LEADING US WAS WHAT WE ELECTED HIM TO DO. It is not my fault or other Democrats fault that he continues to compromise Democratic party platforms and values and steer the country to the right. In my book that is just NEO-CON light taking over the Democratic party, the new Democratic party for disgruntled and disillusioned Republicans that don't believe in flat earth policies.

Now, I do blame myself and others for not listening closer to what he campaigned on....it was just the times....we were desperate to not have the neo-cons continue to lead us to perdition. Unfortunately, Obama is still steering us in the same direction we so prayed would not happen. Maybe gentler, but still it is the same damn fucking direction. That is what is so disheartening and bewildering.

I don't want excuses - I want results - I don't want thrown away opportunities - I want someone with the moral fortitude and strength to do what is right and good for this country.

If I wanted "Bush Light" I wouldn't have voted for Obama at all! I cannot & will not continue to be an accomplice to the "sham" that is being sold us. I understand I will go down the drain as everyone else, but I will not be an accomplice to it.

I still treasure my sanity, my ability to know right from wrong, and being able to look my children & grandchildren in the eye and tell them that I would die before I'd vote to sell out their future.

If that's okay with and you feel you can justify it ...fine, I won't judge you, but you have no right to judge me and others that think and feel like me either.

[Auntie Bush]

57. I was under the impression that only ReThugs referred to the H in Obama'a name.

I think that your use of that letter is telling...you don't much care for Obama.

[treestar]

62. Didn't catch that.

They may not be aware that is a thing that will make it clear.

[totodeinhere]

75. Not necessarily. The official Barack Obama biography at the White House website refers to him as

"Barack H. Obama." Is that also telling?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/president-obama

[Auntie Bush]

102. Of course they use the H...it's his official name.

But the haters ALWAYS use it to remind people his name is Hussein...same a Saddam Hussein. I don't think a Dem would use it unless he didn't like Obama.

[BlueCaliDem]

143. Bingo.

On fucking point, Auntie Bush.

[rusty fender]

147. Oh please! That is so stupid!

"You can't use his middle initial because the freepers use it as an epitaph." Really? H is his middle initial. Even he uses it. In fact, not recognizing that his middle name is Hussein allows the right wing a victory, of sorts. The victory of demonizing "Hussein" to the point that even we, on the left, won't touch it. I remember in '08 when we were all saying, "I am (name) Hussein (name)."

[rufus dog]

119. I picked that up too.

Fucking offensive as it is enlightening.

[darkangel218]

6. I agree, Treestar.

I couldn't post here. I was banned for posting for 90 days. I had to hang out on yahoo and deal with their vitriol.

I might say, it was eye oppening.

I know they hate us. They always will. ( even though I don't get it how or why they think that way ). But lets not allow that RW hate on DU.

We are supposed to support our own. If we don't, we will lose the elections.

Don't underestimate the repukes. Like Jimmy Carter said last night on Bill Maher show, the republicans will try to get rid of the ACA. Don't you think for one second that they won't. They will, and they will succeed if we continue to undermine and belittle our own.

[treestar]

22. I know, you'd think there were no repukes dark angel

They really seem to think the country will vote for a Congress of Bernies if someone just were charismatic enough! They are the ones looking for a Great One who can be all powerful. Look at how bitter they are about it! And positive ideas? None to be had.

[Caretha]

139. Anyone who hangs

out on Yahoo is really bored or has a problem or way too much time on their hands. That's not where I would go for information or enlightenment.

Couldn't find anything else more intellectually rewarding?

[G_j]

32. They They They They..

It's always "they". Did you ever think to ponder the possibility that your own broad brushing and attacking others in the community may actually be divisive and counterproductive?
I didn't think so.

[treestar]

44. I doubt you are innocent of that

You've never complained about the cheerleaders, third way corporatists, etc?

Pretending your side is angelic is silly, even if you really never have said anything like that.

[G_j]

73. frankly,

I've never used the terms cheerleader, Obamabot etc. I don't call the president names. I get upset about issues I've been concerned with my whole life.

[cui bono]

54. You know what would help?

If you stopped taking all criticism of Obama's policy personally and realized it isn't about the man, it's about his policies. Then you would get less emotional and you wouldn't feel that everyone who criticizes Obama's policies hates him. That could even lead to you not calling everyone who criticizes him a "hater".

Alternatively, you are welcome to remain in your safe haven where anyone who doesn't fawn over Obama gets banned even if they barely even criticize his policy.

However, to complain about the very behavior that you engage in on an daily basis is hypocritical. Both sides participate in the pile ons. If you want it to change why don't you set an example?

[lumpy]

78. Whatever leaves the impression that Obama is personally disliked or hated by Democrats is

destructive to the Democratic party.

[cui bono]

88. Impressions are in the eye of the beholder.

For some here any criticism of policy is taken as personal dislike or hatred of Obama when it is clear that is not the case. Hell, I'd love to hang out with him some time. He's very personable and funny too.

What is truly destructive to the Democratic Party is allowing it to continue to move rightward and to morph into the old moderate Republican Party. If the Democratic leadership fought for the principles of the Dem Party and fought for the people and people felt they were going to really make things better for the working people, the Dem Party would have no problem at all. That's what people felt when we were getting rid of BushCo, but then it turned out things didn't change very much. THAT is what is destructive to the Democratic Party.

[LittleBlue]

112. +1

Like I've said before, they defend him irrationally and emotionally like a child does a parent. Every criticism of his policy is treated as if it's a personal attack against daddy.

The whole thing is disturbing.

[totodeinhere]

67. There is some of that at DU. But to say that "none" of it is constructive is quite a stretch.

Are you saying that you have never seen any constructive criticism of the president at this board? Come on now.

[lumpy]

87. I have seen very little constructive criticism of Obama on this site. Most response has been drawn

to the personal attacks against him, as well as his supporters.

[Gormy Cuss]

79. Expressing disappointment at the POTUS's actions or words is constructive criticism.

It's called feedback. Moreover, I imagine that the president can handle hearing that some of his base is disappointed.

However, there are some here who treat that level of criticism as equal to stating that one won't vote for Democratic candidates in 2014, or stating that one is never supporting a Democratic candidate again.

[BlueCaliDem]

4. Judging by some posts these days on DU

you'd be hard pressed not to think that they would've preferred McCain or Mittens to President Obama. It's become so toxic that any and all posts that are positive in regards to our current POTUS is immediately and viciously attacked (as well as the poster who dares to post such a post).

Now I realize that most of them who are on a perpetual attack of this president aren't really Democrats. They're more of the Liberaltarian-types: a hybrid between Liberals and Libertarians. And they absolutely loathe this POTUS with a passion.

But you are undoubtedly correct, that in this election year where we just might lose the Senate if we don't pump up the enthusiasm and GOTV and we would then hamstring this president completely while Republicans are rewarded for doing absolutely nothing for the American people for the past five years, it's vital that we set petty snarks and criticisms aside regarding this president and the Democratic Party, and now enter GOTV mode.

Unfortunately, too many Liberaltarians and Republitarians on this site who absolutely hate this president won't stop breaking the ToS rules and continue, in the most sneakiest ways, to attack both this president and the Democratic Party to dampen enthusiasm for the upcoming elections. To me, that's reason to get their pizza delivered, but I guess these days on DU it's okay.

[FSogol]

7. +1 n/t

[Nuclear Unicorn]

13. Well, if we had McCain or Romney as president at least we'd be united in our misery and outrage.

[Fla Dem]

68. You know, sometimes I think there are some who are happiest when they"re the party in opposition. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

152. and, that would be the very Least of OUR concerns.

right?

[treestar]

24. They hate him more than they hated Bush!

And yet they voted for him and worked so hard to get him elected.

Hmmmmmm.

[BlueCaliDem]

65. Exactly, treestar.

That's why they can't and will never convince me that they had. I'm sorry, but I do read the writing on the wall when it comes to posts that both claim to have voted, campaigned, and contributed to President Obama's election and reelection and yet are chock-full of unfair and politically naive attacks on him that can only make Teabaggers and other assorted CONservatives proud.

No one believes that this president - or any other president, for that matter - is perfect. No. One. But there's a difference between pontificating one's grievances against this Administration and completely tearing it down and defending that "tear-down" to the nth degree. We should leave that crap over to TeaBaggers and the other assorted misguided CONservatives (that includes Libertarians, btw), right where it belongs. Not on this Democratic Party supporting site.

[treestar]

148. Yes, it's not human nature to turn on something you worked hard for

at least not right away, too. the harder you worked for it, the more likely you are to defend it as strongly as any BOGGER. Especially right away - a lot of those posters are gone as it was DU2 and they eventually came to light for what they were. And in politics, they need support - the rest of the country needs to know we still support someone we elected, or they will end up thinking their ideas not so good. Someone really working in the trenches gets that.

[BlueCaliDem]

157. Most of those naysayers here are Libertarians or Liberaltarians

who have an unhealthy distrust and dislike of government and are no different and no better than their Teabagger brethren. The sad part is, unlike the willfully ignorant Teabaggers, Libertarians and Liberaltarians - who are generally more intelligent - don't even see that commonality between them.

As a Democrat, I believe in government. I believe government has a vital role to play in protection of and working in the best interest of those who don't have the resources to keep millionaires and billionaires from trampling all over us, our rights, and that of our children.

There is only ONE entity powerful enough to take them all on - the U.S. Government. Therefore, as a wage-earner, I believe in Government - something Teabaggers, Liberaltarians, and Libertarians are incapable of understanding, let alone, are willing to accept. They think they can do it all on their own; that they can go up against powerful corporations with their legion of high-paid corporate attorneys - and win. They don't understand that the only thing standing in-between us and perpetual slavery under neocolonialism that's spreading through this country at alarming rate, is the Government "of, by, and for the People", and that we need to have a government devoid of pro-Corporate Republicans who make no bones about to whom they've pledged their loyalty.

[JustAnotherGen]

55. +1

[Bobbie Jo]

59. Watching some of these folks

in their enthusiasm to post the latest hit piece, (only to gather round and high-five one another) day after day after day.....makes one wonder what the hell they're trying to accomplish here.

Every. Single. Day.

[BlueCaliDem]

82. Oh, we *know* why they're here.

We know what they're trying to accomplish. Although they believe themselves to be clever, they couldn't stick out more like a wayward Rightie around here if they had posted an avatar on their account of a person wearing a floppy hat with teabags dangling from it.

True Democrats can see right through them because we know how our gov't works and we understand that the president is not a dictator. We also understand that when it comes to domestic policy, he certainly doesn't have a magic wand. With Teabaggers infesting our House of Reps, it's pretty much impossible to get any domestic policy through that doesn't benefit the 2%.

So instead of attacking the president over this, we should fight harder to get more people to the polls, attack those do-nothing Teapublicans in our House, and work extra hard to give Nancy Pelosi the gavel back. Absent that, we should do everything we can to keep the Senate under Democratic control.

Instead, these posters continue to attack and blame Democrats and the president for the catastrophe that Republicans in the House and Senate are waging against this country.

I simply don't understand that disconnect with these posters unless, of course, it's their mission to push for more Republicans in our Federal gov't. In that case, their excoriating posts against this president and Democrats make sense.

[redqueen]

103. +1

[Scuba]

8. There's a big difference between bashing from the right and calling out from the left.

I will not remain quiet when the President appoints neo-cons or otherwise advances their agenda. If that is your purity test, then count me out.

[darkangel218]

9. There is no purity test involved.

I was exiled from posting for about 90 days. 90 long days.

I was out there and saw the hate. It was so vile and disgusting.

All I'm asking for is a bit of unity, so we have a chance this year.

Sorry if you felt offended.

[Scuba]

10. Not offended, but I cringe when I see folks trying to pull us left equated with right-wing bashers.

[darkangel218]

12. We dont have to be vile when we criticise.

It only reinforces their delussions.

[Scuba]

14. I hope I'm never "vile", but you must realize there's a huge amount of frustration with ....

... what feels very much like a betrayal of the values on which President Obama campaigned.

[darkangel218]

17. I know and i agree. We should speak up.

But not in a way where we dig our own graves.

[Auntie Bush]

92. Congratulations Scuba and darkanglel 218

You two are having a very productive and polite conversation/disagreement.
We need more of that around here.

[Cha]

113. Well said, darkangel.. "But not in a way where we dig our own graves."

[treestar]

26. I just don't feel betrayed by all that

I did not even have those sorts of expectations. Politics is tough. It's not idealistic. I don't care who gets appointed to those jobs though and doubt that any major number of them are truly "neocons." I just wouldn't feel "betrayed" by anyone else doing what they thought best, I guess. I don't understand all the "feelings" involved. I don't bother to have "feelings" (though I am accused of it) regarding political figures. Especially the President.

I just support having a Democratic President in the WH rather than a Repuke. I don't want the Democratic President criticized too much, because of other voters taking that to heart and maybe it influencing them to vote R next time for that office. I can see criticizing him every once in a while, but here there are some people who you have to admit have nothing but, and that's a little strange here. I know right wingers who think every single thing he does is wrong but then I expect that from them.

When my Senator voted for something fishy, I liked that less, because he's more directly supposed to be representing me. But when I had a Republican senator, I didn't hate him.

I didn't even hate Bush that much. I liked making fun of him, and that was about it.

[Scuba]

28. That's the saddest post I've ever read.

[treestar]

41. To me it's sad when someone says they feel betrayed

by a politician.

I can only imagine what betrayals you have suffered over and over again from your representative and Senators. There have to have been many.

You must have spent a good deal of time feeling betrayed by Bill Clinton.

At least with a Repuke in the WH, you can feel hatred and anger, and maybe that feels better?

[BrotherIvan]

43. You got that right

Once the surface is scratched there is a lot of that. "He's smarter than me" "I trust whatever he does" and in this case "I don't really care who is appointed". My brain goes kablooie with all the pretzel logic, but this actually explains quite a bit. Damn...

[treestar]

48. How am I going to keep track of each appointment and act of the Presidency?

I don't have time for that.

In fact, you are having to trust a lot of it, too, as you can't monitor every agency for every action it takes!

If you have to backseat drive the Presidency, that'll take up all your time. Do you have any time left for legislators or governors?

I'd rather have people in those offices than leave them empty because Congress won't approve anyone left of center. They are just offices that carry out the laws. The laws are already there, enacted by previous Congresses.

It's not worth the time. Better to spend it trying to get Democrats into the offices and supporting them once there. Republicans are not going away real soon.

[BrotherIvan]

51. So keeping neocons and Bush appointees in place

when we elect a Democratic President and a majority in both houses is A-OK with you? Is that what you voted for? You don't care about the policy, only that you "like" the politician? The have a beer test? WOW...23 percenters exist on both sides I guess.

[treestar]

63. Has that been the case for every single office?

You'd think so. No I voted for them all to be removed. I don't know why Gates was kept there, but I suppose because it is tough to change horses in midstream there. But it's not enough for me to get upset and betrayed about. I knew Obama wanted to be conciliatory at first rather than confrontation a la Bush. As for the banksters in the other positions, they had to be confirmed, and just because they worked for a bank once doesn't mean they are the height of all evil or even Republicans.

[mindwalker_i]

69. It a cop out to say you just can't keep track of stuff

Some things he has done that are very visible and talked about a lit here, you can't have missed. For example, he's pushing the TPP which is a terrible idea. It's terrible in that it will hurt the middle and lower classes while helping the rich. You said a few posts ago that you aren't disappointed in him, then kind of justified it by saying that you never have expectation of politicians. Or maybe you do for congress people because they represent you.

That's really a mealy-mouthed justification for, basically, supporting Obama unconditionally. And here's what a lot of people have a problem with: when we see things like the TPP or other policies being pushed by Obama that make the problem of income inequality worse, it's hard to see people who are democrats spend so much effort justifying it. After Bush and all the hatred we voiced towards him when he screwed us to help the rich, to see people defending Obama for doing the same shows us as people who don't care about the issues, just the people. It shows that we just hated Bush, not that we hated the policies since, if Obama does it, it's ok. That's why a lot of people cringe when it seems like someone blindly defends Obama no matter what he's doing.

So when people keep defending Obama on every issue, whether it's the TPP or appointing people who support policies that favor the wealthy, of when it has to do with actively avoiding dealing with the problems from the Iraq war, then get mad at people who are angry about Obama doing those things and want some sort of purity purging, it feels like you are sticking your fingers in your ears, clamping your eyes shut, and yelling "La la la la la." It feels like you worship the man with a "D" and don't want any nonbelievers around.

And it's intellectually dishonest.

[cui bono]

80. If you admittedly don't have the time to keep track of every appointment

then why do you deride others who do keep track and are dissatisfied with the appointments? You go so far as to call them "haters" on a regular basis. You should be glad they are paying attention and exercising their rights in a democracy. They are making democracy work as intended.

[grasswire]

101. I agree. Sad and almost pathetic.

The poster doesn't care who gets appointed by POTUS? Then it IS about The One.

[cui bono]

74. "I don't care who gets appointed"

Why are you on a political board then?

That is such an anti-democratic sentiment. The whole point of a democracy is the the govt do the people's bidding, that the people stay involved, that the people voice their opinions to sway their elected officials.

deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

If you simply don't care what a politician does you are abdicating your responsibility as a citizen of the US.

By your post it seems that you are willing to put all your trust and faith in a politician (ill-advised to be sure) to do whatever they feel is best. Then, when they do things people don't like, the people should remain quiet with their criticism because standing up for principles will make people vote for other people with worse ideas (Republicans).

That's just not how a democracy works. Honestly, I don't even understand why you are posting on a political board if you simply don't care who the president appoints. He appointed Wall Street into the White House right after he got elected. At a time when we all knew what sharks Wall Street execs had - and continue to be - been. A lot of people didn't like that move, but you, by your own admission didn't care.

Why is it wrong for others to voice their opinion and say it was a bad thing? You think that will make people vote Republican? I think it just makes the Democratic Party closer to Republican Party when the Dem leaders keep doing things that Republicans would do and no one calls them on it because they have faith that their leaders will do what is right.

You are giving away democracy by wanting critics to remain silent. And you are enabling the move of the Dem Party further to the right by not caring what the president does and complaining about those who do care and who criticize him when he does something questionable and beyond.

Check out my sig. That's exactly what democracy and the first amendment is all about. In order for a democracy to work, it must have a robust discussion of its government and its actions.

[Cha]

115. Yes, I appreciate that you don't take the vile insulting crap road. And, I'm sure you realize

there are many people who appreciate what President Obama is actually doing for our country and don't feel "betrayed". In fact we have his back.

No, I do not agree with everything but on the whole I thank him for the yeoman's work he's doing as our Democratic President at this point in history.

[Scuba]

116. Sadly, my reading is different. While he's done some good things the good is overwhelmed ...

... by the Geithners and Monsantos and letting the banksters rob us blind. I'd give him a D+/C- grade with foreign policy pulling him up.

[Cha]

117. I think you're way off but that's your opinion.. my is the opposite so we will just have to

disagree. I know I'm not changing your mind and you're not changing mine.

"Some good things"? Try this..

A Long List of President Obama's Accomplishments With Citations

You probably won't read it or even care.. I don't know.. but this list is for anyone who comes along and is interested.

Also I'm fully aware and appreciate that President Obama is on the front lines between us and koch industries and the extreme court 5. And, you know the damage republicons can do living in a state like Wisconsin.

[Scuba]

118. What grade would you give him on handling the banks? Monsanto? How heavily do you weigh ....

... those issues?

As for the Kochs, they're major funders of the Third Way, which enjoys the support of President Obama, and vice versa.

[Cha]

120. Bullshit on your measley attempt to smear President Obama with the kochs.

And, I'm not playing your little grading game. Like I said we disagree. You stick to your FUD talking points and I'll stick to supporting the President.

And, when I see you fighting republicons.. I'll thank you for it.

[Scuba]

121. How about the Keystone Pipeline. Will the President approve it? Who stands to gain from it?

[sheshe2]

142. Well said Cha!

Thank you for the link....

Not only is Obama NOT a “disappointment,” he’s pretty much the opposite.

Not only is he NOT a “disappointment,” he’s pretty much the opposite. And no, I don’t just say that because he took out Osama bin Laden, helped Libya determine their own destiny for the first time in a while, and because he seems able to handle international incidents without starting a new war. The guy does nearly everything we elect a president to do, and he doesn’t brag about it constantly.

Is he perfect? No, he’s human. Does he deserve some criticism? I suppose, but I must admit I haven’t seen any complaints that were of based on anything having to do with the real world. One I can’t forgive him for is pulling Janet Napolitano out of Arizona. But the thing is, on balance, he’s mostly stellar. Besides, criticism about certain specific problems is one thing; taking on an overall “Obama sucks” meme not only has the potential to put Willard Romney into power, it’s also a lie. Just because you wanted a president who would give you a glitter-farting unicorn and didn’t quite get that doesn’t mean he’s not doing well at the job we hired him for.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/02/15/a-long-list-of-president-obamas-accomplishments-with-citations/

[Cha]

144. Mahalo, she.. Yeah, it doesn't matter what Obama has done or

who he's helped while being the President.. there's always going to be those who don't want to even hear about it. They've got their FUD points with their fingers in their ears and they're good to go.

They were on this board in 2009 with their perpetual whine about ACA/Obama and the whine still spills.. too bad for them Obamacare is the law of the land and will only get stronger as the years pass.. thanks to people like you who will be actively making it so.


Rachael Ray Show ✔ @RachaelRayShow
Follow
Rachael Ray on set today reminding everyone to #getcovered. @JoeBiden @WhiteHouse @BarackObama
12:09 PM - 27 Mar 2014
105 Retweets 86 favorites
Reply
Retweet
Favorite

TOD





TOD

They can't kill it, she.. the more they whine the stronger it gets!

[lumpy]

91. You hit the nail in one sentence. Thanks

[BeyondGeography]

37. It's the CT-tool-of-the-MIC-America-is-the-bane-of-humanity fare that brings that out

And it is here disproportionately at times. To the extent that some people can't be reasoned with on any level, the comparisons are apt.

[lumpy]

66. I agree, I don't think posters should not be equated with right wing bashers, or similar responses.

I think the use of calling Obama supporters senseless cheerleaders,worshipers etc. is equally uncalled for. What is lost is reasonable criticism of Obama policies. Calling Obama names or telling him to F-off is contemptible, period.

[HereSince1628]

15. But, the president isn't running -this- year.

And he told us to keep his feet to the fire...to let him know when we think he and his staff get it wrong.

I don't think that requires name calling, but criticism and complaints that he is not doing what people want isn't bashing, it's doing as he asked.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

29. he also said that the most important thing right now

Is to get Dems elected in the midterms.

If we were able to get rid of the fucking puke-baggies, we would see much more of the action we want.

Imagine what could have been if we'd focused on the last midterms? Yes, I know we're a small percentage here, but....

[HereSince1628]

35. So, dem candidates should provide things that attract voters to them.

It's well past time to be sniveling and GET ON WITH IT.

[treestar]

42. to the nonpolitical it will encourage them to not bother voting

or even vote R.

And the President doesn't read DU, so he's not benefiting from the criticism. On DU people are trying to persuade others they are right. They usually have nothing they propose to do about whatever it is, either.

[HereSince1628]

56. There are a lot of nonpoliticals aroung here, aren't there?

The president may not read DU, but members of the administration probably are.

[grasswire]

104. in all honesty....

....since you have just dmitted that you have abdicated your responsibility to pay attention to politics, do you think you are qualified to decide what "the nonpolitical" will be swayed by?

[NCTraveler]

16. United we stand, divided we fall.

The problem there is that there is a clear and large group of often long time duers who feel the party has left them over time. They feel it is the party who has created the divide at the peril of the people. Therefore they are upset with the party and the divide is real. It is hard for some to find unity when it is felt that they have been abandoned. They want to fight to bring the party back to them, not the other way around.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

33. much better chance of that happening if we get more Dems

in all levels. Local, state, and federal.

[Doctor_J]

158. I agree. Time for the pro-war, pro-insurance, pro-drilling, pro-TPP, pro-KXL, pro-chained CPI,

pro "All of the above", anti-public school DINOs to agree with those who made the party great for my first 45 years.

[WhiteTara]

18. Thanks, Dark Angel

We must hang together or surely we will all hang alone.
Thomas Paine

[WhiteTara]

84. Attribution correction! It's Ben Franklin

master of the great slogans.

We must all hang together or we will hang separately!

[darkangel218]

90. +1 million

[Babel_17]

19. I agree but being United is a two way street

Remember Rahm Emanuel, the "Unity" Chief of Staff?

P.S. This just in, oh the irony.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/03/rahm_emanuel_puts_some_daylight_between_himself_and_obamacare.html

P.P.S. Who can respect a party that has members who speak only tactically? I always throw into the debate that the Republicans own everything Bush did if they didn't come out against it. Same for the Reagan era, etc.

We draw in the younger voters because of our free speech, not in spite of it. It's part of why we have a future and the Republicans don't.

[BeyondGeography]

31. K&R for a well-worded appeal to reason

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

34. a a "hideous hermaphroditical character.."

Unfortunately, politics is not a game of gentlemanly discourse. It never has been.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/08/22/mf.campaign.slurs.slogans/

Things got ugly fast. Jefferson's camp accused President Adams of having a "hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman."

In return, Adams' men called Vice President Jefferson "a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father."

As the slurs piled on, Adams was labeled a fool, a hypocrite, a criminal, and a tyrant, while Jefferson was branded a weakling, an atheist, a libertine, and a coward. See 8 great campaign slogans »

Even Martha Washington succumbed to the propaganda, telling a clergyman that Jefferson was "one of the most detestable of mankind."

[lumpy]

94. Just because vile sniping was used in the past doesn't mean it should continue to be the standard.

Just because women in the past were openly derided for being women doesn't mean that viewpoint should be carried on.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

95. Get back to me after the next presidential campaign.

Or, when the next Repug president takes office.

[lumpy]

100. I wont get back to you most likely. Sure, the Repubs will get shit on, but it will relieve the shit

presently being thrown at Democrats by fellow Democrats. The Republicans deserve it more than Democrats anyway.

[tabasco]

39. We're going to fall

Gradual progress for the better will not be possible in the US, in large part because of these utopian asswipes who demand instant socialist nirvana, don't know jack shit about history, and will not unite with other liberals.

The other big reason is the criminal U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United. Propaganda works.

I expect another 30 years of republican rule, after which it may not be possible for the working class to unite.

[BrotherIvan]

45. This is the second OP with the same message?

Did the first one not get the lemming reaction you were hoping for?

[lumpy]

96. You came forth with a lovely example of what we have been talking about.

Thanks for delivering another snide post, just what DU needs.

[stg81]

46. some people seem to get off on the attention from POTUS-bashing around here

website not getting enough hits maybe, time to engage in some Fox-style POTUS-bashing PR tactics, try to stay relevant, "look at me! look at me!"

[HangOnKids]

131. LOL!

Comedy gold wrapped in a personal attack. CLASSIC!

[DeSwiss]

50. It's official, DU has turned into Jr High.... :-/ n/t

[whatchamacallit]

53. It's okay to follow your principles and speak your mind, always.

That's what the constitution the president is sworn to uphold guarantees.

[totodeinhere]

64. Yes we should all strive to keep our tempers in check and remain civil. But that

applies to everybody. If I have a reasonable constructive criticism of President Obama then those who disagree with me should treat me civilly and I should return the favor to them.

[darkangel218]

76. I agree, toto.

Respect goes both ways.

[Baconeater]

70. I'm a regular poster on Israel Conflict Board

The members of the board for the most part are those who used to be on the Yahoo Israel conflict message board before Yahoo closed down the message boards.
I've never seen a bunch of people go absolutely berserk since Obama became President. The anti-Obama crowd is completely irrational, from their belief that Obama hates Israel to blaming Obama anytime they stub their toe.
I think that no matter who was President right now, the conflicts in the world would be pretty much the same and moving at the same rate.
Pointing out that 70% of Jews voted Dem doesn't do much either. Those Jews are looked upon as traitors, JINOs, or uninformed. The hypocrisies on that board are mind numbing, but for some reason, it is a source of entertainment for me, to point them out.
Anyway, here is the link for anyone who wants to punish their brains http://israeli-arab.proboards.com/

[cthulu2016]

71. Wha? "Because Yahoo comments" is an argument now?

[Rex]

83. Desperate people say desperate things.

I think the crew is running on vapors.

[darkangel218]

85. I dont belong to any "crews".

Maybe you do.

Well, do you?

[Rex]

86. Yeah right you just got out of timeout and started right in on meta.

Okay, sure you don't. Good luck with your topic.

[darkangel218]

93. The attacks towards POTUS were technically Meta as well.

What's the difference? Or what's good for the goose is not good for the gander?

[Union Scribe]

97. ...not sure that word means what you think it does. nt

[darkangel218]

98. Whatever.

I doubt you missed my poin

[cthulu2016]

99. Discussion of politics is technically Meta?

[GoCubsGo]

81. Yep.

Even the worst critics here have nothing on the Yahell! posters. They are utterly sickening there. The sad thing about this place is that the critics and the president's most loyal supports all really want the same things for this country. Yet, they'd rather bash each other over the head over their differences than try to work together to find solutions.

[SmittynMo]

89. My signature line says it all.

[Vashta Nerada]

105. I saw criticism, not bashing.

It's a shame many can't tell the difference between the two.

[Trajan]

107. So, anyone who criticizes this Democratic President

MUST invariably be right wing ?

I cannot be an FDR, HST, JFK, LBJ Democratic voter, and then criticize the sitting Democratic President for being, in my own view, too right wing and not enough FDR, HST, JFK, LBJ Democratic President?

AND, if I do? ... I am a right wing Bushbot?

Yeah ... DU is one crazy place lately ... but I reserve my right to criticize THIS sitting Democratic President, and still be an honest and sincere FDR, HST, JFK, LBJ Democratic party voter.

Even Skinner can't take that away from me, nor can anyone reasonably claim I am now a right wing hater .... DU has become so absurd ...

I stand with Will ...

[Bobbie Jo]

108. "Anyone" "MUST"

Non-starter.

Exaggeration....

[Trajan]

110. Useless

Non-sequitur

[Bobbie Jo]

111. Useless

Straw man.

[Doctor_J]

126. Most of the Fan Club have broken with reality

I have voted (D) in every presidential election starting in 1980, and now I get lectured about what it means to be a Dem by people who are in favor of for-profit health insurance (mandatory), TPP, KXL, Chained CPI, fracking, more drilling, and other policies that the party is supposed to fight against.

[1000words]

109. LOL ... forgot about you.

Welcome back, I guess.

[noiretextatique]

122. it is your duty as a citizen to think critically

Not to offer blind loyalty to any politician. And just because the opposition is pure evil, our duty does not change. I oppose everything the GOP stands for, however that does not mean I support everything the DP does. I support the values of the party, and I fully expect its member to stand for those values also...100% of the time.

[Kali]

123. how is Alaska?

Thought I heard some noise.

[darkangel218]

124. I dont know, you tell me.

[Kali]

125. you didn't get your degree in January and move to Alaska

after they hired you sight unseen back last fall?

[CreekDog]

127. i think she may have not passed a portion of the boards

the spelling portion i believe.

darkangel218 (9,085 posts)
55. The only problem i have with the ACA is that they demand all plans to have maternity care

So if me or many other females don't want to ever have children, why get stuck with paying for something we don't need? And no, this is not the same as preexisting conditions.
Pregnency is a choice, and care for it should be optional on ACA.

[darkangel218]

162. I never said i moved. I said i was considering.

How is your truck doing, Kali?

[DrewFlorida]

128. I agree, there are so many things on the rightwing to criticise, I have no idea why people...

waste their time criticizing Obama, who has done a great job overall.

[Maven]

129. You basically just unwittingly defended DU's Obama critics

By pointing out the (valid) distinction between his most vociferous critics on DU who want to see him do better and RWers who want to see him destroyed.

Bravo. And, fail.

[HangOnKids]

132. Jackpot!

Thanks Maven, excellent post.

[Maven]

161. Thankee

[TroglodyteScholar]

133. So criticism of our guy amounts to support for the opposition.

Got it.

[HangOnKids]

134. In a nutshell

Remember that and keep it close to your heart.

[hrmjustin]

135. Welcome back darkangel!

Happy to have you back.

[darkangel218]

137. Thanks Justin!

I never left though :p

[hrmjustin]

138. .

[rhett o rick]

145. Threads like this keep the flame alive. If you really want to get even, and apparently that's

the driving force for the dozens of anti-anti-Obama threads, put offenders on ignore and start posting about ISSUES.

[liberal_at_heart]

146. Until he repeals Race to the Top and Common Core I will criticize him all I want.

[Logical]

149. This is BS. I have read Wills posts and still will vote for a Dem in 2014, 2016. People.....

are not so clueless that complaining about Obama not being liberal enough will make us GOP supporters. The logic is idiotic!

[Doctor_J]

159. Every fucking DUer will vote straight D this year, and 16, and 18, and so on, until they die

OP's like this one are a desperate attempt to hide the fact that the DC dems didn't do what they were mandated to do in 2008. Meanwhile the DC Repukes serve their drooling morons faithfully, enacting every anti-American abomination that Hate Radio and Fox "News" sell to the brain dead masses.

[Logical]

160. Great point. nt

[L0oniX]

151. If you don't agree with me then you must be a member of the tea party!

[Bobbie Jo]

153. If you don't agree with me then you must

be an idolizing politician worshiper.

[chknltl]

156. Regarding united we stand.

Imo. We The People can not fix our problems within our government when we are divided against each other and distracted. Our very democracy is being held in check and taken away from us because of this.