noticing a worrisome trend...

[nadinbrzezinski]

and it is not a cool trend...

We are in the middle of becoming just as hateful as the other side, and those of us who point the dangers of creating the other... look it up... face the charge that we are defending conservatives.

Nope, this is not a good thing... since this OTHER ism, can create some serious problems at a national level. And I mean really serious problems...

That is all.

[Fridays Child]

1. Maybe you're right but could you point to some examples?

I think we all have the capacity for both good and bad words, deeds, thoughts, and so on. We're each ultimately responsible for our choices, whether or not we believe that we've been provoked. But it sounds like you may be sensing a troubling group dynamic at work. Is that right?

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. No, a troubling trend

And it would require actual call outs.

Suffice it to say...this creation of the other can be ahem...problematic.

[Fridays Child]

4. Gotcha.

[zappaman]

7. "you may be sensing a troubling group dynamic at work"

Are you implying the author of the OP is a psychic?
No evidence or examples of this "trend" because she is "sensing" the trend?
Got it.

[sabrina 1]

8. Well, she's not the only one, does that help you at all?

[pinboy3niner]

11. +1

No, she's not the only one. It's not something new, but Nadin's right that it does seem to be increasing as a reaction to the increased RW expression of hate, intolerance and lack of compassion coming at a time when many 99-percenters are struggling and suffering.

What she's calling attention to is the kind of reaction expressed as something like, "I wouldn't piss on him or her if he or she was on fire" (naming some particularly vile and soul-less RW personality). It's a response to a seeming lack of humanity with...a lack of humanity.

[pecwae]

17. That's how I'm reading the OP.

It has nothing to do with what is written on any RW site and everything to do with what is written right here.

[sabrina 1]

97. Yes I agree. A lack of humanity. On the positive side though, I think it's just the loudest mouths

but otoh, the reason they meet with so little resistance now, unlike a few years ago, is that many people have been totally turned off by all of it, and have just left to do more important things.

[Sandra14]

2. Spam deleted by gkhouston (MIR Team)

[RZM]

5. Some things transcend ideology

And this is one of them. I think it's a human tendency to identify with one's group and vilify outsiders. It seems to happen all over the place. We're all humans, after all. Many dynamics are equally present in both the left and the right.

Thanks for pointing this out and speaking against it. Articulating one's own argument and criticizing the arguments on the other side is fine. But it has to be done right. Too often people venture into the absurd on this.

I think 'othering' is wrong on principle. But aside from that, it's also a losing approach. If you ascribe unrealistic motives and false characteristics to the other side, you're failing to understand where they come from and what they're all about. And if you don't understand your enemy, you will never defeat them.

[zappaman]

6. If it is a trend, then I expect you to provide examples.

If you can't, you are clearly making this up.
Suffice it to say, I doubt we'll see you provide the reasoning behind your logic.

[cali]

9. Will my providing an example help?

How about posts declaring that all conservatives are traitors?

[Bonobo]

41. There was a post last week that said "I won't ever help a Republican"

So if a Republican was in trouble, that poster wouldn't provide any help/aid for them.

I'd say that's a pretty good example.

But what can you really expect of personal morality when you are painted into a corner where you have to support indefinite detentions, torture, secret trials and aerial drone attacks on teenage Americans and slaughter of innocent children?

[pinboy3niner]

42. More recent...

...was this post that preceded Nadin's thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002798583

That OP author is a brother, but I have to disagree with him and agree with Nadin.

She replied with a post about the ethical duties of responders, which is entirely correct. But even as a civilian bystander, without such an ethical responsibility, I'd feel a human obligation and duty to help someone in distress--without first applying a partisan political litmus test--even for someone as vile as Limbaugh.

[muriel_volestrangler]

109. What, this one from 7 years ago?

http://election.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4680051#4680263

How far back does the trend go? I'm not sure DU was archived on Google before 2004 (when journals were introduced, I think part of the novelty was that journal entries would be included by search robots).

[sabrina 1]

10. She doesn't need to provide examples. I think a majority of people have already noticed it.

'Suffice it to say'. Do you find what passes for humor at the cesspool known as 'the cave' worthy of bringing over here? Speaking of trends and what the OP is talking about. Unless you think imitating their insidious insults is not a nasty thing to do. I think it is and an example of that trend she was speaking of come to think of it. I saw enough there in one week several months ago to last a lifetime. Do you spend a lot of time over there reading their garbage? That might be the problem. When you spend a lot of time wading in mire, you do become immune to it.

[pintobean]

13. I think it's much more likely

that they got it from here. The OP uses that phrase often, and it's frequently followed by condescending comments.
Your accusations play right into their hands - they don't even need accounts here to disrupt. Your suspicion and finger pointing is doing their work for them.

[sabrina 1]

14. I know where they got it and you just proved the OP's point.

They are a despicable and sad, obsessed bunch of people and it felt dirty to go there at all. But what I saw was a collaboration between them and people here and you are doing it now. You are justifying their mocking of a DUer and playing right into their hands.

And THAT is part of the nasty trend people have been have been noticing for quite some time. Why would you approve of a bunch of rightwing lunatics mocking a DUer in the first place? I don't care how someone here is perceived to act, she is a DEMOCRAT.

At least I'll say this for Republicans, they may dislike each other in private, but they would never enable US to attack one of theirs. Why do you come into her threads if you are that upset by her? Just use the ignore feature and leave her alone.

[pintobean]

22. How in the fuck do you

get that I approve of them? I suggested that you ignore them. The irony here is unbelievable.

[girl gone mad]

23. You're defending a poster who basically contributes nothing here..

except to stalk Nadin.

[pintobean]

58. A simple search says otherwise.

[girl gone mad]

70. Thanks for the suggestion.

I did search, and what I found has led me to the conclusion that this poster has a serious problem, much worse than I had thought, and probably should have been banned by now.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002786981

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002597424

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002670863

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002775346

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002685514

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002447273

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002640335

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002556571

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002737083

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002744973

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002647949

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002618177

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002513691

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002702402

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002654533

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002793505

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002447620

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002672747

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002549087

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002645174

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002307280

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12522481

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002748418

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002605443

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002438403

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1252533

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002666498

http://election.democraticunderground.com/124084258

Do I need to continue, or will you stop defending this?

[zappaman]

78. By all means, continue.

And while you're at it, maybe you can support the OP by telling us what examples has led to this "worrisome trend"?
If you're not sure what a trend is and how to recognize one, I refer you to this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trend_estimation

And just so you know, I can post wherever and whenever I want.
And when a pretentious, condescending know-it-all posts false or just plain wrong information(such as 60cms equals a meter or there are 51 states in the US, a marine was killed on a "sooper duper secret mission in Pakistan", or "American" is a language), I will be there to disagree.
And when a poster tells me they are an xe-cop, former firefighter, retired drill sergeant, "trained historian", an expert in firearms, a journalist, a "trend spotter", or a EMT who carries a 10 inch knife, I will be there to thank that poster for there awesome service to this country, but I might...just might...have some questions relating to their expertise.

You don't like it? Feel free to put me on ignore. I couldn't care less.

[girl gone mad]

79. Dude, get help.

I have absolutely no idea why you haven't been banned for this shit.

[zappaman]

80. Banned for what?

And are you gonna support the OP or just cast aspersions?

[pintobean]

81. Sometimes, there's a lot

in a name.

[sabrina 1]

26. Go read your own words. You justified their mockery of her by telling me what an irritating

condescending person she is. So that's where it came from, they only imitated her because 'she is so condescending'. What is that if not justifying their sick, misogynism. The right thing to do would be to attack them for mocking her, wouldn't it? A woman being bullied and mocke by a cowardly gang of rightwingers, (and I saw some pretty sick stuff over there directed at her, as a woman, and other DU women), should be condemned, not explained.

I don't care what she is or is not and that is YOUR opinion, which an awful lot of people disagree with btw.

They read YOU and the person you came in to defend who used THEIR mocking garbage to attack her with giving them kudos for being so funny in his opinion.

Don't use their stupid attempts at humor to attack a DUer and no one will think you approve of it, as zappaman did and you defended.

[pintobean]

57. This didn't start when you noticed it.

It was going on long before you joined DU and long before your cave existed. It appears that you don't care about the history. The cave has nothing to do with it. Your obsession with them is really weird. On DU2, any posts that referred to them were deleted. I really wish that were still the case. You bringing that shit here and making unfounded accusations doesn't do DU any good. It's divisive, and that's what their miserable existence is all about.

You are the one who brought them up. Unless you have proof, you should keep your accusations to yourself. You've made personal attacks against 2 long time DUers. I find your comments repulsive. I'd alert, but I'd rather they stay for everyone to see.

[girl gone mad]

64. Methinks thou doth protest too much.

[pintobean]

68. Like I care what you think.

What's really fucked up is - Sabrina's comments started a very long thread over there. Seven pages and counting. They're having a blast with this. Like I said, it's best to ignore them and not feed them.

[girl gone mad]

71. Physician, heal yourself.

[pintobean]

74. I have a similar suggestion.

[girl gone mad]

75. "Like I said, it's best to ignore them and not feed them."

You mean, like spending time on the site and reporting back here on the "7 page thread" you found?

And didn't you already make this suggestion once?

Thus my response that you should lead by example.

Are you still defending the transparent stalker?

[pintobean]

76. 74

[girl gone mad]

77. Thanks for exposing yourself.

Now I know to ignore you in the future.

[pinboy3niner]

25. The mocking attacks on Nadin are characteristic of those RW sites

Yet here she gets the same treatment, merely for posting an OP on MSM news reports of the Coast Guard responding to an SOS radio call.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=797769

Some of these attacks are gratuitous cheap shots--as in the case above, when her OP was what was being reported all over MSM sources, and the Coast Guard responded to the distress call by dispatching 7 helicopters and many boats--assisted by 'Good Samaritan' boaters--in a search. Yet Nadin is being portrayed--here--as some kind of gullible sucker for relaying those reports? When even the U.S. Coast Guard took it seriously enough to deploy considerable resources?

Fair criticism is one thing, but Nadin may very well be right in pointing to a 'fan club' that goes after her even in cheap, unfair and disingenuous ways. As Sabrina observes, those attacks here can even resemble the kind of crap posted at the other site. If you don't believe it, it's easy to check over there and compare their comments to those here.

[sabrina 1]

31. She is right, that was already established several months ago when she asked the community to help

her. That was the first time I was aware of it, but was shocked when I went to see what she was talking about. It went back years, with the same people always in her threads. One of them was clearly to me and to a lot of others, a right winger and when we looked at that other site, and saw what a hero he was there, he even had a fan club, it boggled my mind that he was here for so long and got away with what he did for so long.

He was finally banned, not for what he was doing for years to Nadin, he always had his defenders, which in itself was amazing, using a woman here to provide entertainment there, it was sickening frankly, and he was aided and abetted here also. But that was not why he was banned, he finally revealed himself as the right winger he was and there was much mourning at his favorite site at the loss of their leader of the entertainment committee. I never saw anything so sick frankly. To use another human being to provide daily mocking threads. What kind of people do that sort of thing. I presume he returned to his natural habitat, which is where he belonged all along. What is sad is that she was not only NOT defended, he was joined in his sick games.

Trends of nastiness, absolutely. And it is why so many people have given up on the internet. Maybe that was the goal.

[zappaman]

56. Hey, I just went to that place you spend time at and did a search on your name.

Unfortunately, you have to be a member to search and I don't want to join, so I was wondering if I could borrow your login info?

[sabrina 1]

61. That is a personal attack.

I expect you to provide evidence of that false allegation or retract it.

Google is your friend when you are searching for information on a site you are not a member of. Now I will thank you to have the decency to retract that false allegation.

[pintobean]

62. You should talk.

[sabrina 1]

73. Thank you, I will!

I love that little roly poly guy!

[zappaman]

82. Nothing to retract.

I went to the site you are constantly promoting and I entered your name to see if you are mentioned.
When doing so, it says I need to login.
I am not a member so I was asking you nicely if I could borrow your login information.
BTW, how much time would you say you spend there?
Like PINTOBEAN, I have noticed a huuuge thread was started there because of you. It seems to be mostly about one of their members rockin' body now, but nonetheless, it was your mentioning of them that created the thread.
Why do you give them the attention, Sabrina?

[sabrina 1]

86. Well I hope the two of you enjoy all the time you are spending there.

Although WHY you want to spend your there is anyone's guess.

[zappaman]

90. Well, it is a little hard to navigate

Maybe someone who has spend a lot of time there, such as yourself, could show us around?
I'd gladly pay you for a guided tour.

[sabrina 1]

92. How are things going at your favorite site?

[pintobean]

93. You have been reduced

to one and two sentence replies, yet you still say as much as you do in your typical six lengthy paragraph replies. Nothing.

[sabrina 1]

96. Odd thing to say. Someone just emailed me a C&P of

an almost exact quote of what you just said from that site. How strange. I would never accuse someone of having an account at that site without absolute proof of such an allegation, but the similarity between that caver's comment and yours is something that would make a reasonable person go 'hmmm'.

Never mind, it's probably just a huge coincidence!

Btw, thanks emailer

[pintobean]

98. Or, it could just be an obvious

observation that any person could make.
I'll save you the gumshoe work - I do not have an account there, nor will I ever.

[sabrina 1]

99. Nor do I.

So we are in the boat, although the difference is no one has falsely accused you of having an account there, I would never do that without absolute proof. But your friend has now set a standard, one which you did not object to. So I guess people will come to their own conclusions. But for what it's worth I believe you.

I do know that freepers find more than three sentences in a row to be very taxing on their brains. So no surprise they would see a post longer than three paragraphs as a fearful threat to their limited IQs. But I never found that to be true of Democrats.

[pintobean]

100. Jeezz

I really don't care what you think. I might have had a little respect for you if you could have controlled yourself and not posted that 2nd paragraph. I'll just be honest with you. It has nothing to do with IQ. Your posts are boring and redundant, and you pepper threads with the same thing time after time. I've come to the conclusion that you believe volume wins over substance.

As to me not being accused of having an account there, you came awfully close in post #14.

[sabrina 1]

103. Well, now you're just firing duds and they are not even reaching their target.

The fact is that your friend made himself look pretty bad in this thread. That you chose to defend him, is not my problem.

For the record, if I were insane enough to waste time on that site, everyone here would know about it, it would be under this name and as a democrat. Nor would it be the first time I spent smacking down freepers.

It was fascinating to see someone fall all over themselves to make an 'accusation' that was totally meaningless but it did help Nadin's thread so it wasn't a total waste of time.

As for the rest of your comment, an opinion has to come from someone who is respected in order for it to have any impact. But the feeling is mutual, generally if I see your handle I just skip over it.

[zappaman]

104. Yes, I sure looked bad questioning the reasoning behind the OP

Which nobody, including you, could back up.
But hey, thanks to you and your promoting of a conservative site, I did get to see some great "boobiez", so it wasn't a total loss.
Thanks for the heads up and I'm glad we can count on you to tell us what is up with that site.

[sabrina 1]

106. You sure did. But don't sell yourself short. You served a vital function in this thread.

You proved Nadin's point perfectly, helped keep her thread kicked and are responsible for most of the recs. Thank you so much for your cooperation. Apologies for pretending to take you and your friend Pinto seriously. But you understand, it was for a good cause.

Say hi to your buddies next time they invite you to share some porn with them. Not much else on their minds is there?

Okay, I think my job here is done. A great thread, people got to have a discussion uninterrupted, while I kept the main distraction busy and away from the serious conversation.

All in all a very successful endeavor.

[Cerridwen]

101. You don't have to be a member to search the site.

You do, however, have to make a good-faith effort to search.

Here are the parameters for a google search:

<insert whatever information here without the brackets> site:www.conservativecave.com

For example: zappaman site:www.conservativecave.com

Amazing how often you wind up in Nadin's threads or threads about her; isn't it?

[zappaman]

102. Cool thanks!

Not so amazing since I tend to be on the lookout for sanctimonious, condescending know-it-alls.

[inna]

105. unbelievably malicious post.

what is this poster doing here, exactly?

[pintobean]

107. How would you respond

if you were accused of collaborating with the some of nastiest wingnuts on the internet?

[cwydro]

15. What is the cave?

Is that the right wing site?

[sabrina 1]

20. Yes n/t

[pinboy3niner]

21. RW site with one forum dedicated to monitoring and mocking DU posts and posters

It's really not worth the clicks and the time going there--unless you're involved in drafting the new DSM-V.

[HughBeaumont]

36. They do this to our posters . . . and WE'RE the "losers", here.

Right.

[pinboy3niner]

37. They think so highly of themselves--but they give US their awards :)

I think Nadin may be running out of lamp tables for her awards...



She's hoping they'll stop giving them to her, because they're really a problem. They're so fra-gee-lay.

[zappaman]

55. It's a rightwing site that Sabrina likes to read apparently. n/t

[sabrina 1]

65. Another personal attack. Unsubstantiated allegation.

You're helping the OP with every false allegation you make, prove her point.

[zappaman]

84. What's false about what I said?

You've posted about them more than once.

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=85431

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002420386#post34

[sabrina 1]

88. Quick, call the cops!

little roly poly guy.

And thanks for kicking the thread and providing some perfect examples of what the OP was talking about.

I am still hoping to see your evidence or more distractions, doesn't matter which so long as you keep kicking Nadin's thread. I'm having fun, how about you?

[zappaman]

91. I sure am!

And no one has shown any evidence of a "trend" that supports the OP.
Although I will give you credit for having 2 threads on 2 very different sites become all about you.

[sabrina 1]

94. But you're wrong, the evidence is right here in the thread. You yourself have been most obliging

in providing it.

And credit where it's due, I believe you are single-handedly, well almost, responsible for the success of this thread and most of the recs.

[zappaman]

54. Again, you seem to spend a lot of time at that site.

I went over there once the last time you brought it up, which you do quite often.
No, I don't read it so I don't "bring anything over here".
Keep trying.
And yes, when someone says they spot a "trend", I'd like to see some examples.
Enjoy your time over at "the cave".
Suffice it to say, I notice what certain posters say constantly...including you and your fascination with that site.

[girl gone mad]

66. Her fascination with that site?

How about your outright obsession with Nadin?

[sabrina 1]

72. Shhh, you're spoiling 'operation distraction'!

which is in full progress complete with false allegations and personal attacks.

I almost forgot the little roly poly laughing guy

[Shankapotomus]

12. My policy in this regard is

the one place where it's ok to be intolerant is of the intolerant.

[Vattel]

16. I agree with you and would add that the hate is not just directed at Republicans.

Critics of Obama are subjected to plenty of smears and villification on this site even if they are not Republicans. If you need examples, read a few recent threads on Glen Greenwald or old threads on Cornell West. Also, at least some DU members like myself who dared to suggest that it wasn't clear that George Zimmerman committed murder were instantly accused of racism or otherwise villified. The level of hatred I was subjected to simply for admitting that I don't know whether Zimmerman committed murder was remarkable.

[StarryNight]

18. agreed. we're supposed to be better than that. nt

[trumad]

19. I'll provide the example...

Fuck every right wing douchebag on the planet.... Fucking kick them in the balls every chance you get-----and never fucking apologize.

Oh---but if you are of the clan who likes to play nice----don't fucking bitch when you get steamrolled.

Good enough example?

[SidDithers]

67. +1...

this is a partisan board. We don't have to fucking play nice.

Sid

[Quantess]

24. Flamebait.

[pecwae]

27. How so?

I fail to see flamebait-ishness at all. I don't generally agree with the author of the OP, but she's nailed it here.

[pinboy3niner]

30. Yes, it's just a bit of samokritika--self-criticism applied to the Left, or to DU

It makes a fair point and certainly doesn't cross the flamebait line.

[sabrina 1]

32. No, it's a fact.

[lunatica]

28. Is there any other kind of trend in a Presidential election year?

Really. I'm serious. People's passions and totally unrealistic expectations and condemnations always peak in Presidential election years. Their worst fears are on display and their tempers are short because someone might say something against their candidate. And then there are the shit disturbing trolls who love to stir the pot. And now it can all be bought and paid with unlimited funds by the corporate Personhood.

[greytdemocrat]

29. nadin might actually be right on this.

Or it could be gas. 50/50.

[JNelson6563]

33. If you're talking about here, you're behind the curve.

DU has long been a pretty ugly place in regard to the R's and often case, the D's. I found DU right after the theft of 2000. I picked up the terminology and a bit of the attitude. Jumped in with both feet to the world of politics. While mixing with the local and what not such was ok, not really a big deal. When I started working with folks who make a living at politics it soon became very apparent to me that the nastiness of DU, with all it's wicked funny terms. and various names for certain pols, well that stuff was a bit crude and/or harsh for them, to a person.

By that time, 2004, I learned that DU speak is absolutely not the way the real world political people (on our side, anyway) communicate and they found it a real turn-off. I learned pretty early on, if you want to be taken seriously, don't talk as they do on DU.

But again, that was a loooooooooooooooooong time ago, where have you been?

Julie

[Mairead]

34. "Those who make a living at politics" are of course never going to accept

that there's anything bad about them or their kind!

But their refusal to own up doesn't mean that some or even many of them aren't terrible, exploitative creatures who have no one's interests but their own at heart. If they had a heart.

[JNelson6563]

39. Senatorial aides, Presidential advance team

and others who I've worked with were who I was referring to. Not people who get elected or need to win people over to themselves.

And I said nothing about them thinking they are infallible. I simply said they do not speak in the uber-negative, nasty even, ways that DUers do on DU.

They are regular people with families and such, they aren't exploitative creatures who have no heart.

You should go and meet some of them sometime.

Julie

[pinboy3niner]

40. But...but...you're a terrible, exploitative creature!1!!

Hang in there, Julie. We've got your back.

[JNelson6563]

43. lol Thank you!

Damn, I was shocked to read that those of us out here trying to make a difference are simply exploiting others!

Oy.

Thanks for the support pinboy3niner!

Julie

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. Well, it's gotten far worst Julie

and yes, I will call it what it is.

I have also been to PLENTY of Democratic AND Repub clubs, part of the job... and you are wrong... the language is also spreading there. It is NOT as prevalent as here, but it exists.

[JNelson6563]

50. It is worse in that it's more often at each other.

At least in regard to DU.

In RL it is still not my experience so perhaps I have stumbled upon a political utopia.

I was at an event last night for a Congressional candidate, there were a few pols there among the crowd. Each spoke and I didn't hear trash talking of the R's from the mic. Additionally the conversations I had while milling about were about electoral strategy, what we're doing & how we're doing it. Sure the R's came up but the ugliest even that got was people being incredulous that anyone even votes R these days, well anyone outside of the 1% a least.

Still, I didn't hear name calling or a whole lot of mention of the Rs outside of how to beat them, of course. Admittedly the focus was on how to win in November but still, even in down time (non election years, not even mid-terms!) I still have yet to see the level of trash talk in RL as I do on the tubes~~not even close.

And the penchant to trash our own? Yet another on-line thing in my experience. I liken it to a baseball game. While the spectators will readily criticize and trash talk you will find the participants of the game behaving much differently.

Just my .0125

Julie

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. Funny I was at the election returns last tuesday

and some of the things I heard at the Republican Lincoln Club from supporters can't be published.

OTOH, I was at two democratic clubs recently, and there was SOME trash talk too. Just like the Lincoln Club, only reason there was more during the returns was the alcohol involved.

As I said, part of the job. IT IS FAR LESS PREVALENT, since it is real life... and real life people are more careful... I mean talking smack may get you called on it and shit... and it might not be pretty... but it is there.

Online (and there are plenty of studies to back this up), people are less polite and tend to go off a tad easier... since they are anonymous and shit. But if the feelings are expressed on line, you can bet that the feelings are real as in real life.

And that is where the trend becomes dangerous. We are seeing groups of people on BOTH sides seeing the other side as less than human... there is a special hell in there, quite potentially.

[libtodeath]

35. Seeing the RW do everything in their power to destroy the foundations of this country

is going to cause anger and I for one have no problem calling their evil,hatred and racisim out.
That directly applies to the "cave",a bunch of low life idiots that wallow in bigotry and hatred,they can go fuck themselves,as far as I am concerned they are not americans and deserve every bit of scorn they get and wont apologize for that.

Hope you dont get discouraged here nadin,you do a terrific job of reporting on things.

[Puzzledtraveller]

38. I switched sides because of that attitude

So it is disconcerting that it appears so prevalent amongst us here now.

[JNelson6563]

44. It's prevalent *here*

at DU and other political forums but not in reality. Go to your local Dem meeting and you will see a much different tone and vocabulary that what you see here.

It saddens me to see so many think that the way things are on DU is the way things are. Untrue.

Julie

[rbixby]

45. I just wish that the other side would be willing to compromise at least a little

That's what democracy is supposed to be about

[sadbear]

46. I notice a worrisome trend, too.

We are in the middle of becoming just as hateful as the 1%, and those of us who point the dangers of creating the other... look it up... face the charge that we are defending the 1%.

(You see, when the other side has declared war against you, what good does it do to fight back?)

[Gregorian]

47. It's a kind of unconsciousness.

I've been wanting to start a thread on something along these lines that I honestly believe is one of the biggest problems the human race faces. People doing things that are not in their best interest. This is happening to liberals, and not just conservatives. Most of what needs to be said would provoke rage though. Like trying to tell Republican voters that they are just helping to create a poor economy.

Hate is no different.

[ananda]

48. It is possible to hate what people stand for..

.. without hating them personally.

[Romulox]

51. It's a "big tent" full of many, many "ex" Republicans atm...

[Capt. Obvious]

53. Here's a rec for this thread

[ecstatic]

59. This is war

Playing a fake "fair and balanced" game has never worked out well for us. A LOT is at stake in November, and yes, the thought of the tea party having full control of the government does cause me to say things that you might deem "hateful."

ETA: If you're referring to actual acts of cruelty towards others based on their ideology, then that is not something I would take part in or condone. I haven't seen anyone encouraging that on DU.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. Latter

And yes people are condoning things like letting somebody die in the middle of a medical emergency...since they are less than human. We're seeing this now from both sides.

[Arugula Latte]

63. On my list of things to worry about ...

this is number 17,538.

[Whisp]

69. nonsense. nothing close to Santorum craziness

or some of those other crazy fucked ups.

what are you smoking.

[deaniac21]

83. I have never seen a hateful post on DU.

[zappaman]

85. still waiting

For anyone to show me examples of this "trend" and why they agree.
Here is a helpful link that explains what a "trend" is and how to spot one...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trend_estimation

Anyone? You don't have to be a trained historian to answer...

[Bonobo]

95. It was shown. You should read the whole thread. nt

Last edited Tue Jun 12, 2012, 11:00 PM - Edit history (1)

[zappaman]

111. yes I saw a total of 2 examples.

unfortunately, that doesn't make a trend.
still waiting....

[JI7]

87. There has always been Hate, and there is nothing wrong with it , but i don't see it as equal as the

other side.

there are a few but people often disagree with them.

can you give examples of changes in level or type of hate you see which show we are becoming like them ?

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. Calling out specific people is a TOS offense

and I am sure you knew that.

[pecwae]

108. There's a lot wrong with it.

It's an emotion that can ruin your life, eat you up from the inside out, suppress positive thoughts and feelings. It's human nature to feel it from time to time, but dwelling in it is ruinous.

[Atman]

110. At least we can stay on message.

I checked out the thread on CC discussing this thread -- they only made it through a couple of pages of hate-responses before yelling "SQUIRREL!" Or, more accurately, "BOOBIEZ!" as one of them posted pictures of herself from the 80's in a ruffled bikini, and close-up shots of her boobs. The next six pages of the thread discuss nothing but her breasts, and plenty of third-grader comments about how "hawt" she is.

That is the same for every thread there...they start one with mock outrage at something said on DU, but rarely get beyond three or four posts before they lose focus and start talking about some other item mentioned in the thread, like a toaster oven they once owned. It's really quite comical.

As for the op here, I can see some validity to it, but not much. What I do see is a LOT of new, very-low-post-count posters telling us how bad things are for Obama, and how "concerned" they are for the future of the "Democrat" party. And a lot of people on CC, CU and other right wing sites, with intimate knowledge of these threads, always quick to bring them home to their intended audience.

But no...we don't have moles and trolls here.

C'mon, Nadin...wake up. You're being played. The best defense is not to play along.

.

[Atman]

112. BWHAHA! Now it's "I meant to do that!"

Some guy posts fake pictures, claiming to be the girl in the pics, and now that they got sucked into 10 pages of "BOOBIEZ! Yore sew hawt!" comments, they say "See, we tricked them!" Yeah, right. I'll believe that when I believe the female in the pictures has ever placed a single post on CC.

"I meant to do that!" These guys are comic gold.

.