So is this forum now a President Obama criticism free zone.

[politicaljunkie41910]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Kaleva (a host of the 2016 Postmortem forum).

It seems all weekend, every time someone levied a critism about Obama, there was this rush to silence them. Do Democrats on this board now have to be like the Republicans under Bush and rubberstamp anything and everything whether or not you agree with it? Then the namecalling begins. If this is a discussion board, than we should be able to discuss without the name calling, questioning people's loyalty to the party, or claims that the dissenters hair is on fire.

I for one am not happy that we will revisit the spending cuts and debt ceiling issues in another two months, with little to bargain with and a pissed off GOP. No matter how dead many here think the GOP is, they are not buried yet and they can still create chaos.

Also the Obama Tax Cuts, (what they will be called from here on out) are PERMANENT, unlike the Bush Tax Cuts which had an expiration date on them. Tax Rates were already at their lowest rates in the past 50 years. No future Congress will ever be able to raise taxes again and even President Obama has taken up the mantra that we have a deficit problem. The Obama Tax Cuts add $4 Trillion dollars to the deficit and again they are permanent, so the only solution is going to be spending cuts. Even when the economy returns to normal, we will still have deficits because you don't just wipe out deficits in the trillions overnight.

We have an aging population, a declining birth rate (even amongst the immigrants who were previously driving the birth rate), and spending cuts will be revisited again, and this time somethings gonna give because even Democrats like Ed Rendell are talking about how we have to do something about the deficit and Obama should have embraced Bowles-Simpson.

I'm sorry if it gets the veteran DU posters here panties all in a wad if someone has a different opinion regarding President Obama's negotiating tactics, but so be it. He ran a campaign on the premise that we needed the tax cuts to return to the Clinton era rates for those making over $250K (which in and of itself would assure future deficit spending) in order to increase the revenue stream and then he caved on it. Don't jerk on my strings saying you have to get us (the public) behind you, and then when we're behind you you're no longer in front leading.

I don't care what people here call me, (troll, hair on fire, whatever) I know how I have supported this President in the past and I know how I feel about him personally. But this is not personal. I'm almost 55; I want to be able to plan for my future. I'm tired of kicking the can down the road. The talk will quickly return to the deficit and spending cuts and no one seems to want to cut anything, (not Medicare, not Chain CPI which isn't even a cut but a slowing of the increase), and the Congress seems unwilling to cut the Defense Spending. I'd rather this stuff be discussed here out in the open rather than to wake up one morning to find out that a handful of Congressmen and women who represent a handful of states the size of Rhode Island, have reached a "grand bargain" deal which sells us out and we have nothing to say about it.

[phleshdef]

1. A lot of us here support our President. We have empathy for the difficulties of governing.

And thus we WILL defend him. Deal with it.

[Lisa D]

2. You are certainly welcome to criticize the president.

Other posters may agree or disagree with that criticism.

Disagreement does not equal a "rush to silence".

[boingboinh]

21. It tends to lead to DU Banning though.

That is a known fact.

[11 Bravo]

33. Nice self-fulfilling prophesy!

Buh-bye!

[NoPasaran]

74. Yup!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=293359

See ya in Hell!

[jberryhill]

3. "this rush to silence them"

How does disagreeing with someone amount to an attempt to "silence them".

It is not an "Obama criticism free zone".

It is a zone in which those who disagree with something posted have the opportunity to disagree with what has been posted.

Furthermore, a "criticism" would be something like "raising the threshold above 250K gives up too much revenue".

That would be a "criticism".

Something along the lines of "Obama is a sellout who can't wait to kill old people" is not a "criticism". It is merely a personal characterization.

This I find to be the most interesting line in your post:

"No future Congress will ever be able to raise taxes again"

Why not?

[MADem]

23. This is it, exactly!!

"I'm not able to trash talk with impunity, dad gum it!"

"How dare my intemperate comments be challenged by people bearing....facts!!!"

[politicaljunkie41910]

26. No Congress would ever have the guts to raise taxes ever again.

The expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts was allowed to be reframed from 'a tax expiration' to 'the problem isn't too little revenue, but we have a spending problem'. Even the expiration of the payroll tax holiday was reframed as an increase in social security taxes by many.

If you were following the posts this weekend in this forum, you would have seen what I am talking about, and I didn't see anyone calling President "Obama a sellout who can't wait to kill old people". I heard people being critical of his negotiation techniques, and it's not as if they didn't have cause for concern based on past actions during negotiations. People were immediately attacked and called names particularly if they had less than several thousand posts under their belt as if having 20,000 posts makes you more qualified to speak than someone with much less.

[Igel]

57. Don't make it either/or.

It's both/and.

The deficit in 2002 and 2003 had three causes. Increased military spending. Tax reductions. Recession. Any of the three was enough to wipe out the projected budget surplus. We had all three.

Many picked one as the real cause of the deficit, forgetting that "wipe out the projected budget surplus" is different from "causing a $300 billion deficit." Wipe out the surplus and you're left at $0, not $300 billion in the hole.

Get entirely rid of the * tax cuts, all the Obama tax cuts, and this year Obama said he expected a $900 billion deficit. That's a combination of increased spending--far above the rate of inflation--and decreased revenue from projected amounts. One # I heard was an 18% increase in discretionary spending after inflation in 4 years. That's a fair amount. But only a bit of the increase in the deficit has been discretionary spending. The deficit is larger than 100% of discretionary spending. It's non-discretionary spending that's soared. Part of that's recession. Part is demographics. Part is policy.

Note, though, that in 2012 tax revenue, even with the various tax cuts in effect, hit the same levels that it had in 2008. So revenue's down, but only from what was it would have been with inflation and economic growth.

[geek tragedy]

4. Disagreement is not censorship. Climb down off that cross you built for yourself. nt

[LiberalElite]

66. I'm only here since October 2012 and

yes, disagreement is not censorship but there are plenty of snarky comments, sarcasm, and name calling if anyone has a critical opinion of POTUS.

[geek tragedy]

70. Oh heavens, snarky comments and sarcasm on the Internet?

Never heard of such outrages.

[Liberal Veteran]

5. Hardly. It is extremely varied.

One part thinks he's the bastard child of Reagan and Bush.
One part thinks he's the child of Ghandi and FDR.
The majority is suitable critical of President Obama as necessary, but also pragmatic enough to know politics requires compromises.

[demwing]

6. There's nothing wrong with honest, constructive criticism

but there is a subset of DUers that cannot seem to wait to cast predictions of doom and gloom. They see a few clouds in a blue sky and fret that the day (and likely the rest of the week) will be overcast, and probably rain. A lot.

And if you are truly "sorry if it gets the veteran DU posters here panties all in a wad if someone has a different opinion" then why on Earth would you say so in such an aggressive, dismissive manner?

Sounds like you're the poster with an uncomfortable wad.

[politicaljunkie41910]

35. Maybe that is representative of some, but I think 4 years of experience

is enough time to evaluate without being accused of hastily passing judgment. Besides President Obama is the one telling us that we need to let Congress know how we feel about this bill or that. Well sometimes we need to let him know as well. Also, I don't deny the magnitude of the problem he inherited or the forces he's been up against. But the Bush Administration never backed away from a fight no matter how wrong they were. If you're going to take a stand, or draw a line in the sand, be willing to stand your ground. The thought of watching him repeatedly capitulate on matters of principle is disheartening.

[Harmony Blue]

7. No such thing as permanent

when it comes to taxes. Some people can't accept that....

[alcibiades_mystery]

8. Blah blah blah

"...rush to silence..."

Puh-leeez. There's been healthy debate and disagreement here all weekend. Just because somebody disagrees with you doesn't mean they're trying to silence you. Listen, I get that it is a very attractive and heroic posture to be the "truth speaker' in a room full of people trying to "silence you." Yes, yes, very After School Special and romantic. It's a cartoonish and adolescent fantasy premise. Ooooo, there go all the "intolerant" oldies with their "panties in a wad" on account of all your speakin' truth to power, yeah! You're awesome. We get it.

[politicaljunkie41910]

37. Actually, this isn't about me. I read plenty of posts this weekend from people

Last edited Wed Jan 2, 2013, 07:52 PM - Edit history (1)

I thought had a legitimate point, and the "veterans" just seemed to try and crush them as if there's only room here for one train of thought.

[alcibiades_mystery]

41. Your fevered imagination

That you use the terms of melodrama and silly adolescent fantasy ("crush," "silence," and other nonsense), and the tired narrative of the romantic hero fighting authoritarianism is obvious to anybody with an ounce of maturity.

[BlueStreak]

55. In some cases, it seems that "veteran" is another way of saying a person

so dogmatic and settled in their ways that they outlast others who have moved on.

I don't see the name "Obama" anywhere in the site name or mission. It seems to me this site is about advancing the principles upon which the great Democratic Party was founded. And frankly, I don't see Obama very much in tune with those principles.

I suggest a good way to solve this is to create a special Obama_Cheerleading forum for those who just want to hear from one another about how awesome Obama is. That would allow the rest of us to carry on more thoughtful conversations in the forums that are supposed to be for that purpose. I promise I won't say anything critical of Obama in the Obama_Cheerleading forum and will occasionally participate in the cheerleading when it is justified. In the present case, it is not.

[demwing]

75. So a Cheer Leader forum will be pro Obama?

Have you ever visited the Religion forum?

[Buzz Clik]

9. More melodrama.

The threads criticizing the Prezident seem to exceed those supporting him.

No one has been silenced at DU for criticizing the president as far as I know.

I have been highly critical of the more ridiculous Obama criticisms -- calling him a neocon, right-centrist, sellout, etc -- but I never even hinted that the critics have no right to speak.

Fire away, but don't expect polite applause from everyone. Ain't happening.

And, for the record, I have been called a troll, asshole, ignorant, robot, non-thinking, etc for my trouble. It's the nature of posting here.

[alcibiades_mystery]

13. I was called an "infiltrator of the scumbag right" just yesterday...by somebody criticizing Obama!

Rush to silence indeed. An adolescent fantasy.

[davidpdx]

56. Gee all this time I thought you were a socialist

[sharp_stick]

10. Did you just copy and paste this

or think it up all by your lonesome?

Shit I've seen more of these "why can't I criticize Obama" screeds than actual fucking criticism over the last few weeks.

Add to that the fact that the vast majority of this so called criticism isn't even remotely critical, it's simply a strident whine pretending to be criticism from posters that don't have the faculties to come up with something that requires thought.

But what the hell, I for one am happy as can be that you're bitching and moaning about your right to levy what you think is criticism here on the good ol' anonymous internet because if you were actually in a room trying to negotiate a deal we'd all be well and truly fucked.

[politicaljunkie41910]

40. Bravo to you for criticizing me and accusing me of a cut and paste job as

if anything you just screeched represents an original thought.

[sharp_stick]

71. It came from the heart

and I meant every word of it.

Say hi to your friends for me.

[nenagh]

11. *****Ouch*****

Just out of curiosity, did anyone else hear a comment probably on CNN yesterday, that in fact some Democratic Senators? House Members? behind the scenes, disagreed with the $250,000 figure and wanted it raised?

Just before you totally blast Pres Obama for solely making that decision...

[JoePhilly]

14. Been true for a long time.

Dems representing some of the high cost of living areas, like NY and parts of CA have always wanted to raise it some.

The problem has also been that many Americans believe the GOP's claim that 250k is a normal amount for a small business to make. I suspect that they also see them selves being able to make that much at some point down the road. They're wrong, but that does seem to be what they believe.

When you move the # closer to 500k, the arguments about small businesses stops working.

So as far as concessions go, this one won't hurt any of the Dems who voted for it, and it might actually help a couple of them back home. And the Dems look like they are willing to compromise some, and the GOP looks like a bunch of nut jobs.

[Drunken Irishman]

24. They've been pushing to raise it for a year plus now...

I think some even wanted Obama to go up to 1 million a year.

[octoberlib]

36. I know one of them was Schumer.nt

[WinstonSmith4740]

85. Agreed.

I've never been able to figure out why people lay this solely at the President's feet. Have they not shed the shadow of Dubya doing what he damn well pleased regardless of law, opinion, or anything else? Besides, anyone who has ever negotiated anything knows that your initial offer can't be your bottom line. I'll bet they would have gone to easily $500,000 or even a million if pushed.

[JoePhilly]

12. Here's my view.

When you are critical, do so without freaking out. Don't start screaming about how "if Obama does X, I won't every vote Dem again" or similar nonsense. A post which is followed by others who are sure Obama is in fact about to do X.

If you are going to predict that Obama is going to cave on X ... be specific of what exactly he's going to do.

We spent the last 3 weeks with an endless stream of hair-on-fire ops in which many were absolutely sure Obama was going to cut SS and raise the Medicare age, and get nothing in return. Didn't happen.

Then, when it doesn't happen, the outrage shifts to not what actually happened but how the end point was reached.

This happens every few months around here. Same scary predictions. Numerous flaming threads. Obama is going to CAVE ... he doesn't care about the poor, or the middle class, or the elderly ... so on. Then the predicted evil thing Obama is going to do, doesn't happen.

The recent fiscal cliff example is probably the 5th or 6th time this pattern has repeated.

My prediction is that this same pattern will repeat again in Feb/March, and then again a few times after that during his second term.

[1StrongBlackMan]

19. Well Stated ...

This happens every few months around here. Same scary predictions. Numerous flaming threads. Obama is going to CAVE ... he doesn't care about the poor, or the middle class, or the elderly ... so on. Then the predicted evil thing Obama is going to do, doesn't happen.

But I would add: "This happens every few months around here. Same scary predictions. Numerous flaming threads. BY THE SAME POSTER THAT HAVE NEVER HAD/HAVE ANYTHING POSTIVE TO SAY ABOUT PRESIDENT OBAMA, or democrats, in general ..."

It gets tiresome.

[graham4anything]

53. +a zillion

Wish we could get rid of the republican amendment done in haste after FDR stopping a 3rd and 4th term
The founding fathers did not want that
Let the people decide

We have the best we will ever have in our lifetimes right now.

[Myrina]

15. Well said.

For what it's worth, I totally agree with you.

[Rosco T.]

16. There is a difference between informed, intelligent criticism and difference of opinon...

. and the mindless, hair-on-fire, "I didn't get my PONY so poo on you!", blathering that has been thrown about.

[davidpdx]

58. And we have seen our fair share of that lately

[Cha]

17. You poor thing.. blast away about what you're not happy with.

[Filibuster Harry]

18. Lawrence O'Donnell once stated that there are no such things as permanent tax cuts. So, I

think he should have stuck to $ 200,000; and $ 400,000 with the estate tax at $ 3.5 million @ 35%.
With a grand promise from VP Biden and McConnell on serious spending cuts.
That may have worked. I don't know.
I know this. The Rs would not want the tax rates up on everybody today including dividends at regular rates and the estate tax up to 55% at $ 1 million.

Just my opinion.

[boingboinh]

20. BANNED IN ... 3 ... 2 .... 1

That seems to be the pattern of DU if you state the facts that go against our own party.
Republican base do it...and so do Democratic base.

The benefit though is that it forms a "for the team" mentality which can help get things through congress. So i believe these sell-out democratic voters are doing so with the thinking that something is better than nothing even if it means getting nothing at all (as long as their is a D next to it).

The down side to this logic is that it leaves room for politicians to conitnue to be corrupt to the point that they stop masking it and just say aloud that they are not for the voter but who will line their pockets...And this is what has become of the republican voter base...and what we are seeing in our base.

This tends to be a sign that a third party will do quite well.

[alcibiades_mystery]

22. You've discerned this pattern in your less then three months here, yes?

Look on the bright side: you've been here three days longer than the OP. Lots of mid-October joins who have lots of "righteous" criticism of Democrats.

Keep "speaking truth to power," in your romantic imagination, anyway.

[uppityperson]

30. FWIW

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=293359&sub=trans

[alcibiades_mystery]

42. Interesting...what precipitated that?

[davidpdx]

59. Advocated for a 3rd party

Sorry was replying to AM

[Cha]

73. OMGOSH! Thanks, uppity! I've been

putting up with that crap since the campaign. Always had something snarky to say about Pres Obama supporters., like obsessively so.

Wonder who his previous incarnation was? Nice catch by whomever!

And, what will be the next incarnation?

[politicaljunkie41910]

45. You're just the type of person I was talking about. Just because you've got

20,000 posts to your credit doesn't mean that your opinion is worth more than the next guy who may have 10. Some of us have a job and don't have the time to spend making hundreds of posts a day. I've been following this website for many years as a means of determining which way the wind was blowing on the issues of the day and just one of many source of information on articles I might have otherwise missed. My day is usually very busy and I have very little uninterrupted time to spend on posts particularly on a board which is as fast moving as this one.

My purpose for the OP was to call attention to bullies such as yourself, who obviously like to hear themselves talk, as evidenced by your 20,000 plus posts. I was hoping that others with something to say would not be intimidated by reactionaries like yourself and discouraged from providing an alternate perspective even if it doesn't happen to agree with the 'veterans'.

[blue neen]

52. Wait. Let me get this straight. You're calling other posters "bullies?"

Priceless, I tell you.

[blue neen]

60. Hello?

We want to hear more about your purpose for even posting the OP in the first place.

<<"My purpose for the OP was to call attention to bullies such as yourself, who obviously like to hear themselves talk, as evidenced by your 20,000 plus posts.">>

Well, everybody on DU----"newbies", "veterans", cheerleaders", "reactionaries", "screechers", "cut and pasters", "capitulators"----knows that purposely posting to disrupt (and then admitting it) is really not what Democratic Underground is all about.

Have fun...gotta run...have to get to my job on time.

[alcibiades_mystery]

61. Ok, dude

You go ahead and live out your little adolescent fantasy.

Have fun.

[uppityperson]

64. I hope you realize the poster he replied to has been banned as a zombie.

Just thought you might like to know that.

[kestrel91316]

29. Support for a third party is a TOS violation. You're walking a VERY fine line.

[politicaljunkie41910]

46. I'm not supporting a third party. I also mentioned in a previous post that my husband

worked on the Obama campaign at my urging because I wasn't able to. That doesn't mean I have to agree with everything he says or does. Heck I don't agree with everything my husband says or does.

I did it because I believed that President Obama was the right person at the right time. But unlike the GOP, I'm not going to pledge blind allegiance to anyone no matter what. FTR, I've been critical of other Democrats myself when they exhibit an irrational Henny Penny, "the sky is falling" at the first sign of trouble which is why I've tried to avoid doing likewise. I think after 4 years, we've gotten to know something about this President, so I wouldn't call all criticism's premature.

[bama_blue_dot]

32. If this banning of the President's critics

happens whenever any of them speak their mind, then why haven't you been banned yet?

[intaglio]

25. There's a title at the top of the page

It says "Democratic Underground"

It is notable that it doesn't say "Left-wing Underground" or "Third Party Underground." It also doesn't say "Conspiracy Central" or "The President is a Right-wing Puppet," which seems to be the view of some nominally Democratic posters.

You have as a President a member of the Democratic Party. Like it or not that President has to negotiate with a gerrymandered House and a Senate where a minority can block many bills by filibuster.

None of this renders the President immune to sensible criticism but it does make the mindless hatred and venom spouted by certain posters worthy of contempt. It also leaves me believing that some of these posters are actually intending to foment discord in the ranks of Democratic voters.

[kestrel91316]

27. SOME of us on the left are sick unto death of the endless attacks on Obama

from some folks here on DU who claim to be Dems.

It would behoove you to support Democrats rather than spewing the RW talking points like a good boy. And our president IS a Democrat.

[LiberalElite]

68. Anyone here preparing a loyalty oath?

[liberal N proud]

28. lol

Hardly, if you have not seen unchallenged criticism of Obama, you have not been here very long.

The criticism just needs to be valid and not an attack. It also helps if you are a long standing member who can carry a civilized debate.

[politicaljunkie41910]

48. So your 42,000 posts entitles you to determine whose point is valid and whose is not.

and who is capable of carrying on a civilized debate and who is not. Oh Boy!!

[liberal N proud]

69. The collective of DU makes that determination.

The group as a whole has done a pretty good job of vetting entries and keeping the integrity of information shared relatively high. At a time if you posted anything that was not established through solid evidence and backed up would have been soundly renounced.

Presently, an influx of discenters has made that a bit more challenging but still we do a fair job of differentiating sincere criticism from the perpetual dissenters.

Those who have not been here for a long time could easily have difficulty recognizing it.

[11 Bravo]

31. Well, in my 11 years here, I've not found that to be the case; but perhaps your almost ...

three months on the board provides you with a broader perspective.

[alcibiades_mystery]

43. ROFL

Oh, you're just one of the "veterans" trying to "silence."

[BigDemVoter]

34. I support President Obama. But I have no problem criticizing him when I feel he's fucked up.

I refrained from any criticism during the election season, but he's fair game now.

[pnwmom]

38. Isn't this a thread that belongs in Meta-discussion?

[NYC Liberal]

39. LOL. Quite the opposite. This place should be renamed Anti-Obama Underground.

Oh and the "$4 trillion to the debt" is a right-wing GOP talking point, and it is FALSE.

[octoberlib]

44. I think some people react emotionally to policies that will affect them directly, out of fear.

Last edited Wed Jan 2, 2013, 07:58 PM - Edit history (1)

I understand that. But name calling isn't productive (Obama is a wolf in sheep's clothing etc). What IS productive is writing or calling your congressmen or women , the WH and working to get more Dems elected to the House in 2014.

[dembat]

47. How to Govern

This is called governing, take a governing class sometime and you will be shocked. Life is a compromise, if you don't compromise then you will be a sick and bitter person.

[politicaljunkie41910]

50. You don't know what my background is and whether or not I need a class in governing.

This is not a lecture, it's a discussion board and everyone here's got an opinion. Don't be so condescending.

[Arkana]

49. Yes. Get out.

GOOBLE GOBBLE GOOBLE GOBBLE WE WILL MAKE YOU ONE OF US

[RBInMaine]

51. Occasional criticism is one thing. Endless TeaLeftistNonRealityPurityism Obama Bashing is another.

[orpupilofnature57]

54. +1000 !!!!

[LuvLoogie]

62. Try and get some perspective.

The Speaker of the House just told the Senate Majority Leader to go fuck himself.

[xiamiam]

63. Just have to wait it out. Everything changes including DU. You wont win this argument

It is important however that you continue thinking for yourself. If you've got a feeling in your gut, you're probably right. Doesn't matter what anonymous person with a screen name you recognize and 10 years or 30k posts has to say. Do your own research. I've seen DU change drastically during the last 8 years. I think it was much more interesting and liberal and cohesive before. I liked it better and was addicted. I freed up a lot of the time I spent here and peruse the internet. Lots of extraordinary posters have died or left, and some of them were smart and funny and would have eviscerated anyone who tried to quiet them. Do your own research. Its all readily available. Draw your own conclusions. If you are young, you will be able to sort thru the information quickly. If you are older, a combination of wisdom and common sense will guide you. Getting posters to agree with you on a website is a bit of an uphill battle. Arm yourself with information and then go where your talent is needed to help.

[forestpath]

65. K&R I will criticize any president who puts our safety net on the table.

And I don't give a rat's ass if anybody gets their panties in a wad over it.

[LiberalElite]

67. I'm with you eom

[1StrongBlackMan]

72. It appears you didn't get the ...

pile on support you expected ... now you are reduced to snarky defensive half posts.

What a shame.

[lunatica]

76. I criticize President Obama at times, but I never trash him

There's a difference, and there's a group on DU who you can lay bets on and win who always trash him.

Which one are you? Do you believe he has the power to do all that some people think he should do? Or do you realize our government is made up of three branches on purpose, just so he doesn't get all that power?

[Recursion]

77. Complaints about Obama are fine. Serial whining about DU is not.

What really angers a lot of posters is that DU as a whole doesn't read their "wisdom" with rapt attention, see the error of their ways, and agree with them.

[vi5]

78. I agree 100%

But the cheerleading "you just wanted a pony/don't know about government/are a firebagger/are an emo prog/why don't you stand with our president" types are already making their voices known on this thread so......

My favorite part of all this is that these same folks go from "THANK YOU PRESIDENT OBAMA FOR YOUR WISE BARGAINING, CALM AND REASONED GOVERNANCE, AND FOR SAVING US FROM THE REPUBLICAN BRINKSMANSHIP!!!" to in the space of a few other posts "WELL OBAMA ISN'T A KING! WHY DON"T YOU BLAME CONGRESS/OTHER DEMS/ETC!!!!!!"

It's a replay of the Bush years all over again.

Is it good? Then Obama deserves the credit!!!!

Is it bad? Well don't blame Obama. He's not a king and isn't in charge of everything!!!

[dballance]

79. Okay Everyone - Look at the OP Poster's Profile. It Reeks of RW Troll

he/she joined DU on October 19, 2012. The majority of posts are in Politics 2012. Stop giving this person the time of day.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

81. Oct. 19th and 20th 2012

must have been a record day for new DU membership registration. Every time I glance at a profile of an OP
that's caught my attention, Oct. 19th and 20th are often the date of registration.
Funny how that works. Certainly doesn't apply in all cases, just one of those coincidences.

[NHDEMFORLIFE]

82. BINGO!

Kick his/her can down the road!

[bunnies]

80. This is a joke right?

FFS. I cant get 5 threads into DU without hitting a post railing on the President. Get a grip. Its a discussion board. A DEMOCRATIC one at that.

[union_maid]

83. +1

It seems as though you can't say anything positive about the president or anything he does in GD or Politics without being swamped with posts that amount to attacks on him. Hardly a place where there is no criticism of him.

[Norrin Radd]

84. kr

[yellowcanine]

86. No and apparently not a Troll free zone either.

[Kaleva]

87. Locking

After a discussion the Host's forum, the view is that this is a Meta OP and outside the SOP of Politics 2013. Please re-post in Meta.