General Discussion

patrice

(47,992 posts)

134. You know, it really is interesting that you seem to think that's a non-serious question. It would

Sun Jun 30, 2013, 01:10 AM

Jun 2013

help you case well if you could demonstrate that you are not willing to damage other social and economic justice issues in order to have your way.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

160 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

paulbots. racists. Obama haters. oh my. [View all] cali Jun 2013 OP

They must be demonized so Obama continues to appear spotless. MotherPetrie Jun 2013 #1

too late. nt Deep13 Jun 2013 #21

That is the most irrational and bizarre aspect of the whole mess. bvar22 Jun 2013 #22

Because they know that, no matter what... awoke_in_2003 Jun 2013 #31

They who? Do you believe everything you see on the internet? nt patrice Jun 2013 #105

I don't give a damn who started it or reported it. I care that its happening and roguevalley Jun 2013 #141

Thank You! bvar22 Jun 2013 #145

back at you, darling. Your avatar says it all :D roguevalley Jun 2013 #150

. Iggo Jun 2013 #155

No, they don't know that anymore. See the big coalition of Unions and Liberal groups that formed sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #138

Hope you're right, Sabrina. nt awoke_in_2003 Jun 2013 #146

It makes sense for some to drive people away from the party... Blanks Jun 2013 #151

Who says all of them are Democrats out to help Democrats? I bet you don't believe everything you see patrice Jun 2013 #104

+1 n2doc Jun 2013 #26

That is exactly it. Arctic Dave Jun 2013 #77

They must also be canonized so that Obama continues to appear corrupt. nt patrice Jun 2013 #106

Nobody has to be canonized for that. MotherPetrie Jun 2013 #116

Maybe with a howitzer? xtraxritical Jun 2013 #159

"the majority of people"? See, a lot of us have expressed concern about the NSA without trashing KittyWampus Jun 2013 #2

bwahahahaha. YOU? bull. and how about responding to this post, dear? cali Jun 2013 #7

I know you are, but what am I. Meanwhile I'm going back to cocktail hour. KittyWampus Jun 2013 #9

will you ever respond? No, you'll never respond. cali Jun 2013 #16

Run away? You mean like Snowden? Galraedia Jun 2013 #19

WOW! KittyWampus Jun 2013 #46

care to respond to my proof that your bullshit accusations in the other cali Jun 2013 #59

How about disagreeing respectfully? longship Jun 2013 #29

This... Skidmore Jun 2013 #68

Thank you. I appreciate your response. nt longship Jun 2013 #70

Sometimes I agree with you, and sometimes I don't. But every time I see you address someone ... 11 Bravo Jun 2013 #32

Agreed. It's very condescending. There's a way to disagree without disrespect or condescension. Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #114

This message was self-deleted by its author AtomicKitten Jun 2013 #152

Ah, yes -- your posts are the very quintessence of objectivity . . . markpkessinger Jun 2013 #49

Because it's easier to dismiss legitimate arguments by associating them with bad people n/t Azathoth Jun 2013 #3

There's your answer. Next question, please. cheapdate Jun 2013 #33

BOTH sides are doing that. nt patrice Jun 2013 #113

... sibelian Jun 2013 #142

This message was self-deleted by its author Maedhros Jun 2013 #153

Meta Queen alcibiades_mystery Jun 2013 #4

went to the lake for an hour this morning cali Jun 2013 #8

Awesome alcibiades_mystery Jun 2013 #11

Because to do otherwise is to unravel their entire belief system. The Link Jun 2013 #5

"I know you are, but what am I". KittyWampus Jun 2013 #6

lol. nothing like a little CogDis. cali Jun 2013 #13

My Ex-Wife used to use those exact words in disgreements. Those EXACT words. cherokeeprogressive Jun 2013 #23

LOL! There's a REASON I wrote that childish crap� it's entirely appropriate with Cali's jibberjabber KittyWampus Jun 2013 #126

Drink faster. Fuddnik Jun 2013 #30

why is it so difficult to just add to the already 23 existing posts you made on this particular subj Whisp Jun 2013 #10

Because this isn't being treated like something ELSE we have to fix. The second this shit came uponit7771 Jun 2013 #12

Both sides call names treestar Jun 2013 #14

u criticizing moderate republican policies again lol nt msongs Jun 2013 #15

I believe a few of the Third Wayers here signed up in Paulbotville so they could make a post Zorra Jun 2013 #17

well at least you are consistent. nt sheshe2 Jun 2013 #18

They're here, pretending to be uber liberals...nt SidDithers Jun 2013 #20

Indeed flamingdem Jun 2013 #24

hee hee Whisp Jun 2013 #37

Pretending like Greenwald right Sid? whatchamacallit Jun 2013 #50

Greenwald's a DUer?... SidDithers Jun 2013 #58

Possibly, but my point is whatchamacallit Jun 2013 #65

True Liberals wouldn't betray the poor the way this bunch is getting ready to in the name of some patrice Jun 2013 #56

OMFG this is hilarious after what people who say anything good DevonRex Jun 2013 #25

Obamabots, Obama Worshippers, irrational/illogical, or what Jane Hampser calls Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #117

Look down thread. My post about GROUPIES has a nice DevonRex Jun 2013 #120

The most insane was when they called Catherina racist. backscatter712 Jun 2013 #27

Why is it so difficult to MannyGoldstein Jun 2013 #28

It doesn't toe the party line. obxhead Jun 2013 #34

I believe that Just Saying Jun 2013 #35

Why is it so difficult to believe that many consider Snowden at least question everything Jun 2013 #36

It's not. LWolf Jun 2013 #38

GhostNet Whisp Jun 2013 #40

I wish I had timed how quickly absolutely sickenly sweet hero/saint/martyr pieces started showing patrice Jun 2013 #71

I have no difficulty believing that. And that's fine. But it's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned cali Jun 2013 #41

That's not hard to believe-- it's just completely beside the point. Marr Jun 2013 #44

Regarding smear campaigns: Do you think some leakers could have an interest in leaking in order to patrice Jun 2013 #87

Very well put. Thank you. truebluegreen Jun 2013 #109

Question Everything obxhead Jun 2013 #61

Because a coward would have kept his mouth shut and continued to collect a fat paycheck. HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #127

Oh, don't worry-- in a few years we'll all just be misogynists. Marr Jun 2013 #39

Because there is no coherent strategic issue agenda that makes it possible for all of the DU-ers who patrice Jun 2013 #42

Because there is NO SUCH THING jazzimov Jun 2013 #43

+++1 and if you and I are wrong and there actually is, it's PRIVATE EXPONENTIALLY GROWING patrice Jun 2013 #48

Who would've thought? raindaddy Jun 2013 #45

And in light of a Derivative Crash to the tune of something between $100-$700 trillion US dollars + patrice Jun 2013 #52

No doubt he was handed the aftermath of a failed Bush presidency. raindaddy Jun 2013 #67

You appear to be pretty naive about the whole context of political and economic details, most of patrice Jun 2013 #73

Translation.. raindaddy Jun 2013 #80

I don't accept it as the either : or proposition that you sketch. More than 2 things are possible, patrice Jun 2013 #90

We'll never change anything without first being honest with ourselves. raindaddy Jun 2013 #95

Part of that honesty will consist of how the situation HAS prevented that and also how we have patrice Jun 2013 #97

I'm with you, raindaddy. Enthusiast Jun 2013 #147

This is it. kitt6 Jun 2013 #47

Because of stuff like this Progressive dog Jun 2013 #51

Right on! & why, Why WHY do so few people understand that when you remove your support from a patrice Jun 2013 #53

Patrice...what do you think about Penny Pritzger? KoKo Jun 2013 #148

I will read up and speak up here and elsewhere. Thanks for the catch, KoKo. & One thing I have patrice Jun 2013 #149

I'll proudly express concern about the exponentially growing national security state. Sticks/Stones. AAO Jun 2013 #54

What other issues are you willing to sacrifice, & in what order, for success against the EGNSS? patrice Jun 2013 #60

snark AAO Jun 2013 #107

You know, it really is interesting that you seem to think that's a non-serious question. It would patrice Jun 2013 #134

Your question was silly. AAO Jul 2013 #160

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Working on that list, are yuh? ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ I'll check back later. nt patrice Jun 2013 #75

snark AAO Jun 2013 #108

Answer? patrice Jun 2013 #111

I'm going to go pick up my laptop at the mall shortly railsback Jun 2013 #55

Because I don't log out of gmail I just got an ad served to me on DU flamingdem Jun 2013 #57

Are you similarly concerned over "Obamabot" or "Worshipper" or "Apologist" labels? CakeGrrl Jun 2013 #62

+ authoritarian flamingdem Jun 2013 #63

What do you want to bet that "reactionary" NEVER trends? nt patrice Jun 2013 #66

Maybe "left reactionary" lol nt flamingdem Jun 2013 #69

I prefer reactionary screamers. It's not a slur. It's literally what they're doing. KittyWampus Jun 2013 #129

Yeah, seeing the usual suspects using that on a lot lately...nt SidDithers Jun 2013 #72

What? Surely you jest! Propaganda ONLY comes from Big Brother, not from the Right wing! nt patrice Jun 2013 #74

It always seems to simple to say when Left goes far enough it connects to the Right flamingdem Jun 2013 #84

I think the domain where they meet is Abstraction. I have hopes these days based upon the patrice Jun 2013 #93

Sho' nuff! I've always said that I see little difference between the purists on the Left Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #119

Authoritarian = opposite of Libertarian flamingdem Jun 2013 #83

That's the theory anyway. It's not the way that things actually work out between them though. patrice Jun 2013 #100

Well maybe sometimes it's straight forward flamingdem Jun 2013 #102

Yup, "authoritarian" has replaced the term "third way" as the insult du jour FSogol Jun 2013 #143

Apologist is fair, the other are not. morningfog Jun 2013 #81

You are one who dogs people implying they are evil apologists flamingdem Jun 2013 #85

I find the disingenuousness of posters defending morningfog Jun 2013 #86

That's an over the top attitude for a discussion forum flamingdem Jun 2013 #88

Lol. I should have checked with you on the bounds. morningfog Jun 2013 #91

I'm not even sure why anyone is even entertaining this OP Number23 Jun 2013 #82

She's not nearly the only one. There are others. Then they play the victim when called out... Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #121

I know. But DU is the only place these people feel they have some power Number23 Jun 2013 #124

And while I invite criticism that is expressed through sound, reasonable arguments, Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #128

That answers MY question CakeGrrl Jun 2013 #122

Don't forget 'GROUPIES!' They love that one. DevonRex Jun 2013 #112

Why does MSNBC give us a weekend of jail? Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2013 #64

Well, for starters, since most posts criticizing Obama on the NSA issue are irrational, I guess most stevenleser Jun 2013 #76

you mean, in your ever so exhalted opinion? cali Jun 2013 #78

You've already read my dissertation on this and couldn't refute any of it. I guess that is why you stevenleser Jun 2013 #79

You should run for office, Steve. Major Hogwash Jun 2013 #89

Well, I think name calling here of any kind is NG. longship Jun 2013 #92

Am I mistaken? I thought this thread was a little better than so many others . . . patrice Jun 2013 #96

Do you mean other than the fact that the OP was a name calling call out? longship Jun 2013 #98

I took OP as REFERRING to name calling. I like the fact that we are talking about how we talk about patrice Jun 2013 #99

Sorry. But there's a lot of surly call outs through out the thread. longship Jun 2013 #101

I'm generally for having it all out in the open (with the exception of references to violence). What patrice Jun 2013 #110

I agree, mostly. longship Jun 2013 #118

I think it's unfortunate that there are many DU-ers who wouldn't be as far in whatever patrice Jun 2013 #131

BINGO! longship Jun 2013 #132

What do you think about the juries? Do you think they're helping or hurting the current climate? Number23 Jun 2013 #115

Okay, with some reservations. longship Jun 2013 #123

Well said. I personally believe that the jury system is a colossal failure. Number23 Jun 2013 #125

Worse, some DUers are doing what can only be called stalking. longship Jun 2013 #130

I've seen that exact same behavior as the stalking you mentioned Number23 Jun 2013 #137

Of Course, We Should Not be Impugning Each Others' Motives On the Road Jun 2013 #94

Well said. It's not just DU people, I heard a civil rights lawyer speak on this flamingdem Jun 2013 #103

+1 great post treestar Jun 2013 #158

The authoritarian apologists have nothing. They resort to attempts at bullying by name calling. rhett o rick Jun 2013 #133

LOL Bobbie Jo Jun 2013 #135

. ProSense Jun 2013 #136

Because if they couldn't go to the ad hom, they'd have to argue the policy, and the policy HiPointDem Jun 2013 #139

thank you ,,, slightly off subject but -- Douglas Carpenter Jun 2013 #140

Paul Revere heads off to Hong Kong flamingdem Jun 2013 #157

because we are supposed to be cheerleading for "the team" no matter what they do boilerbabe Jun 2013 #144

Don't let the team down! QC Jun 2013 #154

To give the Republicans comfort in seeing us squabble. Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2013 #156