General Discussion

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

115. Yes, that is so true. Their purpose seems to be to prevent any kind of discussion regarding

Fri Feb 14, 2014, 04:32 AM

Feb 2014

issues their favorite politicians are on the wrong side of. It's very difficult to get them to state where they stand on issues as if they are waiting to be told where they stand.

DU used to be a great place for intelligent discussions, that was what attracted me to it. But if I found it today, I would be so turned off by all the support for everything we used to be against and it's getting worse, excuses for Bush policies, like spying on the American people eg, I would think I had stumbled on a right wing forum. Many people have moved on and sometimes I wonder why I am still here. Seems all we do anymore is try to defend Liberal ideals and I did that long ago before I found DU, on right wing dominated forums. I never thought I'd be doing it here.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

118 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

the consistent effort by conservative, corporate dems to try and tarnish progressive [View all] cali Feb 2014 OP

Even more ProSense Feb 2014 #1

Absolutely! Thanks for saying it, Cali! markpkessinger Feb 2014 #2

it's embarrassingly obvious. so thinly veiled. cali Feb 2014 #5

K&R! I'm glad it is so obvious. Enthusiast Feb 2014 #47

It's obvious. Because it's clear that policies and issues are never what they talk about. sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #82

Thank you, Sabrina. Enthusiast Feb 2014 #88

I agree. However, they may be changing minds, inadvertently. The more we see of them sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #89

Excellent point. One I should have considered......nt Enthusiast Feb 2014 #90

What's more, you can't even get them to state any policy position. All they do is link to barages of grahamhgreen Feb 2014 #105

Yes, that is so true. Their purpose seems to be to prevent any kind of discussion regarding sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #115

I will not cede this ground. Funny how they will not engage when you ask their position. My guess is grahamhgreen Feb 2014 #118

You have also missed the point of those posts. Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #95

K&R. JDPriestly Feb 2014 #3

+1000 Agony Feb 2014 #12

you nail it, JD. cali Feb 2014 #13

Seriously, ProSense Feb 2014 #15

This will make very little difference in the lives of working people and families. JDPriestly Feb 2014 #29

Unfrigginbelievable ProSense Feb 2014 #30

When Obama came into office, he faced an economic crisis due to the excessive JDPriestly Feb 2014 #73

Wrong, ProSense Feb 2014 #74

The underlying purpose and theory was the same. The amount changed. JDPriestly Feb 2014 #76

We still need to make the too-big-too-fail banks smaller and spread the risk in the banking JDPriestly Feb 2014 #83

The bank bailout, by comparison, was 16 to 20 TRILLION!!!! Look, are you for or against breaking up grahamhgreen Feb 2014 #109

Was anyone ever arrested and charged for the corruption in the mortgage business? We were sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #117

Your post needs more blue links. progressoid Feb 2014 #77

Do you know why people hate "blue links"? ProSense Feb 2014 #79

I thought it was the obfuscation and diversion. progressoid Feb 2014 #84

Nope, people who have backup for their points don't hate "blue links" nt stevenleser Feb 2014 #100

Probably because they usually Union Scribe Feb 2014 #86

This. +1 Ed Suspicious Feb 2014 #104

Straw man. No one claimed that Obama hates Warren, geesh. People post blue links because they grahamhgreen Feb 2014 #110

Because obfuscation sucks AgingAmerican Feb 2014 #113

Running a little thin on the ROFL smilies, too. reusrename Feb 2014 #87

More ProSense Feb 2014 #16

Exceptions to the rule and related only to labor issues. JDPriestly Feb 2014 #22

WTH? ProSense Feb 2014 #25

And yet, as Elizabeth Warren has pointed out, the Justice Department as refused to bring JDPriestly Feb 2014 #34

That's fine ProSense Feb 2014 #41

Worshipers is accurate. JDPriestly Feb 2014 #44

Wait ProSense Feb 2014 #48

But I also support Obama's agenda on economic inequality. JDPriestly Feb 2014 #54

President Obama ProSense Feb 2014 #59

Nail on head +1000 Armstead Feb 2014 #23

Hit nerve? pocoloco Feb 2014 #32

Well said. zeemike Feb 2014 #40

Honestly, why can't we have people like you running the country? Enthusiast Feb 2014 #50

Your analysis is spot on in this thread. closeupready Feb 2014 #69

That gets you a <3 grahamhgreen Feb 2014 #106

....^ 840high Feb 2014 #112

Every post is a worthy read. Kurovski Feb 2014 #114

K&R bobduca Feb 2014 #116

du rec. xchrom Feb 2014 #4

Bush league psych-out stuff TransitJohn Feb 2014 #6

lol perfect. cali Feb 2014 #9

Odd how the contented are determined to try and spread discontent Fumesucker Feb 2014 #7

And furthermore, that's all they have, appeals to emotion and suggestive innuendoes. nt bemildred Feb 2014 #8

it's that it's so obvious. they should work harder at it. cali Feb 2014 #10

Well, I feel sorry for them really. bemildred Feb 2014 #11

They're scared of a populist movement. The corporatists would hate to see the People have a voice. Scuba Feb 2014 #14

+1 daleanime Feb 2014 #18

Bingo! Enthusiast Feb 2014 #56

Maybe one day we'll have a President of which the David Sirota types approve. TheMathieu Feb 2014 #17

You just sorta reinforced the OP Armstead Feb 2014 #26

Or one who doesn't ignore and disapprove of the very people who elected him/her. sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #93

Funny how you consistently attack liberals and liberalism Scootaloo Feb 2014 #103

That road goes both ways.. lanes fully operational Peacetrain Feb 2014 #19

That's what a lot of the "carping" is about Armstead Feb 2014 #27

As I said above, we shall see whether the carping is just way out there or whether those who JDPriestly Feb 2014 #37

Why do you think there is so much continual "carping" from the right? Enthusiast Feb 2014 #60

. jsr Feb 2014 #20

It is "try to" treestar Feb 2014 #21

lol. what nonsense. who needs to use warren or bernie. it's in response to the coporate cali Feb 2014 #24

Oh gosh you've found us out...Busted! Armstead Feb 2014 #28

Compromise is only bad when President Obama does it. JoePhilly Feb 2014 #31

You distort the meaning of compromise Armstead Feb 2014 #33

Why use a hypothetical when you should have no problem finding JoePhilly Feb 2014 #35

The ACA is an example of wrong direction rather than compromise Armstead Feb 2014 #42

The PO was never going to pass. And its easy to prove. JoePhilly Feb 2014 #57

I haven't got time to go into the intricacies of that all over again but... Armstead Feb 2014 #62

Lieberman votes NO on your proposal. JoePhilly Feb 2014 #64

If one senator has the power to overcome the will of the Prez and majority of Denms in Congress.. Armstead Feb 2014 #67

+1 warrant46 Feb 2014 #61

Precisely. Enthusiast Feb 2014 #65

Well that is a good example of what is called compromise. zeemike Feb 2014 #49

And DADT itself was a 'compromise' made in 1993. So ten years later, as a compromise Bluenorthwest Feb 2014 #72

So you would have prefered the alternative to DADT? Egnever Feb 2014 #107

Indeed. joshcryer Feb 2014 #81

It was Woodrow Wilson who crushed the Socialist Party. Laelth Feb 2014 #36

You characterize raising situations where these folks agreed with Obama as "tarnishing" them stevenleser Feb 2014 #38

The message that a certain category of peope are stupid and naive is what is bothersome Armstead Feb 2014 #51

That is not the subject of the OP which is what I am addressing. The OP characterizes stevenleser Feb 2014 #53

I don't always agree with the ways cali expresses things, but Armstead Feb 2014 #58

If there are no superheroes then there are no supervillains either Fumesucker Feb 2014 #92

Well said Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #96

well, that's not the only por sense of reality and history they show stupidicus Feb 2014 #39

Good points Armstead Feb 2014 #52

Well said. eom Agony Feb 2014 #68

It's a two-way street. Quotes and votes matter. Nobody is perfect. We can live with that. pampango Feb 2014 #43

I will never, ever fucking understand Bobbie Jo Feb 2014 #45

Good Point supercats Feb 2014 #46

This is true, but the converse is just as prevalent and just as lame. Donald Ian Rankin Feb 2014 #55

It is hardly the case that I am the only one here sadoldgirl Feb 2014 #63

ooh, Kerry voted for the IWR, who cares right? ucrdem Feb 2014 #66

uh, discernment. voting for that was a big deal. bernie voted against it cali Feb 2014 #70

I'm not talking about Bernie. nt ucrdem Feb 2014 #71

It smacks of desperation. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #75

Totally! Rex Feb 2014 #85

what's laughable is Whisp Feb 2014 #78

"But Obama is very throw awayable and disposable, APPARENTLY." djean111 Feb 2014 #80

You're is a sad commentary on how you view the world. Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #97

How he is, as a person, is non-political. djean111 Feb 2014 #98

Unrec brooklynite Feb 2014 #91

You've missed the point. Obama isn't as "corporatist" Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #94

They are being brought up to depress the vote Fumesucker Feb 2014 #99

They're called Right-lighters. n/t Scootaloo Feb 2014 #101

Republican Democrats, I've heard as well. grahamhgreen Feb 2014 #111

Glad this got kicked again. woo me with science Feb 2014 #102

K & R L0oniX Feb 2014 #108