General Discussion

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)

93. Why the need to get personal whenever you don't agree with someone on politics? Why the insults?

Sat Mar 22, 2014, 12:25 AM

Mar 2014

WMWS is one of the most respected people on DU, I have NEVER seen him name call or personally insult anyone. He makes his points and sticks to the issues. Disagreeing with someone strongly is fine, but these personal insults and name calling are making DU a place that people don't want to come to anymore.

Politics is tough. If it gets people to the point the they have lash out at those they don't agree with, maybe it isn't for them.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

125 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Political discussion in a vibrant, healthy democracy will include anger at politicians, [View all] woo me with science Mar 2014 OP

Without critisism, how can policy be improved? canoeist52 Mar 2014 #1

+100000 It can't. woo me with science Mar 2014 #6

Yeah, ProSense Mar 2014 #2

Sounds like Obama's a salesman for piece-of-shit used cars, OnyxCollie Mar 2014 #9

That was my take on it... malokvale77 Mar 2014 #77

Yes, all true up to a point. cheapdate Mar 2014 #3

So? woo me with science Mar 2014 #13

So the shitstorm that followed and continues on spin-off threads cheapdate Mar 2014 #15

Again....so what? woo me with science Mar 2014 #32

No, Will's expression of anger doesn't warrant an apology cheapdate Mar 2014 #45

+1000 eom. 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2014 #104

What a bunch of crock Sheepshank Mar 2014 #73

Why the need to get personal whenever you don't agree with someone on politics? Why the insults? sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #93

how noble you want to try and be.....while you are doing exactly what you are railing against lol Sheepshank Mar 2014 #112

Actually I was thinking about your OP in which you railed against name calling and insults, which I sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #113

Actually, you misread that op Sheepshank Mar 2014 #123

So you're for what you were railing against? You are FOR name-calling and insults on a political sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #124

*gawd* why don't you try and read without preconceived judgements? Sheepshank Mar 2014 #125

There's a term for that . . . brush Mar 2014 #105

Are you referring to anyone in particular? sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #115

Nothing to do with "psycho" nt brush Mar 2014 #116

This is completely supported by your "understanding" ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2014 #102

It was MUCH more than that....your effort to white wash it is Epic Fail. VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #4

Thing is this, I suspect the whiners would do miserably at the oval office job Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #5

I use a cancer analogy. woo me with science Mar 2014 #17

Hear! Hear! ReRe Mar 2014 #24

I suspect JEB Mar 2014 #26

You're using a cancer analogy? I see it as you leaving the tumor behind to continue to grow. Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #56

He was talking specifically about the Democratic Party Maedhros Mar 2014 #78

To look at your own as a tumor, and ignore the enemy, requires a pathological sort of thinking nt Sarah Ibarruri Mar 2014 #85

+1, excellent analogy. Marr Mar 2014 #65

Thank you for those links. Sickening to see but explains a whole lot of what is going on. sabrina 1 Mar 2014 #68

+100 nt Mojorabbit Mar 2014 #101

HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Mar 2014 #7

Did you miss the Bush years? nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #22

you are right, nadin grasswire Mar 2014 #28

And we used to make fun of it nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #30

it used to make me feel ill.. grasswire Mar 2014 #31

Many of the so called worshipers . . . brush Mar 2014 #109

It's easier to dismiss an argument that you don't agree with cheapdate Mar 2014 #49

It is also a fact the US has always had these cults nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #62

Yes, cults are a real thing. cheapdate Mar 2014 #89

Alas we have evidence of it existing here nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #91

yes, but one can criticize without sounds like an asshat teabagger. aikoaiko Mar 2014 #8

recommended crimeariver1225 Mar 2014 #10

On the other hand, how can we express distaste for the lack of civility in politics these day... Liberal Veteran Mar 2014 #11

That's not what the objections are about. jeff47 Mar 2014 #12

That's not what I got. He blamed Pres Obama for not fighting for a better rhett o rick Mar 2014 #18

I disagree with you mythology Mar 2014 #19

It's not what he said or how he said it that counts.... ReRe Mar 2014 #27

Except he nearly made the situation worse. jeff47 Mar 2014 #57

And you pulled that from where, exactly? jeff47 Mar 2014 #54

"And you pulled that from where, exactly?" Really? You had to say that? rhett o rick Mar 2014 #74

Yep. Are we going to the fainting couch now? jeff47 Mar 2014 #75

And you just continue to be rude. rhett o rick Mar 2014 #76

And he left out ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2014 #106

Yes, I see your point. Once again the buck doesnt stop with the President. nm rhett o rick Mar 2014 #108

The buck has never stopped with any President, expect this President. eom. 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2014 #110

Maybe we differ on what "the buck stops here" really means. nm rhett o rick Mar 2014 #122

Politicians are grown up boys and girls with a thick skin. pa28 Mar 2014 #14

Well, ProSense Mar 2014 #16

Scapegoating for everything that goes wrong treestar Mar 2014 #40

Irrelevant. woo me with science Mar 2014 #42

and blaming the POTUS for our personal problems treestar Mar 2014 #43

The speed towards an authoritarian state nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #20

I think you may be right. polichick Mar 2014 #71

What? You are saying you are in a vibrant and healthy democracy? Whisp Mar 2014 #21

No, we're certainly not, woo me with science Mar 2014 #35

But your title said we are. You just did a 2 + 2 = 5. n/t Whisp Mar 2014 #37

... woo me with science Mar 2014 #39

well we do have a lot of anger toward a (particular) politician, Obama... Whisp Mar 2014 #41

. ProSense Mar 2014 #48

Claim it, Whisp. 'Cause you just won it Number23 Mar 2014 #86

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Mar 2014 #23

Has the White House apologized to us for calling our ideas "fucking retarded"? MannyGoldstein Mar 2014 #25

Tsk, tsk, Manny. No White House official EVER called liberals fucking retarded. jsr Mar 2014 #33

Such as you "truncating" the objections? jeff47 Mar 2014 #58

Rahm sort of apologized....link. madfloridian Mar 2014 #34

whine, whine, whine treestar Mar 2014 #38

Obama hasn't apologized for winning the election either. n/t ProSense Mar 2014 #44

He didn't "win" - WE elected him. That's why we expect him to work for us... polichick Mar 2014 #107

We includes some 48 million people treestar Mar 2014 #114

That's a tired argument. Putting corporations before people and planet... polichick Mar 2014 #117

But why is Congress going to care what you think is OK? treestar Mar 2014 #118

Most members of Congress don't care what voters want... polichick Mar 2014 #119

They do too, very few of them don't want to be re-elected. treestar Mar 2014 #120

Congressional job approval is at 15% for a reason... polichick Mar 2014 #121

Too bad DU locks threads that feature clips from "unacceptable" people. reformist2 Mar 2014 #29

It will also include people who push back at that if they think it is unjustified treestar Mar 2014 #36

Breaking news progree Mar 2014 #46

I have no idea what your point is... TreasonousBastard Mar 2014 #47

Thanks for the textbook example nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #70

This post deserves hundreds of recommendations! Enthusiast Mar 2014 #50

K&R Scuba Mar 2014 #51

So, Mr. Pitt's wife is a personal pony, people whose replies often consist of djean111 Mar 2014 #52

So much to like in this post, woo me with science Mar 2014 #61

will's op led to so much new info for me questionseverything Mar 2014 #83

Please post your findings as an OP! Lars39 Mar 2014 #90

Very illuminating post. Autumn Mar 2014 #95

I honestly don`t get it. democrank Mar 2014 #53

Vitriol and Anger Are Not Synonyms (eom) ProfessorGAC Mar 2014 #55

DURec leftstreet Mar 2014 #59

Anger is okay if it is based on facts theboss Mar 2014 #60

Anger is okay. woo me with science Mar 2014 #63

I don't think mindless anger is acceptable theboss Mar 2014 #64

Yes, I know. woo me with science Mar 2014 #66

You get to decide that? nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #69

Facts are facts theboss Mar 2014 #79

Ah the condescension drips nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #80

I would like to see single payer too theboss Mar 2014 #81

Free clue nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #82

I know WP will most an angry, factless rant again theboss Mar 2014 #84

Anger is part of American politics nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #87

So editorial writers can just make stuff up? theboss Mar 2014 #88

People who are scared shitless nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #92

Oh...well...then the lies were okay theboss Mar 2014 #94

Some people do that indeed. nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #99

Nope theboss Mar 2014 #100

Two things, I don't like MIRT being used for person gain and I have to AGREE Rex Mar 2014 #67

If I lash out in anger at someone, I typically apologize once I calm down. PowerToThePeople Mar 2014 #72

So Ted Nugent is simply engaging in a political discussion randome Mar 2014 #96

no! only adulation. how else can we critically think? NuttyFluffers Mar 2014 #97

Agreed... NaturalHigh Mar 2014 #98

There certainly are a lot of threads ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2014 #103

Why are negative emotions fine treestar Mar 2014 #111