Moore and Krugman piss on the ACA decision

[stupidicus]

99. why so?

what I did here was attempted to call out the DUers who were of the mind that the expression of any dissent or criticisms of the law on that glorious victory day were to be admonished in the form of at least one top post I saw referencing how presumably abominable and unworthy they are for daring to have done so as Moore and Krugman did.

In other words, if it's gonna be okay for them to refer to "pissers" in an effort to humiliate them with their silence as the goal, it's gonna have to be okay for me to say "fugg" that. That was the point behind my citing Moore and Krugman, and pointing out the necessity and desirability of the criticisms in my commentary that they leveled against the ACA -- as DU "pissers" had done.

Imo, it's laughably stupid for this to occur in the midst of every issue of significance to hit this board where issues involving BHO and/or the dem leadership are concerned. Why you might ask? Well because of the content of the objections of the "pissing" chargers, which are largely confined specifically or are akin to, their (the alleged pissers) sole intent and desire being to undermine support for BHO and/or the dems period -- not on some specific topic -- and they (the pissing chargers) do so in the role of "champions of uniting" (or maintianing it anyway), like insulting people with "pissing" charges or belittling their principled povs on this or that in insulting ways is the way of a "uniter". In other words, in their efforts to unite or maintain the status quo with often insulting criticism of people for their criticisms of policy choices made, they'll be lucky to maintain the status quo, because most of us have issues with "the issues". It doesn't matter if we as voters go to the voting booth enthused or unenthused, just that we do. The way so many around here make a lack of enthusiasm resulting from disappointment on issues a crime, hardly raises their enthusiasm or lessens the general divisiveness they apparently see themselves as the arbiters of by demanding their be NONE. It's inescapable and a fact of life to some degree, but imo, their making it worse with such conduct, not better.

I haven't been around here long enough to determine if this kinda "purist" as some label them, are the minority or the majority, but I do know that it is intolerant and divisive, which hardly satisfies the definition of "liberal", much less an effort that is conducive for the kinda solidarity we need in gaining the mastery to dictate who and what we're gonna collectively be as a people and country.

One of the first posts I responded to upon joining here, was an appeal from a DUer anoouncing that some relation of his -- a long time conservative looking to explore a change -- was basically being harrassed outta here.

BY all means, keep thinking my "pissing" on those kind is "not cool".

It's not those critical of this and that about BHO/dems that need to be silenced -- if anybody does -- it's those that try to silence them with the kinda schoolyard tactics my "Moore and Krugman pissed..." subject line and quotes were intended to spotlight and show the potential hypocrisy of the paragons of uniting around here.