I thought the Primaries were bad, but I don't recognize DU anymore.

[Laurab]

I pop in every couple of days now, to see if anything has changed - it just gets more depressing every time. When will it be re-named "Obama-Bashing Underground" - or
"Anti-Democratic Underground"?

Tonight the 2nd most recommended post is an Obama-bashing OP, with so many posts adding to the bashing - I'm sure that many people gave up on defending President Obama, and others probably have many posters on "ignore", but I read in disbelief all the hatred and vitriol. One would never guess that we are supposed to be Democrats who support the Democratic party.

I realize it's been over two months, and Obama hasn't fixed the world - not even the country, and he's making decisions that some people don't like, but I haven't seen anything that deserves the level of criticism and just plain hatred that I see here everytime I check in.

Before I get called a "lockstepper" or "worshipper" or the other little insults thrown at anyone who dares defend Obama, I've already heard it, and I'm neither of those things. I DO have realistic expectations, and I DID know that I wasn't voting for Dennis Kucinich when I voted for Obama - I had a good idea what to expect. Apparently, many people didn't do their homework because now all I see is....

WE'RE DOOMED!

I just don't feel that way. I also don't expect the 8 years of destruction to be fixed in a little over 2 months, and I believe many people, including the mods, have forgotten some of the rules of this board.

For so many years I felt at home here, and this place helped me get through some very tough years. I just don't recognize it any more, and I think it's really sad that it's become what it's become. I know I'm far from alone in feeling that way.

If it ever goes back to the DU I knew and loved, someone please PM me - in the meantime, I'll just pop in if I want to get depressed...

[TexasObserver]

1. I agree, which is why I enjoy using IGNORE liberally.

I don't see all those annoying threads, because I put on IGNORE anyone who starts such threads here. I don't want to see their names, their threads, or their posts. If I want to read that crap, I can find a GOP board to read.

It's up to the site to decide what goes here, but I don't have to wait for them. DU gave me the IGNORE feature, and I use it to cull the Obama haters.

Obama is doing great. If I want to read trash about him, I can stop deleting those obnoxious rightwing emails some of my older relatives love to send.

[Laurab]

2. I've never really used "ignore" before

except for one or two posters, a long time ago. I think if I used it now, it would be quite full. I might decide to do that - it probably makes for a far more pleasant experience!

[TexasObserver]

4. You can't read everyone, so why read the haters?

I deprive them of the one thing they most want: Someone to read what they post.

There is a small of army of Obama haters here right now. Some have been here a while and always hated Obama. Some are newer and of dubious commitment to the Democratic party. Whatever their game, I have put them all on my ignore list. You can ignore their threads without ignoring their replies on threads they don't originate.

Some people's opinions aren't worth the time it takes to read them, so why bother with them?

[HughMoran]

38. During the primaries I had some on ignore to 'clean up' the site and make it readable

I removed all of those after the primaries. I was sure I'd never have to put another person on ignore as it's easy enough to simply not reply to certain people. Then the barrage of 'consistent bitter people' showed up and I couldn't not use the feature. Also, 'hide thread' really helps in a pinch - the thread will be removed from the Greatest Page, which can be a real godsend.

[bjobotts]

209. I wish you'd post examples.I don't see it.Maybe I'm lucky and miss out on this"bashing"

[Tangerine LaBamba]

213. It works for me .............

I have an impressive "Ignore" list, and, consequently, I am not seeing any of the posts of which you wrote. For me, DU is still a fun and interesting place.

I've encountered those bashers, the doomsayers, the ignoramuses who don't have the slightest idea of how government works, the trolls, and the really confused. They get one strike, and they're out.

I do not get the sense that I've lost anything by deep-sixing those people. In fact, quite the opposite. I am not suffering the chargin that you most understandably are experiencing.

My theory - for now - is that people have so much stored-up anger and frustration from the past eight years, they don't know what to do with it, so they're venting it, but in all the wrong ways and in all the wrong places. Just a theory.

Trust me - Ignore is your friend.

And that was a very fine OP.

:toast:

[Forkboy]

217. To me, the negative of the Ignore choice is that you lose the chance to counter bs.

While I don't begrudge anyone for using it if it makes their DU experience more tolerable, that's my reason for never using it.

[geek tragedy]

100. I have like 40 names on my ignore list.

Rapidly approaching primary levels.

Of course, about half the people on my primary ignore list got banned for being disruptors. We can only hope.

[jobycom]

3. Same place it's always been.

A third of the posters hate the Democrats, a third think they can do no wrong, and the remaining third gets mad at either those who hate the Democrats or those who think the Democrats can do no wrong.

I'm the only sane one here, of course.

[juajen]

50. Ok, I just loved this post, JC. Really funny! NT

[girl gone mad]

5. I just don't see it.

I see a lot of people rooting for the President to succeed. Some people believe that if we just put a positive spin on everything the administration does, he will succeed. Others think that to be successful, he'll actually have to implement the right policies.

I really haven't seen any hatred or vitriol. Some disappointment, maybe.

[Sherman A1]

7. Agreed

Certainly there haters and bashers, but there always have been. It's just like watching the news, you can choose to ignore one station and watch another or none at all.

I think a healthy discussion is a good thing.

[lamp_shade]

12. Say what? You need to read more posts. There is PLENTY of hatred and vitriol.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[girl gone mad]

15. Is that really what you wanted to say?

No substance, just a lame insult.

Put a little more effort into it next time.

[sniffa]

189. Maybe someone will alert on it

[Zodiak]

18. This is an unhelpful comment...please tone it down.

For me, it is not the "Obama-bashing" or the "Obama-cheerleading" that bothers me, it is the absolute lack of respect posters show each other here.

THAT is what is tearing our community down.

[juajen]

51. You're absolutely correct, Zodiak. Politeness and consideration should be the norm. NT

[quickesst]

19. Ha ha...

"try laying off the weed for a while. The world looks different when sober."

Thanks for braving that place and bringing us this hilarious quote......oh wait.....uh, never mind. Thanks.
quickesst

[HughMoran]

48. Ain't no help for that one

... :rofl:

[kenfrequed]

144. speaking of...

Ad hominem and vitriol. The poster disagrees so you insult them. Kind of chasing your own tail here aren't you?

[leftchick]

32. that is the way I see it as well

blind loyalty is futile.

[HughMoran]

39. Only a bitter person would read her post as promoting "blind loyalty"

Where does she say this? This is the kind of reactionary attitude that's fucking this place up to no end.

[leftchick]

73. bitter?

perhaps I am more scared than bitter regarding obama's economic 'solution'. I have a diabetic son, I am disabled and my husband is very close to losing his job which means our health insurance, such as it is. That means I need at least $2500.00 a month just for medication. Actually it is shocking I am not bitter. :eyes:

[HughMoran]

168. I'm unemployed as well as my ex. We have issues too

I hope like hell that Obama can start to turn this thing around (the economy) as I would like to have more job prospects at this point. I feel for your situation and though I can't completely relate, having kids with 2 households to support and no insurance for braces & other "kid" issues, I'm pretty stressed myself. This is why I'm trying to stay positive and support what Obama is doing. The sooner he can get through the economic issues (stimulus, auto bankruptcy & budget), the sooner he can start working on bread and butter issues like health care and employment. You've posted some really inflammatory stuff that I found to be not helpful at all and only served to depress me more. If the leader of the US, which is also a major leader in the world can't count on not being called an idiot for even a small "grace" period, then I tend to lose hope in our future. Do you even consider the feelings of many of us who are filled with anxiety about our future when you post such inflammatory stuff? He's our only hope and I'm more than willing to discuss alternatives to what he's doing, but calling him and idiot is NOT a constructive way of doing this.

[leftchick]

225. what 'inflammatory stuff'?

I only post the facts. If you can't handle it, that is your problem.

[HughMoran]

226. lol

OK, it's just me.

[leftchick]

227. apparently so

:eyes:

[HughMoran]

228. Look, I'm trying to be nice

I know you've had threads locked and been warned for it, so cut the "not me" crap - k?

[leftchick]

229. wtf is your point?

other than 'I will fall over the cliff if obama says it is okay'. Right on comrade!

[HughMoran]

230. I said just the opposite

That NOBODY is saying that and that you are posting inflammatory crap.

[leftchick]

231. I am posting facts

that apparently you can not accept.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26793903/the_big_takeover/print



The Big Takeover
The global economic crisis isn't about money - it's about power. How Wall Street insiders are using the bailout to stage a revolution

MATT TAIBBI

Posted Mar 19, 2009 12:49 PM

Advertisement

It's over — we're officially, royally fucked. No empire can survive being rendered a permanent laughingstock, which is what happened as of a few weeks ago, when the buffoons who have been running things in this country finally went one step too far. It happened when Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was forced to admit that he was once again going to have to stuff billions of taxpayer dollars into a dying insurance giant called AIG, itself a profound symbol of our national decline — a corporation that got rich insuring the concrete and steel of American industry in the country's heyday, only to destroy itself chasing phantom fortunes at the Wall Street card tables, like a dissolute nobleman gambling away the family estate in the waning days of the British Empire.
The Dirty Dozen: Meet the bankers and brokers responsible for the financial crisis - and the officials who let them get away with it.

The latest bailout came as AIG admitted to having just posted the largest quarterly loss in American corporate history — some $61.7 billion. In the final three months of last year, the company lost more than $27 million every hour. That's $465,000 a minute, a yearly income for a median American household every six seconds, roughly $7,750 a second. And all this happened at the end of eight straight years that America devoted to frantically chasing the shadow of a terrorist threat to no avail, eight years spent stopping every citizen at every airport to search every purse, bag, crotch and briefcase for juice boxes and explosive tubes of toothpaste. Yet in the end, our government had no mechanism for searching the balance sheets of companies that held life-or-death power over our society and was unable to spot holes in the national economy the size of Libya (whose entire GDP last year was smaller than AIG's 2008 losses).

So it's time to admit it: We're fools, protagonists in a kind of gruesome comedy about the marriage of greed and stupidity. And the worst part about it is that we're still in denial — we still think this is some kind of unfortunate accident, not something that was created by the group of psychopaths on Wall Street whom we allowed to gang-rape the American Dream. When Geithner announced the new $30 billion bailout, the party line was that poor AIG was just a victim of a lot of shitty luck — bad year for business, you know, what with the financial crisis and all. Edward Liddy, the company's CEO, actually compared it to catching a cold: "The marketplace is a pretty crummy place to be right now," he said. "When the world catches pneumonia, we get it too." In a pathetic attempt at name-dropping, he even whined that AIG was being "consumed by the same issues that are driving house prices down and 401K statements down and Warren Buffet's investment portfolio down."

Advertisement

Liddy made AIG sound like an orphan begging in a soup line, hungry and sick from being left out in someone else's financial weather. He conveniently forgot to mention that AIG had spent more than a decade systematically scheming to evade U.S. and international regulators, or that one of the causes of its "pneumonia" was making colossal, world-sinking $500 billion bets with money it didn't have, in a toxic and completely unregulated derivatives market.

National Affairs Daily Blog: All the news from the Beltway and beyond.

Nor did anyone mention that when AIG finally got up from its seat at the Wall Street casino, broke and busted in the afterdawn light, it owed money all over town — and that a huge chunk of your taxpayer dollars in this particular bailout scam will be going to pay off the other high rollers at its table. Or that this was a casino unique among all casinos, one where middle-class taxpayers cover the bets of billionaires.

People are pissed off about this financial crisis, and about this bailout, but they're not pissed off enough. The reality is that the worldwide economic meltdown and the bailout that followed were together a kind of revolution, a coup d'état. They cemented and formalized a political trend that has been snowballing for decades: the gradual takeover of the government by a small class of connected insiders, who used money to control elections, buy influence and systematically weaken financial regulations.

The crisis was the coup de grâce: Given virtually free rein over the economy, these same insiders first wrecked the financial world, then cunningly granted themselves nearly unlimited emergency powers to clean up their own mess. And so the gambling-addict leaders of companies like AIG end up not penniless and in jail, but with an Alien-style death grip on the Treasury and the Federal Reserve — "our partners in the government," as Liddy put it with a shockingly casual matter-of-factness after the most recent bailout.

The mistake most people make in looking at the financial crisis is thinking of it in terms of money, a habit that might lead you to look at the unfolding mess as a huge bonus-killing downer for the Wall Street class. But if you look at it in purely Machiavellian terms, what you see is a colossal power grab that threatens to turn the federal government into a kind of giant Enron — a huge, impenetrable black box filled with self-dealing insiders whose scheme is the securing of individual profits at the expense of an ocean of unwitting involuntary shareholders, previously known as taxpayers.

[Pacifist Patriot]

61. Check out the top thread on the Greatest Page. You'll see it.

[dionysus]

71. "I really haven't seen any hatred or vitriol." bull crap. you must not be seeing the daily

"obama is reagan\bush" threads...

[Flying Dream Blues]

178. You must have missed the F U OBAMA thread. It was to do with DADT I believe. nt

[Lilyeye]

6. You spoke my mind.

[Diane R]

8. I feel the same way. Thank you for saying this.

[cascadiance]

9. So should noone have criticized LBJ for what was going on in Vietnam in the 60's?

LBJ did a lot of good things like the Civil Rights bill, etc. But he DESERVED to be criticized along with many others in the government for allowing the Vietnam War to persist and to even allow lies about it to do so as well, much like Obama is doing right now on a number of issues. Obama needs to learn that sometimes risks need to be taken that the people want him to take, like FDR did when he was prsssured into doing many of the things that ultimately had him reelected many times because he listened to the people!

I still welcome him FAR MORE than I felt about Bush. But at least with Bush, we could shout out the neglected issues and not feel like we were being silenced because we were being "impolite" or something like that. Not being even able to talk about our concerns with someone who is "supposed to support us" in charge, in some respects is worse. The people need to be vocal now at such a critical point in our nation's as well as this planet's history. To not do so would be irresponsible of us as rsponsible citizens in a democracy.

[HughMoran]

41. Constructive versus destructive criticism

I can tell the difference, apparently 90% of the hate-junkies cannot or get-off poking people in the eye with a stick.

[cascadiance]

158. I think every "sour" comment one makes about Obama NEEDS an explanation...

... or else it is as the poster said here, just *destructive* criticism, and not commentary directed towards explaining why they think things could be done differently or better. Without those qualifiers, then it does seem just more of a personal rant.

I think many of us here, especially those who are unemployed, facing huge health care issues, foreclosure, and many other plagues facing our society, are very frustrated now, and it is easy to lash out at those in charge, even if not qualifying what it is we're frustrated about. I'm willing to understand those kind of comments too, but ultimately I think it helps if everyone understands what is affecting you, and what could be done to help you and many others in your circumstances. Now is the time to speak up on such things, when there is a lot of us pressing for delivering on the change that is necessary to fix this country.

I think one significant difference between our party and supporters and the Republican, is that we don't just accept what our leaders tell us as dogma without at times questioning it if something doesn't feel right. We've often complained about how blind many Republicans were to the whole plethora of wrongdoing that the Bush administration was involved with. Don't let them point to us and make that same accusation and then just say we were playing "partisan politics" when we were complaining about their "obeyance".

Democracy needs to have us involved in it to succeed, perhaps now more than at any other time in our history. I'm very pleased we now have a fighting chance with a Democratic congress and president. But the work doesn't stop there. Please don't say we need to stand back and be spectators. That's the last thing we need now. Now others out there might desire to be spectators, or under certain circumstances need to be spectators. But that isn't something we should all feel pressured to be doing.

We've got to get Obama to adjust his positions and who he has working on many things (though we should also commend him for the many good things he's doing too). We need to emphasize certain issues that are core issues that might be more difficult to try and fight the corporate lobbyists on, but are NECESSARY to reclaim our democracy and the health of our nation, such as public campaign financing.

Things like the following issues are concerning me:
- single payer health care options.
- public campaign financing and instant runoff voting
- ENDING the dismissals of court cases based on the much misused "State Secrets" privilege that the Bush administration started and Obama is continuing.
- holding our banking institutions AND those who run them accountable for the mess we are in. The financial institutions need to remain healthy for our economy to remain healthy. But certainly the execs in charge of them should be scrutinized and removed if they are continuing them to go down the wrong paths and continue to waste away the tax payers' money that are bailing them out.
- H-1B visas and outsourcing trends of big business to cheapen labor need to be curbed or stopped.
- Our free trade agreements need to be revisited and renegotiated to be *fair* trade and help protect the world's environment, global warming, and the world community of the working class's rights.
- Need to stop the subsidization of big ag industries with farm subsidies that were intended for small family farmers, and NOT for them when they were created. They only now create the opportunity to dump corn and other ag products at artificially low prices and create problems for the farm communities overseas that basically lead to the H-1B, outsourcing, and immigration problems we have now.
- look at and stop the corporate pandering like what happened where the banks are allowed to set the values of their toxic assets that many of us taxpayer's money will be buying up to any value they wish instead of market or at least extrapolated market values.
- media reform is another thing he needs to go after at the beginning. His whole theme of government is that we are out there and we should be telling him what to do, and he shouldn't just go out and assume we want something before working on an issue a certain way. I think that's fine and actually desirable. I think other good presidents in the past have done that. But the problem we have is that the corporate media that we have now stands in the way of good communication to facilitate this sort of government and needs to be fixed before that sort of strategy can be effective. Obama needs to take charge here and have folks in the FCC and the Justice Department go after big media and say things need to change, "or else"!

Some of these issues are big challenges yet that Obama understandably hasn't been able to tackle yet when getting to office. Others, like single payer health options, his administration has made a conscious effort to exclude either in forums or keeping people like Howard Dean out of his cabinet, etc. The former, I'm going to give him some time to go after, and to hopefully provide us ways to help him tackle these issues, whereas the latter, I'm going to really complain about, since in many cases he's had the option of doing things the right way, and he's given some pretty poor explanations for "appeasing" the Republicans instead. Why should Ted Stevens be allowed to go free, and now even have Palin say he should be able to run again for his seat, and not give the same treatment to Don Siegelman, who's far more wronged than Ted Stevens who likely DID commit criminal offenses that Siegelman did not.

[HughMoran]

167. I'm unemployed as well

I hope Obama can help turn this economy so I can get a job. That's my #1 concern. I'm not so naive as to think he can fix the health-care system so I know I need to get it through my employer for the foreseeable future. Single payer is a pipe-dream at this point, so I'm not going to put any hope in that. He's already said it's not the way he's going to go and if he's not going to push it, it's just not going to happen! Fighting with people on DU about single-payer will accomplish nothing and just serve to annoy people. Want it done? Go to Washington with 1000000 people and stand on the front steps of Congress until they agree to tackle the issue.

As much as I find the legal issues infuriating, spending a lot of time right now focusing on putting Republicans in jail will not help the economy turn and therefore will not help me get a job any sooner.

All of the other issues you mentioned are all ones I want resolved and I expect they will all be tackled in time. Bush left such a massive disaster in his wake that careful prioritizing of the issues is required. Even then, there are some jackasses that say he's trying to do too much too fast. I'm glad Obama is a pragmatist as he can't afford to get caught up in the bickering - he knows what he can accomplish realistically and that's what he's going to do. Better than paying lip-service to try to please everyone.

[cascadiance]

170. Thankfully, I'm still employed at this point, but I do think that's his #1 priority!

Of finding ways to fix the system so that we can restore our unemployment rates back to "normal" and get people confident to the point they can spend money again.

I've said to others that I can probably live without a raise right now too, wheas so many people not only need work, but others need more money to realistically live in this economy and not continue to get further into non-living wage debt.

For ME though, I can't really help participate in getting the economy rev'd up again (and spend money) when I see job security out the window, and also security for things like health care also being a problem too. All it takes is for me to get one serious illness along with being unemployed, when I will get screwed (whether I could live on my current salary or not). So for some of us, single payer part of the equation is another essential element.

I had around $1000 plus in medical bills last year, and i'm looking at just dental bills of over $400 next week even WITH insurance. And when the insurance companies play games with the doctors that I just started seeing, I might have to pay even more if I need another procedure for another even more expensive medical problem this year when its "out of network". These problems of providing things like health care NEED to be fixed, if people like me are going to start spending money again, to help get businesses back to having more demand for their goods and services which will hopefully get people more jobs again.

Thom Hartmann said it very well yesterday that many in Europe aren't as concerned about this global recession coming up the way we are, since they already have so many more social safety nets that will still allow them to survive reasonably if they are unemployed, compared to the massive disaster it will be if we start having more of our economy collapse with considerably less of a safety net here.

We need to demand a multi-pronged approach to start resurrecting/putting in place these many safety nets so that at least we are close to what Europe provides its citizens, and therefore restore some degree of confidence and market activity again. And that means we need to tell the corporate lobbyists to SIT DOWN AND SHUT THE F' UP! And to swallow the medicine that's going to be given, instead of still trying to "play along to get along"! It just makes disaster more slow motion rather than crashing down immediately, allowing the criminals to get rich and jump ship!

That's why I prioritize public campaign financing so heavily as it is the cornerstone that will help allow so many other issues get dealt with so much more easily if there isn't the threat of lack of campaign funds that force pols on so many other issues to work against the will of the people in order to serve the few that buy them off. Solving that issue will implicitly solve so many others, which is why it should be done now! And if Obama does do it now, I think it will restore confidence in the voting electorate that he's working for THEM, and not hiding behind corporate lobbyists' doors that some might feel is happening now. If he has that confidence, I think many of the voters will give him some breathing room to spend more time to deal with the other thorny issues like single payer health care that I think everyone realizes won't be solved overnight.

[HughMoran]

177. I don't disagree with any of that

As soon as we can get this economy headed in the right direction, I can't think of anything more important that healthcare reform and public financing. I hope Obama takes these issues on full force with the intent of instituting radical changes.

[Laurab]

72. Oh, gosh, yes, that's EXACTLY what I meant.

You saw right through my post - It's really about criticizing LBJ and the Vietnam War. :sarcasm:

So, you'd prefer having bush back, because you prefer bashing? I wasn't here when bush was (S)elected, but I'd almost bet that in his first two months there was less bashing of him than there is of Obama now.

What I see on here is not "responsible citizens in a democracy" - it's nitpicking and bashing for the most part. I must not be a "responsible citizen in a democracy" because I don't search for things to attack the guy I voted for. I'm not worried - so many others are doing that for me. With your help, maybe we'll get Sarah Palin in 2012 - I just can't wait!

[cascadiance]

162. No, I never said I liked Bush in power more... I certainly don't!

But I'm trying to highlight that this notion that we can't criticize Obama at all when he's doing things that many of us perceive are wrong, and not working in the best interests of those who voted him in is making it harder for us to work constructively than before when we could all be unified in our criticism of Bush (which we could do a lot more, because there was a lot more to criticize in his case).

It's not just about who "wins" that's important. It's ultimately what they are going to do for us that's important. This game is more than just a football game.

I was just using LBJ as an analogy, because unlike Bush, many presidents in the past had some very worthwhile accomplishments in addition to some very deep problems. If we choose to ignore one side (good or bad things they've done) at the expense of the other, we're being unfair to them or the people they serve. I will praise Obama where he does good things, and I do believe he's capable of many good things.

But I'm not going to give him a free pass. The times are just too critical now, especially on some issues where there's no tomorrow and need solutions TODAY! Global Warming, maintaining the middle class by reducing the wealth gap to not be at pre-depression levels any more, our involvement in wars, etc.

[Laurab]

174. No one suggested that Obama shouldn't be criticized at all.

I can't believe the things people are reading into my OP. I'm not happy with some things Obama has done, but he's not a frigging superhero. If you honestly believe that ALL those things can be solved TODAY, then I think your expectations are quite unrealistic. I also didn't say he should be given "a free pass", but I certainly do think he should be given some time.

Obviously we disagree, and probably will continue to, but I did NOT say either of the things you're accusing me of saying, and I see the same accusations in every single OP similar to mine. It's pretty sad when one is on a Democratic discussion board and has to defend their support of their President, but that's what DU has turned into IMO.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

214. Yep, you're really catching it,

and the "interpretations" of your OP - a very straightforward statement that could not have been clearer - are going to land on you with their jackboots, because you dare to question their deranged insistence on calling out the President on just about everything, despite the fact that he hasn't yet been in office for three months, and he inherited a mess of historical proportions.

These people are just unrealistic, or else they've got agendae that I cannot recognize.

The other day, I posted in a thread about someone complaining that her $22 raise that she got in her paycheck wasn't much good for anything, and she prefered that the money go to government-sponsored social programs. I suggested that the $22 would make a homeless person very happy and that maybe she should just give it to someone who really needed it.

That prompted a really angry post from someone who accused me of being a "scab who wants to support people who cross picket lines."

Welcome to DU 2009.

You're not alone, Laurab, and you've done a good thing.

:thumbsup:

[Laurab]

233. Thanks!

It's posts like yours that give me hope - I know I'm not alone, and I think a lot of people have just given up, as I'm doing after this post. I don't care much for DU 2009 so far, and I think you're correct in saying many have got agendas you cannot recognize - I can't either, and truly, I don't want to anymore. I have a rather large ignore list now, but I'm not sure I like that, either - I've never had to resort to that before.

I can find other, more useful things to do if they're going to let DU turn into a Democrat bashing board!

[aquart]

10. I do love to be preached at.

Especially by people whose concept of "democracy" is a mindless goosestep of approval.

[HamdenRice]

25. This coming from someone who feels a certain foreign government can do no wrong

under any circumstances whatsoever. This is the kind of hypocrisy that make DU read like a bad farce.

[HughMoran]

42. Where does she state 'mindless goosestep of approval'

I'm waiting...

[Laurab]

65. Oh, now it's "mindless goosestep" - I hadn't heard that one yet.

That's quite an assumption you just made - it's also quite wrong. It's what I've come to expect from the people who are constantly bashing Obama, though.

My concept of "democracy" is, I believe, exactly what it should be. I don't agree with everything Obama does, nor do I expect anyone to. I wasn't "preaching" either - I was just stating how I feel about DU now. I don't see much in the way of constructive criticism, but I see an awful lot of posts that remind me of how we talked about bush on this website. bush - a man who destroyed our country over 8 years in office vs a President who's working to fix it and has been in office a little over TWO MONTHS.

I hardly ever write an OP, but I guess the main reason I wrote this one is that DU was my safe haven, my sanity, my educator and much more ever since I've been here. We FINALLY have a Democratic President who's trying to do some very good things, and trying to fix the almost impossible mess he inherited. I come here and, instead of seeing support for him, I see people comparing him to bush, giving up on the party, and worst of all, belittling people who SUPPORT the President. All this and more after only 2 months - in fact it started well before two months.

I almost feel I have to apologize for thinking Obama is a good and decent man who is trying to get this country of ours back on the right track. I DO think that, and I'm tired of seeing all the nitpicking and attacking of him on this supposedly democratic supporting website.

[dionysus]

88. epic strawman fail

:rofl:

[lamp_shade]

11. Pretty said isn't it. Remember the old days when disruptors were tombstoned?

Not any more. It used to take me about 3 hours every morning to catch up reading through 5-6 pages of posts... so many wonderful, brilliant, supportive, thought-provoking messages. It only took me about 25 minutes just now to read 5 pages because I only found a smattering of posts worth reading. I guess I can't blame the old-timers for backing off and just letting DU morph into a ______ (what's the word I'm looking for?).

[tekisui]

24. That's what get me.

Why are so many purely disruptive posters allowed to stay. Criticisms and discussions are great, but there are many who are clearly using the opening to do nothing but divide and disrupt. I have seen many new posters come on and post nothing but flamebait bullshit, yet they are allowed to stay.

The mods need to clean house, imo.

[goclark]

204. Ditto ~ where are the tomb stones ? At least during the

Primaries we were still on the side of all Democrats.

Now we aren't and I wonder why.

What could possibly be the reason?

Preparing for 2012 maybe?

:hide:

[Laurab]

74. Maybe we need to alert more?

I don't know, I don't think that would help - mods can't possibly miss some of the posts - like the one at the top of the "Greatest Page". And even though I don't come here much anymore, I've noticed it's often the same people over and over again.

It's difficult to find anything worth reading, and has been for a while. I think I may make use of the "ignore" feature, but I don't think I should have to on DU, a site whose purpose (I thought) was to support Democrats. I don't mean support them blindly, as so many posters say to anyone who doesn't like what's happening on here - constructive criticism is fine - I don't see much of that, though.

[lamp_shade]

94. I think we should. I alerted on one earlier today and I'm pretty sure a whole

lot of others did too. He's been tombstoned. Ta da

[HamdenRice]

82. "just letting DU morph into a ______ (what's the word I'm looking for?)."

Food fight?

:rofl:

I share your sentiment.

[lamp_shade]

95. I was tempted to say "circle jerk"....

but I didn't.

:hi:

[TWiley]

13. I agree, it sems we have been flooded by racists and special interests.

The problem is with the tweed hat crowd. They cost us several elections because we "must be above all that", and now these same "intelectually prideful" batch of supremists say "oh we must have an open mind and criicize our own as we would limbaugh".

Bunk is what I say. The tweed-hatters will go help nadir in the next election anyway.

[tkmorris]

16. Ya know, I've seen a thread like this once a month since 2001

"DU isn't what it used to be, I hardly ever come here anymore because it depresses me so, etc".

Is some of the Obama criticism over the top? Yeah, probably. A small bit of it comes from obvious trolls, but they don't last long so they are nothing to worry about.

As for the rest of it? Liberals who have fought tooth and nail to get a Democrat into the White House, and now have differences of opinion on what is being done. NOT people who are upset that Obama hasn't changed the world in 2 months, which is a claim you levy not once but twice in your OP, but rather people who have specific issues with things that HAVE been done in that same 2 months. I repeat, it's not what Obama hasn't done, but rather what he HAS that troubles them. I don't always agree with the complaints, but all to often I at least understand the reasons behind them.

Take the post you mentioned, you know, the second most recommended post today? The OP there was not overly vague, he named specific issues he has a problem with. Do you disagree with those? We ARE accruing enormous debt bailing out the very same greedy idiots who put our economy where it is, that is impossible to deny. Very sane arguments can be made that we have no choice but to do that, but you have to admit it's rather galling isn't it? Our current AG has just decided to "forgive and forget" former Sen Stevens crimes, is that a good thing? Not to mention an obvious unwillingness on the part of the current admin to examine any of the incredible excesses and crimes of the previous one. Is that just being politically astute? Perhaps, but you cannot expect that people will not be angry about that. We have all watched Reid and Pelosi over the past 2 years, since we took control of Congress back, and marveled at their seeming lack of spine. We hoped for better once we took the White House as well but while the jury is still out for me the results so far are not terribly encouraging. Don't be so "depressed" over that thread you mentioned, or others, but LISTEN to what they are saying. They are Dems too after all. We may not always agree on things but at least try to understand where they are coming from.

I think it would be difficult to argue that Liberals don't have some reason to be somewhat disappointed at this juncture. Perhaps some here express that emotion in a hyperbolic fashion but let's face it; picture threads gushing over just how GORGEOUS the first couple is and how MARVELOUS Michelle looks in that strapless are a tad much too.

So relax. It'll all be fine. Let's discuss what needs to be done, what has been done, and what could be done better. We can disagree without you feeling like you have to leave town.

[zeemike]

20. What you said.

Relax folks we have a long road ahead.

[scarletwoman]

27. "..it's not what Obama hasn't done, but rather what he HAS that troubles them." Spot on.

Good post.

[juajen]

56. I absolutely agree. Marching in lockstep is never good, and criticism

that is given in good faith should always be welcome. We have never had a President who did not receive criticism from his own party; that's what makes this country different from many others. Dissent is constructive. As was said in an upthread, the destructive will be outed.

[kenfrequed]

150. I agree completely.

Though I find the signal to noise ratio is off quite a bit. I encounter far more posts of people complaining about complainers than I find actual "haters." As a matter of fact I often have seen reasonable critiques of policy, support for bailouts, cabinet picks, and statements of support for 'merit pay for teachers' bogged down by posts that do nothing but try to shout down such statements.

[democracy1st]

17. I defend my President daily but at the same time I'm not going to put my brain on the shelf and

not voice things I have a different opinion on. If a person is just daily pushing anti Obama I can't see that helping,but if I have legitimate concerns then I should feel free to air those.

[HughMoran]

46. I assume she's talking about the latter

I would never in a million years assume she means "shut up and agree" - why would anybody read it that way?

[Bluenorthwest]

54. Do you really want to know why?

The hyperbole. The labeling. The characterizations. Calling Democrats haters and bashers for not being just as the OP wishes. Name calling is a tactic of desperation.
The OP could have gone point by point and refuted the post that invoked such harsh words, rather than simply pointing fingers and using adjectives.
The form is the function. The style states the objective.

[HughMoran]

55. So you're impugning the poster, not the post

Ahhh, I get it now.

[Bluenorthwest]

68. No

You asked how it could be read as a 'shut up' and I told you, using specific phrases and language of the poster. And yes, the lexicon a writer uses does speak of their intent, which is what you asked about. You asked how, and I told you.
If the poster wanted to be better understood, less characterization of others would help. The exact same thing is true on the 'other side' of the spectrum. Using loaded language is never wise, if the goal is to be understood.

[Laurab]

76. The "OP" wasn't talking about one post.

I was talking about a large percentage of posts, and although you don't agree, it is hate and bashing. It has little to do with what I "wish" and a lot to do with what this board has become. I notice a lot of people responding have reading comprehension problems.

If "name calling is a tactic of desperation", then a lot of the negative posters are pretty damn desperate. From lockstepper to worshipper, to trying to stop free speech.... there are new ones every day used by the "bashers" to describe the people who dare to defend the President.

I thought what I wrote was pretty clear, but you obviously misunderstood it - by choice I think. So many posts try to put people who defend Obama on the defensive. That's another thing that's getting really tiresome.

[sufrommich]

21. I feel the same way. I rarely comment anymore and spend

way less time here than I have in the past. The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

[K Gardner]

22. Evidently the owners don't care as long as they can pull off a good fundraiser a few times a year.

I'd be ashamed to even TELL anyone I knew about this place.

A shame, but all good things must pass, and this one it seems... has served its purpose. For the total embarassment it brings to the Democratic Party, it needs to be shut down.

[scarletwoman]

23. Really? Since you disagree with some of the posters here DU "needs to be shut down"?

May I suggest that since you're so ashamed of DU maybe YOU ought to leave? The rest of us can carry on quite well without you, I'm sure.

[tkmorris]

26. "Needs to be shut down"?

That is one of the more ridiculous things I've ever read. Why the hell are you here if you are so ashamed? Sheesh.

[spoony]

122. I think I got some of your mail

It's a dry cleaning receipt for six brown shirts.

[Forkboy]

137. Oh ffs, get a grip.

:eyes:

[girl gone mad]

142. This post is an embarrassment.

What is it about free speech that upsets you so much that you would call for the political party in power to shut down a privately run web site?

That's not democracy, my friend.

[G_j]

28. you lost me at "bashing"

I think most are capable of having a discussion.

[HughMoran]

44. No, destructive criticism does NOT lead to a constructive discussion

If you can't tell the difference, let me know...

[Orsino]

108. We do seem to get a new one of these threads every day.

I guess that for every claim of bashing, we could reply with an accusation of cheerleading.

But that wouldn't really move us forward. Our complaining about complaints would seem to be spinning our wheels.

[madokie]

29. I check in, read a little, get pissed, then go on to my private world

One thing about this place it helped me to get past the bush/cheney regime and thats good. I find myself doing other things with my time now that I have a great President in the making. I plan to continue to support the President in any way I can. I find myself deleting way more than I post anymore cause I really don't want to make enemies even if they are only words on a computer screen. I just don't fit in any more around here it seems.

[hisownpetard]

193. Me, too. DU helped me keep my sanity while Bush was in office, but I haven't been posting

much at all since the inauguration. At first, I thought it was just because
I needed a breather after all those intense campaign months. But then, when I
did check in again, it seemed that most of the old DUers I admired and whose posts
I looked forward to reading were nowhere to be found. I thought maybe that was my imagination,
but it does seem to be the case.

I love Obama and am ecstatic, watching him in Europe and feeling overwhelmed with pride
instead of cringing and covering my eyes in fear of what Bush said or did to embarrass us.
I'm turned off by all the negativity that turns up here on a daily basis, so I spend
much less time on DU than I used to.

[Number23]

207. This place is a lifeline for alot of us not currently in the U.S. right now

One of the reasons I created a DU account last year after reading for more than 6 years was because I was so desperate to talk U.S. politics with someone -- ANYONE.

I find this place has become alot less addictive of late...

[ixion]

30. I'm missing something here: what is "anti-democratic" about wanting truth?

Or are we all to sign loyalty oaths, just like we mocked and berated rethugs for doing?

I hold people accountable for their actions, no matter which party they hail from.

That is, I put We, the People over party politics, and I'm not going to apologize for doing that.

[scarletwoman]

31. Well said. (nt)

[progressoid]

33. Looks more or less the same to me.

Perhaps your perception has changed.

[Romulox]

34. The change I see is a rise in the number of aggressive "Centrists" trying to tamp down debate. nt

[HughMoran]

37. That's the attitude that fucking sucks here

So deliberately fukcing poke people in the eye to make a point?

Not you - I'll never see you again you miserable so-and-so.

[Romulox]

59. I love how a differing opinion is taken as a personal affront by people like this!

Way to prove my point!

[HughMoran]

35. Some days are worse than others - "hide thread" works wonders

Those threads you were talking about "disappeared" from the Greatest Page once I did that and it was such a relief. There is a crew of "never-be-happys" that is determined to have their way in the war over constructive criticism versus destructive criticism. Many of these so called "how dare you try to squelch my voice" people are deliberately tilting their threads in the "destructive" direction to make a point - and there are plenty of people on that side that will rec these unnecessarily harsh threads. All I can say is "hide thread" is your friend. And for those who insist on posting stuff that is rancorous - "ignore" and "alert" (when the material is clearly against DU policy) are there and should be implemented judiciously.

[azmouse]

101. I'll let those threads build up a few posts before hiding them because

they can be useful for adding to the ignore list. When I see the repeat 'ihateobama' posters on them... plonk.
It's getting nicer on DU by the day as the igore list gets longer.

I thought after the primary season that list was done for except for very rare cases. Sadly, my list is longer now than it ever was but I can read DU w/o the feeling that I'm on FR.

[HughMoran]

104. There are times when I want to thank a thread starter

...for helping to "collect" all the bitter malcontents in one place. Don't ask me why :)

[azmouse]

106. I've notice an interesting paradox about the ignore list...

As my ignored list grows larger I see fewer posts marked 'ignored'. Interesting.

The only thing I can figure out is these ignored posters are mostly posting on threads by other ignored posters.
Truely they are their own circle jerk.

[HughMoran]

109. I've noticed that as well!!!

OMG, they really are a "clique"!

[moodforaday]

157. "Circle jerk"

You can't even keep your tone civil enough, and you dare judge other people on the ISSUES they care about?

Well, your sentiment is returned back at you. Fawning and marching in lockstep makes me thoroughly sick.

[azmouse]

161. *plonk*

[Political Heretic]

223. You "plonk" a guy for that?

A bit knee-jerk, yes?

[moodforaday]

155. Add me, add me, too!

To your ignore list.

For 8 years no matter what stupid, ignorant or criminal thing Bush did or said or caused to happen, the prevailing majority of Republicans LOVED it and LOVED him and everything he was about. It's sad to see Obama has the same kind of fawning following, really sad. Close your eyes, follow your leader, and crush all dissent. Do you think Obama shares these values of yours?

[HughMoran]

166. I never said anything like that

but since you're determined to convince me that you're an ass hole and can't differentiate between 60 days and 2920 days, there is little reason to think an intelligent dialog can be had with you.

[Laurab]

196. I just took your advice.

I went through this thread and put a whole bunch of people on the ignore list that I've hardly ever used. I'm going to try it out and see if it's a more pleasant experience - I believe that just might be the way to go, and this thread was very helpful, if I do say so myself!

[geek tragedy]

36. Poutrage junkies.

They have lots of anger boiling up inside them, and they feel the need to express their OUTRAGE at anyone with power.

An idiot's tale, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

[stanwyck]

152. Exactly. Why Rush, O'Reilly, and Hannity are milionaires

Because too many people love the adrenaline rush of rage. Even liberals or progressives. It's addictive.
I finally had the sense to switch from Morning Joe to CNN in the morning. I found myself getting too addicted to my continuing rage at Joe and Mika. I can't explain the psychology, although I'm sure some of our DUers can.
But the rage machine has made millions for hate radio and its hate talkers. Apparently, DUers are not immune.

[bertman]

40. I guess Laurab has never heard of "not reading a thread if you don't like the content".

Or perhaps Laurab would prefer to CONTROL what DU'ers think about President Obama. No disagreement, no discussion, only worshipful reverence.

Sounds a lot like some totalitarian regimes we hear a lot about lately.

What's the difference in George Bush telling us "you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists"? and what you're saying, Laurab? And who put you in charge of telling Democrats what to think?

I find your charge highly offensive. If you don't like the site, just leave.

[HughMoran]

43. "If you don't like the site, just leave."

:rofl:

[Laurab]

77. Try a reading comprehension class maybe?

There's a HUGE difference in what "Laurab" said and what you say I said. I find your post highly offensive - Mr. joined 2008 telling me to leave, especially. I've been here since '04 - actually longer but didn't register for a while. YOU telling me to leave is precious.

[Marrah_G]

45. Sorry I don't see what you are talking about.

I see a Democratic forum where people have lots of different views on issues and don't always agree with the President but support him anyway.

[HughMoran]

47. So calling the Pres a "flim-flam man" or "dumb as rocks" promotes a healthy discussion?

After 8 years of Bush, this is the best we can do for constructive criticism? I could post 100 horrible insults used against our President - you "don't see it"? How can you miss it?

[Lilyeye]

79. Not only that saying but saying "Fuck Obama"

"I regret voting for Obama" "I'm done with Obama" "I held my nose voting for him in the voting booth" "His just another Bush and this is not change to believe in" also doesn't promote healthy discussion. Mind you I rememeber some of these comments being made even before Obama took office.

[dionysus]

85. you must have missed the daily "obama = reagan\bush" threads...

[Iggo]

49. LOCKSTEPPER! WORSHIPPER!

Oh yeah, that's right. You said don't do that. Damn you and your clever foresight! DAMN YOUUUUUU....!

[Laurab]

78. You should have thought of "mindless goosestepper"!

I was quite touched by that one!

[WI_DEM]

52. Frankly this has never been a democratic website. Maybe the owners believe it is, but

it's a left wing website, and the ideal president for many people who are consistently leading the attack on Obama is Dennis Kucinich, a good man, who couldn't even win a primary--not even in his home state or somebody like Ralph Nader who was so inflexible he helped give us George W. Bush for eight years. Nothing Obama will do will satify these people. And they make up much of the consitent posters on DU. In fact, many of these posters couldn't care less about the democratic party and probably want a viable far left third party.

[HughMoran]

53. That sums it up nicely

Couldn't have said it any better myself.

[geek tragedy]

57. They're not leftwing--they're intolerant ideologues.

Most leftwing folks are a lot more practical than the shrieking whiners here.

[readmoreoften]

125. Rightttt. Opposition to expanding the War on Terror is "ideological."

I've never met a larger group of shrieking, hysterical whiners than the Obama fan club. Hysterical is the operative word, since you don't even have a reason to support the guy's rightwing policies other than the most sickening form of blind allegiance ever seen outside the Republican Party.

Ideologues? You people are so blinded by right-spectrum ideology that you don't have an idea in your collective heads. That's why you believe Obama must have all the answers. You people don't even have a fucking opinion.

[Forkboy]

138. You've shown great tolerence for others yourself there, Sport.

[geek tragedy]

143. I've despised the Naderites since 2000.

The same numbnutz who said Bush=Gore are now saying Obama=Bush.

Fuckem.

Let them start their fantasy impeachment drives and their D&D-like plans to purge 'their' party of the 95% of Democrats who support Obama.

[Forkboy]

149. And judging from your posts you think anyone with a speck of criticism is a Naderite.

[geek tragedy]

171. Dear lord no.

I agree with plenty of criticism about him. I got warned by the mods for criticizing him too harshly myself.

It's the people who have to make it personal and use policy issues as evidence of his character flaws to whom I object.

[moodforaday]

159. You are apparently offended by words.

It would be way more impressive if you were likewise offended by facts.

And the facts are simple. If Obama continues Bush's wars, they will become his. And anyone who was anti-war for the past 8 years, should continue to be anti-war now. Unless that person was not anti-war, but merely anti-Bush.

[geek tragedy]

172. I never opposed the US invasion of Afghanistan.

I was opposed to the invasion of Iraq.

[Pacifist Patriot]

62. Though I do have to wonder....

If Kucinich wouldn't be villified after just 73 days. Because quite frankly I can't see any single person or party able to solve all of our problems in just a couple of months. Did these people honestly expect a miracle to happen on January 20th?

[WI_DEM]

66. Of course he would be. DK would do his best just as Obama is doing

and because progress wasn't fast enough or he would have to moderate some of his stands to get them passed he would be called a "sell out." Of course some people here probably think he would never compromise but I think he's smart enough to know what he would need to do as president. But we will never know for sure. I think Obama is a liberal but he isn't liberal enough for some critics on the left.

[redqueen]

75. I want a viable far left third party too. I'd like proportional representation.

Cause that's the only way we'll get it.

But that's not the world we live in... we should all be working for that... not trying to transfer blame for all this country's problems on the Democratic party. Not when we're already working to keep congress...

[earth mom]

58. You don't want a discussion board.

You want an echo chamber that parrots only what you want to hear about Obama. Because you want to only hear the lies you have allowed the media to sell you.

You know something? I hate what DU has turned into myself.

Ever since the primaries DU has become a rah rah cheerleading squad where people cheer on a politician who has done little to earn that cheering except that he has a "D" beside his name! Sorry to break it to ya, but that politician-Obama-was put where he is by the powers that be who control this country. Not by the people. You don't really think the people elected him do you? Do you really? Because the truth is we don't have a say anymore and that was proven when Edwards was kicked to the curb, Dean was humiliated by a so called scream, and Gore's presidency was stolen from him by the Supreme Court at *'s behest!

You can deny it all you want and say the people put Obama where he is, but no. Obama got where he was because of powerful forces that marketed him to you via T.V. & print with a huge marketing campaign that started back in '04. Why do you think Oprah didn't endorse Kerry? Because she knew Obama was going to run in '08! That was 4 frickin years before the actual election! WTF! You can live in denial all you want, but Obama was sold to you just like Hollywood sells movies and GM sells cars-or they did sell cars before the economy crashed thanks to the powers that be who control Obama. And control him they do. Look no further than how Obama is propping up Wall Street and the banks who are responsible for the greatest ripoff of the people of this country EVER. Meanwhile Obama is telling the auto industry that they can fuck off and so can all those good paying Union jobs! Frankly, I simply can't believe anyone would support Obama for pulling this shit a mere 2+ months into his presidency, but there you are. :crazy:

You may want to come here to DU and have some nice, soft, warm and cozy place to read rah rah posts about your beloved messiah Obama.

But I don't.

I come here for information, discussion and critical thought and to make sure that the rah rah cheerleading is tempered by some honesty and truth because this place sorely needs it. Now more than ever.

It's time to scrape the bullshit off the truth and see for real how much the bastard powers that be have been lying and stealing from you and me and all of us.

Wake up and smell the corruption.

[WI_DEM]

64. Oh, so Oprah didn't endorse Kerry because she was in on the big effort to sell us Obama

You sound like the right wingers crying about media bias for Obama as being the reason he won, forgetting that he ran a smart campaign compared to his opponents in the primaries (maybe if Hillary had planned to contest the caucuses she might have been the nominee?) and general election. People also took to him and his message, it wasn't some conspiracy. Your post shows all the pent up frustration you have that Obama was nominated and elected. I think you need a rest.

[geek tragedy]

97. Why are you arguing with PUMAs? n/t

[tonysam]

134. earth mom is Right

Obama was marketed, and 24/7 by the media. There is no getting around that fact.

[geek tragedy]

141. PUMA talking points, How trite.

Don't bother responding. I won't be able to read it.

[juajen]

67. Amen brother. Wish I could recommend this post.

[geek tragedy]

96. PUMA POWER!!!!! n/t

[Laurab]

80. Oh Good God.

Can you READ? My "beloved messiah"??? "rah rah cheerleaders?" - please point me to them because I haven't seen any of that.

I come here for the same reasons you say you do, but unlike you, I don't see much of that anymore.

Yes, I support Obama..."there I am". On a Democratic discussion board no less. What WAS I thinking?

[geek tragedy]

99. For some people, the primary never ended. n/t

[readmoreoften]

127. Right... it's the Clinton supporters who are anti-war. You're as paranoid as Bill O'Reilly.

You see CLINTON around every fucking corner. You do realize that the majority of DU--IN EVERY FUCKING POLL--were DK and Edwards supporters until they were forced out. Obama lied to those people. Obama supporters said that the concessions to the Right were a "brilliant plan" to "bamboozle" the center right into trusting him. What it actually was was a "brilliant plan" to bamboozle the center-left and center into voting for his War on Terror expansion and Wall St. representation.

It's people who SUPPORTED OBAMA who are pissed. People who throw the word PUMA around are freeper-level idiots.

[geek tragedy]

169. You have no right to speak for Obama supporters.

You swore a jihad against Obama and his supporters long ago.

readmoreoften (1000+ posts) Sat Mar-29-08 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. Exactly. I wish he wasn't forced out for the benefit of this spectacle.
Of course the Obama supporters were demanding that he stop his campaign then too. I'm convinced that they are bullies who have no interest in democracy--a good number of them anyway. They've consistently demanded that everyone else suspend their campaigns for the benefit of their candidate. They've become the Republican-style thugs of our party.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=printer_friendly&forum=132&topic_id=5303359&mesg_id=5303869

readmoreoften (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-01-08 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Uh. I'm not a Clinton supporter so don't call her 'my' candidate.
I didn't vote for her in my senatorial primary election in 2006. She's a centrist, corporate shill. Problem is I think Obama is a centrist corporate shill with the worst group of hysterical lunatic followers in the history of the Democratic party. The problem isn't that Clinton is still in the campaign, the problem isn't even that she's playing dirty tricks, it's that your crew has alienated half the party with your bullying. That's why your candidate is telling you people to shut the fuck up--because you're the problem.

I like Obama more than Clinton (eh, maybe not--they're both 2's on a scale of 1-10) but I find Obama's supporters so nuts that I don't even want to be in the same party as a good number of them. All things being equal between the candidates: I like Clinton's supporters better.

If Obama loses the election, it'll be Obama's fault. Not Clinton's fault. So grow up. Stop playing the victim and take some responsibility.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=printer_friendly&forum=132&topic_id=5338449&mesg_id=5338716

Sorry that your golden boy, Baby Daddy, turned out to be a fraud.

Your candidate lost. Get over it already.

[datasuspect]

87. i want more "Y'all chill the fuck out, I got this" pics!!!!!

[Tangerine LaBamba]

216. You're right ..................

[dionysus]

90. "beloved messiah" eh? Your bitter tears are like nectar for my soul.

[TheWatcher]

124. Probably the most SANE post on this thread.

:applause:

[HughMoran]

132. bye

You can joint that poster in purgatory.

[geek tragedy]

140. Add another PUMA to the list.

Toodles.

[moodforaday]

160. When you call people names

it dehumanizes them, corrals them in an ugly stereotype, and thus makes them easier to persecute and kill. Like "gooks", you know? Funny how well-meaning people turn to such age-proven fascist strategies defending dear leader, especially when they have little in the way of hard facts to support their defense.

[TheWatcher]

203. I guess I will be "Jointing" you in Purgatory.

Honestly, it really doesn't bother me what those two say.

They have always shown they know less than what they are talking about.



So let me get this straight, if you do NOT Blindly Goose-Step with everything our leadership says, if you reasonably question or disagree with ANYTHING at all regarding the current fake rally in the Stack market, do not follow blindly and unquestioningly, or question or scrutinize anything that Obama says you are:

1. A PUMA

2. A Freeper

3. A Republican

4. A Conservative

5. A Right Winger

6. A Troll

7. A Disruptor

Considering my lifetime Voting Record Consists of Dukakis, Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, and (GASP!) OBAMA, I think the two posters above me have very apt user names.

Moran and Tragedy.

Very ironic.

[Blue-Jay]

151. You know who else refers to him as "messiah"?

Hitler, that's who.

Way to go, Hitler.

[Number23]

208. Madam, do you realize that your comments are absolutely IDENTICAL to that of the Freepers??

Even down to the idiotic "beloved messiah" bit.

Is that by design or simply an unhappy coincidence??

[Pacifist Patriot]

60. I found myself being sucked in a bit this morning, but no more.

I've popped in to see editorial cartoons, Top 10 Conservative idiots and use DU as a clearing house for relevant headlines.

Unfortunately, looking for the latest headlines has brought me into contact with way too much pissing and moaning. I am tired of being accused of being some sort of brain dead wanker because I am willing to allow more than 70-odd days for cleaning up the mess our country and our world has gotten us into over the past 12,000 years.

The Democratic cannibalism is more than I can stomach.

[Seen the light]

63. I'm enjoying more people being critical of Obama

After all, isn't he the one ultimately making the decisions now? Breaking news: Republicans are, for the most part, irrelevant now. When it comes to making decisions, this country really only has one party.

Criticizing those in power has always been a staple of DU hasn't it? So why should it be different just because Democrats are in power?

And I like how you make it seem like you, the Obama supporter, are an oppressed minority here on this site.

::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:rofl:

Give me a break.

[LWolf]

69. I would point out a couple of things:

1. While this site IS partisan, and DOES censor in favor of Democrats during elections, it is not a "Democratic Party" only site.

2. DU still claims to be a "left-wing" message board. I'd argue that it's gotten increasingly centrist since '04, but that's just my left-wing opinion.

3. Before there were only 2 centrists left standing for 44 states to weigh in on in the primaries, Obama was not exactly a favorite at DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3649440

When the choices were down to Clinton or Obama, many swarmed to Obama because he was "not dlc," disregarding the fact that his positions are more right-of-center than even Clinton's.





It really isn't a surprise to me that Obama would be criticized when DU finally turns back, post election and inauguration, to look at issues. His positions are not at all "left-wing" friendly, and this IS supposed to be a "left-wing" message board.

It is neither a cheerleading squad nor a campaign organization for the Obama administration.

[redqueen]

70. People seem to want to just say things that make them feel

like True Progressives^TM.

It doesn't have to make sense. It doesn't have to do anything but reinforce that mindset. And if the M$M provides some ammo, well hey - who cares if it's the AP and mostly spin?



And yeah... after this last little bout with mindless bullshit... I'm out too.

[dionysus]

91. spot on!

:hi:

[Juche]

81. The criticism is because he isn't liberal enough

If you want an open, honest dialogue we should have one. But it sounds like you were making strawman arguments about why people are criticism Obama. It isn't because he hasn't solved all the nations problems in 2 months, it is because he doesn't seem to be standing as firmly for some progressive causes as he needs to be.

Obama is doing a great job so far. But I think the media and politicians have been so intimidated by the right wing that everyone except the blogosphere and a handful of progressive politicians is terrified of being anything other than centrist or right wing in their views.

If single payer healthcare has the support of 60% of the public, why isn't it even an option? If pot legalization, investigating Bush/Cheney and supporting gay marriage have the support of half the country in opinion polls, why are they radical ideas? Why are politicians so terrified of them?

I want Obama to have the courage to stand up for what he believe in in public. The honest answer is that by and large he does not. In 1996, while running for state senator he stated he supports gay marriage. Now that he is president he opposes it. In 2003, before he became a US senator he told the AFL CIO he supports single payer. As president he opposes it. In college he smoked tons of pot. As president he opposes decriminialization.

Do you honestly believe Obama the person opposes pot decriminalization, gay marriage and single payer, or is it just something he says in public because he fears the criticism he'd face if he expressed those views?

He has done great things. Ending the Iraq war, doing something about healthcare, his energy proposal, SCHIP, the list is endless. But unless we criticize and primary democrats from the left, they have no incentive to listen to us. People here complain about Nader, but if anything Nader should've woken the democrats up to what happens when you ignore the left wing. They find someone else to vote for.

[Laurab]

83. You're not reading the same criticism I am. n/t

[Juche]

86. Well, that is why I criticize him

[tjwash]

114. delete-dupe

sowwy...

[No.23]

84. Confessions of a lurker.

I remember the days of the primaries quite well.

I lurked here then. Never signed up because what I saw didn't impress me.

I saw, basically, an echo chamber where the prevailing pro-Obama echo reverberated with full force.

And if you didn't reverberate the same echo, you were shown the door, in some instances.

I know many lurkers who lurked and didn't sign up, then, because alternative views weren't treated with the respect that all alternative views deserve (except for the ones that advocate physical harm to others, IMO).

You're right. Things have changed a bit since then. But I think that it's for the better, not for the worse.

But what do I know, eh? I try to practice "question everything" as much as a I can. It doesn't make for a good echo chamber, I know.

[bigwillq]

89. DU is fine.

It's what you make of it. Hide thread and ignore are your friend! :)

These threads are more annoying than some of the threads you're talking about.

[Bryn]

92. To quote you on this one:

'If it ever goes back to the DU I knew and loved, someone please PM me - in the meantime, I'll just pop in if I want to get depressed...'

If you go to discussion boards you don't expect everyone to agree with you or the way you want a discussion board to be. Discussion boards aren't about *YOU*. They're about things people in general want to discuss...their concerns, to fight for something, etc. Most of the time DUers are swell people. We all are going through changes. Lots of DUers have lost jobs, homes, have no health insurances, etc.

[Laurab]

119. Bryn - I've been here almost 5 years and loved it here.

It has NEVER been a place where I agreed with everyone, or they agreed with me. Why do some people insist that's what I'm saying? It's just a ridiculous assumption. The primaries were a little over-the-top, but I suppose that was to be expected. I just never expected what came after we finally won the Presidency, and the nitpicking of just about everything Obama does. I don't have a problem with constructive criticism, but for the most part, that's not what I'm seeing. Maybe I was mistaken as to what this board was supposed to be, and what it's been for the last 5 years or so.

Did I say I wasn't having financial or health problems? I don't think so, because I too am having both of them, and more.

Honest - I know what discussion boards are for, and this was a great one for a long time. If people really enjoy bashing the guy I voted for EXACTLY the same way we used to bash bush, especially after only 2 months in office, it just seems odd to me, and it's certainly not something I want to waste my time doing.

[blue_onyx]

93. Where is this Obama bashing ?

I haven't noticed people "bashing" him. Criticizing him when you feel he is wrong should occur. I can't believe people use the ignore button. Being so unwilling to be confronted with opposing viewpoints is sad.

I believe people supporting the president unconditionally is more common on DU than bashing. For example, I've noticed a lot of people are suddenly defending Wall Street, particularly in regards to bonuses. Some have even said that Wall Street deserves to be saved because they're are so important to our economy. A few months ago, when Bush was still president, DU seemed to have pretty strong consensus to let the financial institutions fail. Suddenly, now that Obama is president and showing support for Wall Street, people feel that these companies are vital to our economy.

I believe Obama is doing a good job. I do have some issues with him, particularly regarding the different ways in which the auto industry and Wall Street are treated. It has nothing to do with me thinking that everything would be ok after 2 months. Part of the reason we are in this messed is because people refused to question Bush...everyone operated with a group-think mentality and dissent wasn't allowed. If people think Obama is wrong, they should say so. Disagreeing with him, which I believe some take as "bashing," is health and necessary.

[dionysus]

98. you must have missedthe daily "obama = reagan\bush" posts...

:shrug:

[blue_onyx]

105. Yes, I must have

I come on DU most days so I don't know how I could miss them. You have any link?

[dionysus]

112. here's one example, there are many more. you can find them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8317139

[tomp]

102. "obama bashing"...

...and pathological obamaphilia are in the eye of the beholder. your complaint and your assessment expose your narrow view of the situation both at du and in the country/world.

don't hurry back.

[HughMoran]

103. bye

Glad you're leaving since you can't play with others.

[Laurab]

128. Are you a psychiatrist?

It's amazing that you know me so well from one OP, just amazing. You're also totally wrong in your lovely assessment of me.

I'll hurry back if I want to - I'm not sure who you think you are, but that was kind of a jerky thing to say. You sound like a very pleasant person - I envy your significant other if you have one. :sarcasm:

[tomp]

205. well, actually, yes...

...but that has nothing to do with it.

you made statements in your post that i found "jerky". thought i'd let you know. thought i'd let you know i don't like your attitude about "obama-bashing" and don't care if you come back (i see you haven't left quite yet). i can be unpleasant when i want to be (and i did want to be in your case). i usually get that way when someone's being unpleasant with me, especially when they get all righteous about it, like theirs is the only viewpoint.

i think the fact that you responded as you did indicates i pegged you pretty well.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

218. Now, now ..............

Your profile says you're a psychiatric nurse.

That's not the same as a psychiatrist, is it? Did they change the requirements while I was outside sniffing glue? I hate when they do that.

Or is a nurse the same as a doctor?

When did THAT happen?

Your claim - when your own profile can be used to debunk you - is suggestive of a certain kind of grandiose thinking.

I'll be kind and simply say that I think you did a terribly dishonest and petty thing there, and you should apologize to Laurab.

[Laurab]

238. Oh, I didn't actually say I was leaving.

Maybe I want to get depressed a lot - maybe I'll come here everyday, in fact now that I have an ignore list, I find it much more pleasant. I took you off just to see what the other poster was talking about. - it's not at all surprising that you lied about being a psychiatrist, and it gave me a good laugh, but I'm thinking maybe you might want to talk to one of your bosses about what the poster below me said. Maybe they can help you. I have a close friend who's a psychiatric nurse though, and if she's any indication, you'd be the last one to ask for help, or realize you had a problem.

You didn't peg me well at all, in fact - my response to your ignorant response was not characteristic of me at all, but defending myself to someone like you is a waste of my time.

"My mind is made up - don't confuse me with the facts" - my husband has a sign like that - it would be most appropriate for you.

Of course you don't like my attitude about Obama-bashing - "yours is the only viewpoint" and you obviously didn't comprehend what I said in my OP. Perhaps you're not quite as smart as you think you are.

Back to ignore you go, but you can continue playing a psychiatrist on the internet, I won't tell!

[MadBadger]

107. This is nothing compared to the primaries.

[geek tragedy]

111. Some of it is a residual of the primary.

There are at least two PUMA's in this thread--one of whom was an active McCain supporter.

But, now she's a 'supporter' of Obama who only posts here to bash Obama.

[leftofthedial]

110. Yeah, we should all just shut the fuck up

and let Obama and Geithner give another $12.8 TRILLION to Wall Street

and let Obama send a few tens of thousands more mostly poor young Americans into a missionless meat grinder in the middle east

and let Obama tell us that the kind of health care that 60-70% of Americans say they want is "politically not viable"

and let Obama aid and abet the corporate union-busters at every turn

what the fuck right do we have to disagree with someone so great and wonderful.

THESE ARE NOT THINGS HE HASN'T DONE YET BECAUSE IT HAS ONLY BEEN 70 DAYS. THESE ARE THINGS THAT HE IS DOING ALREADY.

[SlowDownFast]

113. That's what happens when you feel betrayed by the candidate you voted for.

What else you expect?

He's towing the line for everyone BUT the people.

Just not feeling the Kum-Bah-Yah.

Sorry.

[HughMoran]

116. He's doing exactly what he said he'd do

Since this is so, you obviously always hated him - liar.

[SlowDownFast]

240. Fuck off.

Kool-Aid drinking fool.

[tjwash]

115. Hee...I think it's fucking hilarious. Sad and pathetic, but fucking hilarious.

The Dow is up nearly 700 for the month. Lenders are finally loaning money again. GM, Chrysler and AIG have been told that they no longer get an endless flow of bailout money to spend like meth-addled hookers walking on Broadway. Street construction projects, and public works are starting to pop up all over our city. Oil prices are starting to stabilize, and for the first time in years, aren't forecast to result in prices of $4 plus a gallon gasoline in the summer. All of this is occurring in the FIRST THREE MONTHS of Obama's Presidency.

I do have HUGE issues with the troop escalation in Afghanistan, and that we still have troops in Iraq, but, that's a fucking mess that was started back in 2002 fer-christ-sake, and as a result, is something that just so fubar'ed and mishandled by the Bush Administration, that it is way beyond the point of being an easy or a pain-free fix now.

Yet, no one here will cut the brother a freaking break. I swear, half these mother fuckers here, are holding their breath in masturbatory anticipation of an entire global economic collapse, and the resultant war/death/enthic-cleansing that will follow, just so their views are vindicated, and they can dance atop the rubble chanting "I TOLD YOU SO!!!"
:wtf:

By the way, I'm sure Obama is REAAAL tore up about what a bunch of anonymous, armchair, message board dictators think about his policies.

[Juche]

117. Can someone post a link to these hate threads

Maybe I don't read them enough, but I haven't seen any where people openly hate Obama and want the world to fail. If they are there, I'd like to see them.

[HughMoran]

121. Nobody's going to do your work for you

I could give you a few names of people who post nothing but destructive criticism, but that violates DU rules. Many of these threads are locked or deleted as they are from dubious sources. If you were here most of the day, you'd have seen these threads - many of which were pushed up near the top of the Greatest Page.

[Juche]

146. Nobody is going to take you seriously if you are this poorly informed about debating

If you want to claim people are badmouthing Obama and want the country to fail, find the evidence and show me. Its not my job to research every one of you opinions every time you say something.

[HughMoran]

147. Lazy person can't do a search or isn't here enough to know

Oh, well. :hi:

[Juche]

148. What does this accomplish?

When I originally posted in this thread I tried to make a good faith effort to explain why I personally was criticizing Obama. In return I was called names and retaliated by attacking people in return.

Again, if you guys want a serious discussion on criticism of Obama, fine by me. But claiming people hate Obama, want the country to fail and giving no evidence to back it up, then insulting anyone who questions that is not very persuasive.

[Laurab]

176. Try reading the thread - several people have provided links. nt

[Juche]

201. I didn't see any URLs

(deleted earlier post) I just reread your OP and saw this issue is personally hurting you and don't want to make it worse.

I think it is just the way we liberals are. Maybe we are just worriers by nature and worry Obama will fail before we give him a chance.

[tjwash]

136. I'll give you a clue...

Usually it's the first people that respond with "who is saying this? show me the links!!11!" that are the worst offenders.

And do your own damn research...I'm not here to hold your fucking hand through a tour of the internet.

[Name removed]

Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Juche]

163. Who makes the rules on what is an insult?

I am confused. Are we only allowed to insult each other indirectly and via implication rather than frontal insults?

[Political Heretic]

224. It's cause you are full of shit.

And you know it.

[Laurab]

129. I have issues with the same things you do.

Even though he's my "messiah" and stuff, or so someone told me. I'm not sure we can say he wasn't honest about his plans, though - except for how long the troops are going to be IN Iraq.

Your last paragraph, and then your last sentence cracked me up! :)

[Number23]

211. LOVE your post. The most real, and by far the most honest...

I'm sure Obama is REAAAL tore up about what a bunch of anonymous, armchair, message board dictators think about his policies.

Okay??! :rofl:

:toast:

[readmoreoften]

118. Oh lord stop the WHINING! If you want harmony why don't you pressure your

beloved to stop bombing Pakistan and revving up operations in Afghanistan. And all the other bullshit he's doing that would've been unacceptable under the Bush regime.

[hiphopnation]

120. god forbid we should hold the feet of our elected leaders to the fire

:eyes:

[HughMoran]

123. Nofuckingbody is saying otherwise

Why be a roll-your-eyes twit?

[Juche]

200. Why is this not deleted?

Who makes these rules here?

Indirect insults = ok
Direct insults = ok, depending on the mood of the board.


SO I can say 'I feel sorry for anyone stupid enough to believe that' but I can't say 'you're an idiot'? Who made these rules?

[NC_Nurse]

126. It's always been like this. Ebbs and flows, but always plenty of bullshit to go

around. When it bothers me, I find something else to do. Most of the time, I just use DU as a place to catch up on news I
can't find elsewhere. Sometimes there are some very informative posts and some interesting discussions. Other times, not so much. ;-)

I think it's funny that some people are just as pissed off as they were when Bush was fucking things up. I guess it's just a way of life for some.
I don't like everything that Obama has done, but it's a hell of a lot better than anything the Idiot-in-Chief did. Just the fact that I'm not constantly
bracing for the next rotten Bush initiative is a giant relief. Perhaps they didn't suffer like I did over that. I feel some actual hope and relief after 8
years of darkness. I'm not letting other people's angst take that away from me.

[spoony]

130. Yeah just look at this bubbling cauldron of hatred

Threads from GDP's first page (without even scrolling):

Photos: Angela Merkel definitely has a crush on Obama
Exclusive Photos: Behind the Scenes with the Obamas (Time)
OMG They are cheering Obama like he's a rock star...
PHOTOS The Obamas' Afternoon/Evening
DIAL-UP WARNING) Pictures of Michelle Obama in London
K&R for One of the Best First Ladies Ever...Michelle Obama!!
PHOTOS The Obamas and the Sarkozys (April 3)
PHOTOS & VIDEO Ooh la la, Les Obamas! (April 3)

Oh my, who can save us from this destructive anti-Dem propaganda?? Have we been invaded??

Gimme a break.

[tonysam]

135. LOL! And GDP is a Virtual Obama Lovefest.

Sheesh, even the mildest criticism of Obama is considered "hatred."

I shudder to think what REAL Obama hatred is.

[Laurab]

182. I usually start with the "Greatest Page" ,

You know, the one with the most popular threads, supposedly the best threads? I could type a list of what's on there for you, but I'm sure you already know. Or I could pick and choose some thread titles like you did to prove MY point, but I can tell it would be an exercise in futility. "Propaganda" is your word, by the way - I didn't say a word about it being propaganda, but now that you mention it......

[treestar]

131. Don't you know we have to hold his feet to the fire, just for the sake of

holding his feet to the fire? I mean when you have a surgeon operating, doesn't someone have to do something to make it harder even for the most brilliant surgeon, just for the sake of challenging him? :sarcasm:

The captain of a ship going through rough waters but is very talented has to have somebody to yell at him and make sure that he can be proven to have been able to do it under distraction! :sarcasm:

Hopefully somebody was bitching at Capt. Sully while he was trying to land the plane on the Hudson, about how he wasn't doing it right or perfectly or had the wrong people helping him! Otherwise, it's just not worth it. Better the plane go down and kill everybody than fail to keep his feet to the fire! :sarcasm:

[ohheckyeah]

133. It's the nature of the beast.

I've been on many message boards and the nature of them is contentiousness. Political boards aren't for the faint of heart and they are always in a state of flux or they die. The complainers aren't going to change anyone's mind so I tend to ignore them.

[Forkboy]

139. DU has it all. People choose to focus on what they want to see.

Some get pissed because it seems too positive. Some get pissed because it seems too negative. Focus on the negative and that's all you'll notice.

My father never enjoys a movie anymore because he goes into them looking for negatives. You might be making the same mistake when you come to DU. If you want to see positive threads about Obama there are plenty of them. I see them everyday. :shrug:

[Stinky The Clown]

145. Ya know ..... for every post like you cite as offensive to you, there are .......

..... cloying, admiring, childish, sycophantic, fanposts and even lame-assed attempts at original poetry.

It cuts both ways, kiddo ..... and the edges are where the action is ..... and the nutjobs .... on both sides.

[moodforaday]

153. I think there's good news for you here.

You sound like those people who are sick of the nightly news, and demand a channel that would air Good News Only. What's that saying about the kitchen and the heat... But hey, look at the "greatest" page today, and see if you *really* have a cause for complaint:

I feel good every time I hear the words ("...President Obama")
What Real Diplomacy Looks Like
I'm very glad Obama is President.
PHOTOS The Obamas' Afternoon/Evening
It's amazing how smitten European LEADERS are with Obama. Also, BREAKING NEWS.
TYT: Obama personally creates dialog, compromise, impresses at G20 summit (Video)
Making me proud Obama
Am I the only one who is suprised by how proud I am of our IMPERFECT President?
The Return of Statecraft-How Obama proved his mettle at the G20 summit
Obama has a terrible job and we need to do our best to support him
PHOTOS Ooh la la, Les Obamas! (April 3)
PHOTOS The Obamas and the Sarkozys (April 3)
I'm gonna gush ... GOD I LOVE the President and First Lady
I am SO. DAMN. PROUD. of our president and first lady.
Okay... Somebody Needs To Say It : Barack Obama Has Given The Whole World HOPE!!!
WOW, World Leaders Desperately Want To Be Near Obama!!!


...plus a few more smitten ones...

Touching video of the First Lady inspiring young women today (from BBC)
Isn't Michelle awesome?
Michelle in London is like when Jackie went to Paris.
The irony of Michelle Obama's triumph in Great Britain . . .
Yiddish lesson for y'all: I'm kvelling. I'm proud to be an American and have Barack and Michelle
The girls' reaction to Michelle Obama today is a beautiful depiction of what it means to people
Fawn Over Michelle O
Majestic Michelle revives a weary nation
K&R for One of the Best First Ladies Ever...Michelle Obama!!
Is Michelle WORKING those eyelashes or WHAT??


If you want the good cuddly news, read the good cuddly news. As you can see, there's no shortage of lucre here, so dig in. And shut up about what others should or shouldn't post, since the real issues, like people dying every day in Iraq and Afghanistan, are obviously not GLAM enough for you.

[HughMoran]

186. "And shut up"

You could as well snarkmaster.

[Laurab]

192. Wow! Another person who assumes they know me.

Another person who apparently didn't read my OP. I'm not "one of those people" you're referring to, nor do I care for the cloying or cuddly posts. I like intelligent discussion, a little bit of humor, and - well, DU like it used to be.

You could have found the threads I'm referring to a whole lot easier than you found the ones you did methinks, instead of wasting your time like that. I wouldn't even click on most of the ones you listed. This board is just full of psychiatrists I guess - or do you just play one on the internet?

I posted how *I* felt about DU - I didn't tell ANYONE what they should or shouldn't post. And what's with the "shut up"????? Are you 12?

[Enrique]

154. only 99% support for Obama here!

it's unbearable!

[EFerrari]

156. I voted for a president. I didn't take a vow of chastity or agree to never

again hold my president accountable for his policies. :shrug:

[HughMoran]

183. Yeah, all these calls for a VOW OF CHASTITY are getting out of hand

I could not agree more - this is getting out of hand!!one!!11!!

:)

[nichomachus]

164. Criticizing isn't bashing -- unless you're a Bushite n/t

[HughMoran]

179. ...or an ass hole

:D

[sellitman]

165. I disagree.

Supporting the Democratic Party is only worthwhile if I agree with the direction they are going in. If the Mods want this place to become what Freeperville is then they can listen to your whining. (And they can Tomb Stone me here and now.

Otherwise I will speak out and yell when my party and it's elected officials run afoul.

I wouldn't have it any other way.

[snappyturtle]

173. From what I've read here I gather there are Pres. Obama bashing

OPs. I haven't seen bashing. I have read disappointment in policy. I think the best tactic would be to post praising OPs....with reasons and try to persuade those you feel are bashing to change their viewpoints. Then....do.not.read posts you think might up set you. Otherwise, just take a break....go take a walk and check back later.

[Mike 03]

175. My take on this from another thread:

I'm no psychiatrist, but I think people who dislike what Obama is doing
just want another reason to fail. It's so easy to do nothing if you are disappointed in your leadership. Now we finally have a leader who is leading, and that is challenging and frightening to a lot of people who would rather sit around complaining with a thumb up their ass.

Suddenly a great leader has challenged us to be a part of change, and all those people who voted for him, claiming to crave change, are caving out of fear that they will actually have to do something.

That is just my opinion. I'm sure it won't be popular, but that is what I think.

[TBF]

184. Could you pls. read my post (181) - just down a bit.

Just wanted to give my personal perspective. Yours is valid as well, I could see that there may be some "debbie downers" who will just complain no matter what happens. For most I believe it is more substantive than that however.

[Name removed]

185. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

180. Believe Me; I Hear Ya.

Ignorant zealots abound.

[WhollyHeretic]

187. No kidding

:rofl:

[TBF]

181. This time is the first dem president for DU, right?

I found this forum when I started volunteering for Obama last winter. I took a long break from it over the summer when the primaries were so contested and I started to find out some things about Obama that concerned me. I can't speak for all on the far left, but for me I can tell you it's mainly policy/systemic concerns, as opposed to personal dislike of Obama.

I would imagine the dynamics overall might be very different now that a dem is safely installed. There is a very wide spectrum between centrists (and even moderate republicans who may have found the place when they decided to give Obama a chance rather than rubber-stamping McCain) and communists. Perhaps that is what you're experiencing, and those groups weren't here (or weren't as vocal) when the focus was just on getting a dem - any dem - into the office.

I guess the other factor I'd suggest is that the economy has crashed very hard since last fall. There are many folks out there who can simply not wait for years, months, or even weeks to see improvement. They are unemployed now, they are losing their houses now, they are hungry now.

[defendandprotect]

239. Interesting comments . . .

even though you don't mention any specific "policy/systemic concerns" you had over the summer --
but my own experience here also points to criticism of Obama's decisions resting on the decisions
and not personal dislike.

Additionally, those complaining about "Obama haters" rarely mention the decisions/policies
so I'm left to wonder whether they actually support the policies and refrain from saying so?

One of my grave concerns for the Democratic Party -- and for DU, in fact -- is the influence
of the corporate-DLC which is dedicated to moving the party to the right.

And while I've noticed three or four DU'ers saying they had been long time Republicans
now moving into the Democratic Party, I am surprised to see you referring to "communists"--!!

There's an old Russian joke which goes something like this . . .

Question: What's the difference between capitalism and communism?

Answer: In Capitalism man exploits man
In Communism it's just the opposite



There is only one reason for our economic problems and that is de-regulation followed by
repeated bailouts of capitalism.

Unregulated capitalism is merely organized crime.

And it's not as if this has come "out of the blue" . . . rather more than two years ago
Gov. Elliot Spitzer was organizing Governors to react to the mortgage problems leading to
foreclosure and Bush interevened and stopped him.

And, again, overturning regulation like Glass-Steagall had predictable consequences.

Further, the derivatives -- rumored to be $600 TRILLION -- with GDP around $15 TRILLION -
were also unregulated - though one of the agency officials tried to move to regulate them
and was stopped by Robert Reich and Alan Greenspan. In fact, her power to regulate them
was later removed by Congress!

Coming back to the "Obama hater" complaints, I will personally try to call out anyone who
in any way reverts to name calling or personal attacks on Obama -- anyone who is not
dealing with the issues. But I will also fervently stand for freedom of speech and the
right and duty of us all to criticize policy and decision-making by anyone.

[Brucie Kibbutz]

188. We gave up defending him because he turned his back on us.

We voted for change and we're getting it but I guess it was too much to ask for positive change. He lost my support when he started governing like Ronald Reagan. But hey, at least he's better than Bush! :eyes:

[JerseygirlCT]

190. I'm with you. I've been saying

"thank goodness we have this man" over and over as I think about all the things he's had to deal with, and how well he's juggled one crisis after another. At this point in a first term, how many other presidents have had to get as much done?

He's a good man, and he's doing a good job. Perfect is not an expectation, since we're dealing with humans.

[lostnotforgotten]

191. Some Of Us Have Minds That Think Independently Which Means We Are Not ObamaBots

eom

[HughMoran]

194. Cut and Paste, Good Job Mr. Headline Master

:rofl:

[lostnotforgotten]

195. Thanks Mr. "Who Can't Recognize Blind Loyalty" That Is Obvious To All

eom

[BlueJac]

197. There is always disagreements on DU............

The only thing that has changed is the whiners that don't like to be disagreed with. Being a Democrat is like herding cats, so get used to it. I can recommend some tissue if you like. These whining posts are getting so old. The issues at hand are what is important! Locked step is not an option.

[Skittles]

198. I am sick of these fucking whiners

absolutely sick of them

[Redneck Socialist]

199. I'm still surprised that people are surprised by this.

Eating our own is what DU's best at. With out geedub to focus our rage on it's not too surprising that we turn on each other and family fights are the worst.

I was very curious (not hopeful mind you) to see what DU would be like with a Democrat in the Oval Office, and it's pretty much how I expected it to be: Vicious, hopeful, alarming, snarky, provocative, educational, enlightening, maddening, in short, gloriously entertaining.

[craigmatic]

202. From 2001-09 we had bush to unite us against him. Most on here are liberal and want quick results.

Obama's not moving fast enough for some. Maybe the expectations aren't real but that's how people think. Plus Obama isn't perfect and pressuring him on some issues is not only patriotic but it makes him a better president. I'm glad some people disagree with Obama enough of this fan boy shit. If you want total conformity go to the freepers but we're democrats and democrats debate.

[Name removed]

206. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[defendandprotect]

219. I do note that the "only 60 day-ers" aren't saying that they like what Obama is doing . . .

they do say . . . "it's only 60 days!" ---

Seems a pretty inane argument to me, but if they have confidence that Obama's

policies are going to pull this out -- AFTER 60 days -- then what are they so

frightened of?

[certainot]

210. the problem may be the smileys, trolls, and lazy libertarian absolutists

who channel limbaugh and hannity and don't know it

[paulk]

212. it's the same as it ever was

it's a democracy

which is what you want, right?

[ribrepin]

215. Another recommendation

I've been wondering when they will change the name too. I don't spend near as much time here as I used to. It's skinner's site and apparently the Obama bashers are making up for the time we used to spend here. I wish them the best of luck.

I never really got into ignore and why should I give a site that's giving Free Republic a run for it's money traffic.

[defendandprotect]

220. Obviously, there are those . . .

here at DU who would prefer if the site was called "DLC" ---

Personally, I find it hard to believe the "only 60 days" rant ---

and that perhaps those who oppose the criticism of Obama's polices

want that criticism to go away because they support those policies?

[ribrepin]

221. I think I'll try out the ignore tool on you

You'll be my first.

[defendandprotect]

234. So you don't support Obama's policies, you're just anti-criticism of them . . .?

Meanwhile, I'll be honored to be on your "ignore" list -- !!!

:)

[grahamhgreen]

222. this is not an actual issue. Giving $ to banksters is.

[defendandprotect]

236. That looks like corporate-bashing to me . . . .

which I agree with -- !!!

And, I'm wondering if this over-sensitivity we're seeing to supposed "Obama-bashing"

isn't really a cover for people who don't want to come out and say that they

actually support throwing money at Wall Street and banks -- ??

[TWiley]

232. Its the fucking "Tweed Hat" crowd ...... they need to go back to their empty Nader campaign offices

[defendandprotect]

235. What could possibly be . . .

more lame that trying to blame Nader for an election that Gore actually won,
including in Florida . . .

In fact, Gore left the corporate-DLC afterwards recognizing that their advice had hurt
him as he moved away from more populist issues and into saying nothing.

Of the foremost reasons rarely mentioned . . .

First, they obviously had to turn to the Supreme Court for the final steal
because as the votes were being recounted in Florida -- presumably with all
they could steal having already been accomplished -- Bush was down to something
like 134 votes and maybe even 54 votes?

Second, they also had to revert to a GOP fascist rally in Miami-Dade County to
STOP the recounting of votes -- because they could guess what the outcome would be.
There was no police interference with this rally which actually became violent.

Third, computer voting has been with us generally since they passed the Voting Rights
Act-- they began coming in during the mid/late-1960's . . . and I would say that every
Republican win since then is questionable, including Nixon/Humphrey.

Fourth - Democrats approved the "butterfly ballot" which moved 3,000+ votes to Buchanan.

Fifth - 600+ ILLEGAL military ballots were counted for Bush

Sixth - 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida voted for Bush

Seventh -- tens of thousands of third party votes went to Libertarians, Socialists and
others -- other than Greens.

ALL OF THOSE THINGS must be considered before you reach the point of trying to blame any
individual. And least of all Ralph Nader --

Additionally, consider that since then we have not heard a PEEP from the Democrats about
insituting IRV voting which would prevent the kind of third party concerns you have --
and which they supposedly have!

Again -- Ralph Nader has long been one of the Democratic Parties biggest critics --
he was one of the first to begin telling us of the buying of government and elected
officials over decades. Nader has consistently pointed to the co-opting of the
Democratic Party by the right. And, in fact, the Democrats have been very active in
trying to co-opt the Green Party and work with Republicans to handicap all third
parties - including barring them from the debates. Is this really what you want?

It's time for the Democratic Party to turn their attention to where the real problems lie --
and they are not with Ralph Nader!

[friedgreentomatoes]

237. DU is a big tent.

The one thing that is common is everybody here wants Obama to succeed. For their own sake, if not anything else.
However, the way even a minor disagreement with an Obama policy decision gets bashed by the "Obama-can-do-no-wrong" crowd only acts to alienate those posters who voted for him but were and still are a little skeptical. Nothing wrong with that, I hope you will agree? But when, the poster again happens to post another (arguably) "bashing" post, he/she becomes labelled as one who only posts articles about Obama's shortcomings (in policy).

Going over posts some times feels like people here believe in freedom of speech only when you agree with them. That is the last thing expected of DU. The reason a bashing thread might be highly recommended is people come, read the post, reply, and then rec it so that it features at the top in the hope that others can come and find it easily and post more in Obama's defense. Surely you don't believe there are Obama-bashers are a majority here who can override the general DU crowd and hijack any thread they want?