You Might Be A Racist, Not For Valid Obama Criticisms, But For Posting Rightwing Obama Smears

[KittyWampus]

It's perfectly normal for liberals to have issues with Obama and his Administration. I certainly do.

However, it's NOT perfectly normal for liberals to:

Post rightwing smears from Breitbart
Buying into bogus scandals the second they arise simply because they make Obama look bad
Blame him for things that need to be done by Congress
Never acknowledge any positive changes brought via the Obama Administration

There are plenty of DU'ers who have big issues with Obama and his Admin. (I am one of them) but we don't post crap from Breitbart, buy into bogus scandals etc.

[BumRushDaShow]

1. Firebaggers = Teabaggers

[allin99]

2. Is the NSA dragnetting millions of peoples phone data a bogus scandal?

[gcomeau]

8. We've known they were doing phone data collection and archiving...

...for at least 7 years.

http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm

That headline look familiar? Notice the article date in 2006?

So yeah, the idea that all of a sudden we're supposed to be shocked at what was happening right this minute and everyone freak out about it and act like it's some kind of breaking news SCANDAL is bogus bullshit.

You want to be upset about it? Go ahead. But "something is happening I don't like" is different from "something is happening and it's an administration scandal that our hero whistleblower has courageously uncovered!!!!!". Don't pretend a program that has been publicly reauthorized twice in Congress in the last 5 years is suddenly an administration "scandal" just because people had their heads up their asses and weren't paying attention until recently.

[allin99]

12. just a couple of questions regarding that...

What if there are people here who campaigned for obama and also find snowden a hero. Are they racist?

Pretty sure dems have been upset about this since 2006, and they were angry at bush, would it be fair to say those who campaigned very hard for him expected more than continuation of the last 7 years?

of the, judging by recs of posts, about 150 ppl here who are now very upset that obama is doing this, and ALL of them voted for obama, even if you want to say not all, let's say 90%, are they now racist.

[gcomeau]

16. No they're not racist

I don't think any of the people upset about this are racist.

But i do think all the ones with their hair on fire about it acting like it's some kind of Obama administration scandal or that Snowden is some kind of hero for "uncovering" something that everyone already knew about are reactionary idiots who enjoy screaming at the government on general principles just a wee bit too much.

[allin99]

34. okay, even though i disagree on...

a couple a couple of points, b/c many hair on fire republicans do it no matter who the person is, it's always too much, especially considering they clearly do not care about what the nsa does and for them it is just about bring the pres down, it's clearly faux outrage b/c they've never been upset about it before, and some of those people are indeed quite racist, i've had quite a few unfortunate incedents seeing it up close (and many are not).

For people here who find snowden a hero for bringing it back into the spotlight, all voted for obama, so clearly they are not racist, even if their hair is on fire. And there's a good chance their hair is on fire b/c they are stunned to see private orders issued continuing what we all hated before.

but to your point that no one here upset is racist, cool. Many of the posts here HAVE been directed and dems and even people right here, and you are saying otherwise. You have a different stance than a lot of what i've seen here.

[tblue]

45. I didn't "already" know.

I haven't mentioned Obama or blamed any individual for this. All I know is as soon as this story broke, people here started beating up on others for discussing it, questioning their motives, calling them racists or haters, and saying there's no other way to stop terrorists.

I don't happen to think that's cool.

[lark]

151. Don't agree

It was not well known that THIS administreation was keeping copies of actual domestic phone calls, emails, texts from Americans that did not go overseas, not just numbers but actual content as well. The Director of the NSA specifically denied this was happening when asked during a Congressional hearing! Yes Bush was doing the same and it was wrong when he was doing and it's just as wrong now. It seems odd to me that some people on this board are OK with it, only because it's Obama's administration that's doing the illegal spying. Wrong is wrong!

[Life Long Dem]

97. The meme

"Snowden is our man", when his aim is to shame the US comes across as anti-government. And Republicans are anti-Government like Ron Paul who Snowden supports.

[Th1onein]

35. So it's not a scandal, then? Is that what you're saying?

Because I was here when Bush was doing that shit. And it was a scandal then, and it's a scandal now, when Obama is doing it. Moreover, it's grown since Bush; it's grown under Obama. They are keeping a database of EVERY communication now.

Are you REALLY saying that that is not a scandal? You ought to be ashamed of yourself, if that's the case.

[gcomeau]

63. Sigh.

"Because I was here when Bush was doing that shit"

Bush was performing actual ILLEGAL WIRETAPPING.

THAT was a scandal. That isn't happening now. Understand?

[truebluegreen]

94. And, according to you, this program is legal because we have new laws, right?

Except the laws are interpreted and applied in secret, and no one in the know can talk about it 'cause it is secret, and no one can challenge it in court because they have no standing, because it is secret. So there is no actual way to determine if the program is legal / constitutional. That is what is happening now. Understand?

Is that the hill you want to raise your flag on?

[MNBrewer]

95. and are the laws legal?

Who can say what the rubber stamp court will say?

[truebluegreen]

111. My point exactly.

[gcomeau]

119. In other words...

..you are outraged that classified stuff happens. You should be told everything about everything.

Sorry, doesn't work that way. You can not like it all you wan but don't pretend like*that* is new. That has always been the case. *ALWAYS*.

[uponit7771]

125. *****AMEN!!!**********

[truebluegreen]

136. Oh puhleeze...

You got a lot out of my statements about a secret program secretly administered: I am "outraged that classified stuff happens"! I "should be told everything about everything"!

Spare me your over-reactions and straw man arguments.

I will say this though, and I'm not the first: Too much secrecy is the death of democracy and the over-use of the classified label coupled with a lack of oversight is what we need to stop.

Or maybe we should just trust the government in all things. I hear that's what the Founders intended.

[Th1onein]

211. They ARE doing warrantless wiretapping, by their own admission.

They've just changed the rules so that it's legal now. Everything that Hitler did was legal, too, remember?

[quakerboy]

224. Are you certain of that?

Because it seems pretty clear that they are performing universal illegal wiretapping.

They just promise to never, ever listen to it unless they somehow think its maybe related to something else and they can somehow, against all odds, convince a fisa court that their near 100% approval to listen to whatever they want should continue.

And as long as they don't listen to it, they didn't really "collect" it.

[Progressive dog]

57. ^^^K&R^^^^ nt

[Maven]

67. He signed it, he supports it, he owns it.

Same as Bush. Next?

[gcomeau]

70. No, not same as Bush.

Bush was performing illegal wiretapping. THAT was a scandal.

That isn't happening anymore.

[Maven]

71. Yes, it's all been made "legal" now.

We've been down this road before. Feh.

[gcomeau]

83. Performing the surveillance WITH A WARRANT

...has ALWAYS been legal.

[backwoodsbob]

113. sorry but

having a secret court hand down a secret ruling done in secret that we aren't allowed to see declaring something legal isn't cool by me

[gcomeau]

117. Go ahead and be not cool with it. *I'M not cool with it.

But you or I "not being cool with it" doesn't make it a scandal. It makes it something the government does that we don't particularly like. There is a whopping great difference between those two things.

[backwoodsbob]

122. no you're wrong

it is a scandal and worse.If they can do this in secret and have the ruling sealed so we can't see it then what else can they rub through that is in secret that we will only find out about years later?

THAT is what's pissing people off

[gcomeau]

123. No, I'm not.

Elected congresspeople repeatedly voting in large numbers to authorize a program and then the NSA doing it according to the law is not "a scandal".

Everything that pisses you off is not "a scandal".

[backwoodsbob]

127. and here we see why our country is falling apart

everything you defend isn't moral or ethical iether

[gcomeau]

131. Lack of basic reading comprehension? Yeah, could be.

Tel me where I even implied, let alone stated, that is was moral or ethical?

Pull your head out and try actually paying attention to things you respond to.

[backwoodsbob]

146. insulting people really turns people to your PoV

impressive sidestepping

[gcomeau]

173. You mean...

...like telling people they're an example of why the country is falling apart?

Save the fake moral indignation for something you didn't start and find some other excuse to avoid dealing with the fact that you made a claim that had no basis in reality and got called on it. And there was no sidestepping. Try actually reading things before pressing "reply" and writing whatever you feel like.

[totodeinhere]

141. There is no need to get hung up on semantics. Whether we call it a "scandal" or something else it is

wrong and un-American. And President Obama should not have signed off on it. That isn't the Obama I thought I was voting for.

[treestar]

158. Exactly.

Some people think things should be as they like, and when they aren't, it's some kind of scandal or major wrong. They don't get that their particular moral outlook does not rule - society does, and it's a compromising conglomeration of rules and regulations and systems. The idealistic person wants all that swept aside and vents that things aren't as they please.

[quakerboy]

225. You need to go back to the book.. Or "I dont think that word means what you think it means"

The book being the dictionary. The word being scandal.

scandal
1. a disgraceful or discreditable action, circumstance, etc.
2. an offense caused by a fault or misdeed.
3. damage to reputation; public disgrace.
4. defamatory talk; malicious gossip.
5. a person whose conduct brings disgrace or offense.

[MNBrewer]

115. "Search everyone for anything" is still an illegal search.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[gcomeau]

118. Which isn't being done. -eom

[MNBrewer]

139. Yes, it is.

[zeemike]

72. All of a sudden?...WTF?

One of the reasons I voted for Obama is he promised to end this shit...and Gitmo and the wars and all of that stuff...
Now you tell me that we did not do enough then so we should now STFU about it?

What a stunning thing to say.

[Agnosticsherbet]

112. Congress has refused to allow the President to close Gitmo or

move prisoners into the U.S. (http://gawker.com/5713090/democratic-congress-helps-keep-guantanamo-bay-open). That was democrats and Republicans that back that.

We are out of Iraq, and he has called for Congress to revoke the authorization to use force. He can not do that because he can not legislate. I've never heard of a President that announced a war was over where Congress did end the war. Congress have to do it.

Government requires all branches of government to act.

[zeemike]

132. It is the same old good cop bad cop argument.

Funny how Bush never had that kind of problem....I wonder why don't you?

For the first two years he had a democratic controlled house and senate but could still not get the important things done ....like Gitmo and other torture things...and you can't figure it out?
Nope instead he spent the first two years first taking single payer off the table...while Nancy took making Bush responsible for his shit off the table and then spent the next two years crafting Obama care...which was really a big giveaway to the insurance industry and used Bad Cop as an excuse to not do anything on the rest.

Sorry but I gave him the benefit of the doubt for 4 years and voted for him the second time hoping that once he no longer had to run he would do something for us...and what was the first thing he did?...purposed chained CPI.
Well he lost me then...and I will no longer make excuses for it

[Agnosticsherbet]

169. So the problem is Obama didn't disovle Congress and become a beneficant dicator. n/t

[zeemike]

178. No the problem is he did not use the bully pulpit

Especial when he had a democratic congers and a clear mandate from the election....ypu did not see Bush do that and he had no mandate....in fact he lost the popular vote to President Gore.

My personal belief is that they would not let him....that is the PTB...and what we learned about NSA spying it is even more probable that they taped his communications and had some dirt on him to make damn sure he did nothing to spoil their little game.

[Agnosticsherbet]

182. So you think he could use the bully pulpit and sway Congress with public opinion?

80% of Americans support rasing taxes on the rich. How has public support worked out?
A solid majority in almost all polls say Americans approve of same sex marriage. Congress did not run to approve that though most American approve of it.
71% of Americans approve of immigration reform. When did Congress pass that bill?

The bully pulpit works to change public opinion to get the people to convince one side or the other to do something. The Republicans in Congress are not swayed by public opinion.

[zeemike]

184. Well tell me when Obama called for raising the taxes on the rich

I sure as hell don't remember it, but I do remember him extending the Bush tax cuts and bailing out the banks...
The bully pulpit does not work if it is not used.

Oh and I forgot...he gave us a payroll tax holiday, which undermined Social Security...

[Agnosticsherbet]

188. Here you go.

http://mobile.rawstory.com/therawstory/#!/entry/obama-to-republicans-raise-taxes-on-rich-or-no-fiscal,514b00c6d7fc7b56707a9c32

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2013/04/17/taxing-millionaires-obamas-buffett-rule/

One from 2008 an another from 2012. Re publicans have refuse to allow it.

[zeemike]

192. Oh right I remember the Buffet rule

Which was quickly dismissed...
But Bush got two tax cuts for the rich and it sailed right through congress and he had no mandate.....Obama had one and could not even get the tax cuts repealed....How is that do you suppose?

I know. bad cop in the congress...every time we have good cop in the white house.

[Agnosticsherbet]

223. The Republicans are not concerned with public opinion

The only thing the bully pulpit does is engage public opinion.

Only the congress can pass legislation and raise taxes.

The President has not yet suspended the Constitution and declared himself emperor.

[zeemike]

233. He had a democratic congress for the first two years.

And the bully pulpit works on them as well as party discipline
And he used it to influence public opinion it would have stayed a democratic house....I am convinced of that.

I will no longer make excuses for his actions...which are third way leaning republican.

[Tx4obama]

238. Sorry but you are wrong. Really for only TWO MONTHS.

We had 60 votes in the Senate in Obama's 1st year or only a little over 2 months.

Sen Franken wasn't sworn in until July 2009, and Sen Kennedy died in August 2009.

Also, don't forget that Senator Kennedy was unable to be present at Congress the last couple of months of his life.

After Senator Kennedy's death his seat was vacant for one month before a temporary replacement was sworn in - Paul Kirk (D-MA) was appointed to fill the vacancy, sworn in September 24, 2009.

The Senate was on recess for most of the rest of the year (including Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Years, etc)

Scott Brown (R-MA) took over Kennedy's seat February 4, 2010

Altogether we had a 60 vote filibuster proof super-majority for only a little over TWO MONTHS

[Number23]

212. Serious, serious props to you for your efforts in this thread

They are much appreciated. Don't know if they will do any good but the effort is much appreciated.

[duffyduff]

253. He has not done one thing about the economy or joblessness

He's outright hostile to government job creation programs, being the far right, neoliberal that he is.

He had only a half-assed economic stimulus package, and it did NOTHING to alleviate the situation of millions upon millions of people who are suffering because they cannot get work.

[totodeinhere]

138. Yes we know that this has been going on. But some of us were naive enough to think that if we

voted for Barack Obama he would eliminate such surveillance programs. And the fact that he has not disappoints many of us. And we can't just blame Congress for reauthorizing the Patriot Act. President Obama could undo a lot of this by executive order or he could simply choose not to use some of those tactics legal or not. But he hasn't and this saddens me.

[Honeycombe8]

222. Yep. 'Tis true. This story was merely confirmation of what we knew already...

and the database was new to me. But not the Patriot Act, etc. That's old news.

[eridani]

240. What if you supported Obama in order to change this policy? n/t

[tomp]

246. the initial "scandal" was obama voting to let the telecom companies off the hook.

so no surprise from obama now. is something not scandalous if it has happened before?

[snooper2]

20. define phone data

It's not hard to be specific

[allin99]

39. what number you are calling, when and for how long.

[snooper2]

42. thank you

I could care less about them getting CDRs from Verizon


Here are all the standard fields for a softswitch CDR if you are curious-

GATEWAY ACCT_ID_3 START_TIME_SYS_TICKS_4 NODE_TIME_ZONE_5 START_DATE_GMT START_TIME_GMT TIME_ELAP_RESPONSE_8 TIME_ELAP_RECEIPT_9 TIME_ELAP_SERV_ESTIMATE_10 DISCONNECT_DATE DISCONNECT_TIME TIME_ELAP_CALL_TERM_COMP_13 CALL_SERVICE_DURATION CALL_DISCONNECT_REASON_15 SERVICE_DELIVERED_16 CALL_DIRECTION_17 SERVICE_PROVIDER_18 TRANSIT_NTWK_SELECTION_CODE_19 CALLING_NUMBER CALLED_NUMBER EXTRA_CALLED_ADDR_DIGITS_22 NUM_CALLED_NUM_TRANS_23 CALLED_NUM_BFR_TRANS_1_24 TRANSLATION_TYPE_1_25 CALLED_NUM_BFR_TRANS_2_26 TRANSLATION_TYPE_2_27 BILLING_NUM_28 ROUTE_TABLE_NAME RUT_ATTEMPT_NUM_30 ROUTE_SELECTED_GATEWAY_NAME EG_LOCAL_SIGNAL_IP_ADDR_32 EG_REMOTE_SIGNAL_IP_ADDR_33 ING_PSTN_TRUNK_NAME ING_PSTN_CIRCUIT_END_POINT_35 ING_IP_CIRCUIT_END_POINT_36 EG_PSTN_CIRCUIT_END_POINT_37 EG_IP_CIRCUIT_END_POINT_38 NUM_AUDIO_BYTES_SENT_39 NUM_AUDIO_PACKETS_SENT_40 NUM_AUDIO_BYTES_RECEIVE_41 NUM_AUDIO_PACKETS_RECEIVE_42 ORIG_LINE_INFO_OLIP_43 JURISDICTION_INFO_PARAM_44 CARRIER_CODE_45 CALL_GRP_ID_46 SCRIPT_LOG_DATA_47 TIME_ELAP_RECEIPT_EXIT_MSG_48 TIME_ELAP_GENERATE_EXIT_MSG_49 CALLING_PARTY_NOA_50 CALLED_PARTY_NOA_51 ING_SIGNALING_TYPE_53 EG_SIGNALING_TYPE_54 ING_FAR_END_SWITCH_TYPE_55 EG_FAR_END_SWITCH_TYPE_56 CARRIER_CD_ING_TRK_GRP_OWN_57 CARRIER_CD_EG_TRK_GRP_OWN_58 CALLING_PARTY_CATEGORY_59 DIALED_NUMBER CARRIER_SELECTION_INFO_61 CALLED_NUM_NUMBERING_PLAN_62 GENERIC_ADDR_PARAM DISCONNECT_IND_64 NUM_PACKETS_LOST_65 INTER_ARRIVAL_JITTER_TIME_66 LAST_MEASURE_LATENCY_67 EG_TRUNK_GRP_NAME_68 IN_CALLING_NUM_70 RECORD_LOAD_DATE AMA_CALL_TYPE_71 MSG_BILLING_IND_MBI_72 ORIG_LATA_73 RUT_INDEX_USED_74 CALLING_PARTY_RESTRICTION_75 IN_ISUP_CHARGE_NUM_76 IN_ISUP_CHARGE_NUM_NOA_77 DIALED_NUM_NOA_78 ING_CODEC_TYPE_79 EG_CODEC_TYPE_80 RTP_PACKETIZATION_TIME_81 CALL_ID_82 ORIG_ECHO_CANCEL_83 TERM_ECHO_CANCEL_84 CHARGE_FLAG_85 AMA_SERV_LOGIC_ID_86 AMA_BAF_MODULE_87 AMA_SET_HEX_AB_IND_88 SERV_FEATURE_ID_89 FE_PARAMETER_90 SATELLITE_IND_91 PSX_BILLING_INFO_92 ORIG_TDM_TRUNK_GRP_TYPE_93 TERM_TDM_TRUNK_GRP_TYPE_94 ING_TRUNK_MEM_NUM_95 EG_TRUNK_GRP_ID_96 EG_SWITCH_ID_97 POLICY_RESPONSE_CALL_TYPE_102 OUT_RUT_ID_103 OUT_MSG_ID_104 IN_RUT_ID_105 CALLING_NAME_106 CALLING_NAME_TYPE_107 IN_CALLING_PARTY_NUM_PLAN_108 OUT_CALLING_PARTY_NUM_PLAN_109 CALLING_PARTY_BUSS_GRP_ID_110 CALLED_PARTY_BUSS_GRP_ID_111 CALLING_PARTY_PUB_DIR_NUM_112 ELAP_TIME_SET_RCP_RUT_ATT_113 BILLING_NUM_NOA_114 IN_CALLING_NUM_NOA_115 EG_TRUNK_MEM_NUM_116 SELECTED_RUT_TYPE_117 ING_PROTO_VAR_SPECF_DATA_52 EG_PROTO_VAR_SPECF_DATE_69 TELCORD_LONG_DUR_REC_TYPE_118 TIME_ELAP_PREVI_REC_119 CUMUL_RUT_INDEX_120 CALL_DIS_RSON_TRANS_TO_ING_121 CALL_DIS_RSON_TRANS_TO_EG_122 ISDN_PRI_CALL_PTY_SUB_ADDR_123 OUT_TRUNK_GRP_NUM_IN_EXM_124 ING_LOCAL_SIGNAL_IP_ADDR_125 ING_REMOTE_SIGNAL_IP_ADDR_126 REC_SEQ_NUM_127 TRANSMI_MEDIUM_REQUI_TMR_128 INFO_TRANSF_RATE_ITR_129 USER_SERV_INFO_USI_LAYER_1_130 UNREC_RAW_ISUP_CALL_PTY_CT_131 SS7_RLS_TNK_RLT_FETUR_DATA_132 TWO_B_CHAN_TRAN_FETUR_DATE_133 CALLING_PARTY_BUSS_UNIT_134 CALLED_PARTY_BUSS_UNIT_135 REDIRECT_FEAT_DATA_136 IG_RLT_FEAT_DATA_137 INDEX_138 CONGESTION_LEVEL_139 PROCESSING_TIME_140 SCRIPT_NAME_141 IG_EXTERNAL_ACCOUNTING_142 EG_EXTERNAL_ACCOUNTING_143 EG_RTP_PACKET_TIME_144 EG_NUM_AUDIO_BYTES_SENT_145 EG_NUM_AUDIO_PACKS_SENT_146 EG_NUM_AUDIO_BYTES_RECV_147 EG_NUM_AUDIO_PACKS_RECV_148 EG_NUM_PACKETS_LOST_149 EG_INTARRIVAL_PACK_JITTER_150 EG_LAST_MEAS_LATENCY_151 IG_MAX_PACKET_OUTAGE_152 EG_MAX_PACKET_OUTAGE_153 IG_PACK_PLAYOUT_BUF_QUAL_154 EG_PACK_PLAYOUT_BUF_QUAL_155 CALL_SUPERVISION_TYPE_156 IG_SIP_RR_FEAT_SPECIF_DATA_157 EG_SIP_RR_FEAT_SPECIF_DATA_158 NET_TRANS_FEAT_SPECIF_DATA_159 CALL_CONDITION_160 TOLL_INDICATOR_161 GENERIC_NUMBER_NUMBER_162 GENERIC_NUM_PRES_RESTR_IND_163 GENERIC_NUM_NUM_PLAN_164 GENERIC_NUM_NOA_165 GENERIC_NUM_TYPE_166 ORIG_TRUNK_TYPE_167 TERM_TRUNK_TYPE_168 REMOTE_BILL_IND_169 VPN_CALL_PRIVATE_PRES_NUM_170 VPN_CALL_PUBLIC_PRES_NUM_171 EXT_FURNISH_CHARGING_INFO_172 IG_POLICING_DISCARDS_173 EG_POLICING_DISCARDS_174 ANNOUNCEMENT_ID_175 SOURCE_INFORMATION_176 NETWORK_ID_177 PARTITION_ID_178 NCOS_179 IG_SRTP_180 EG_SRTP_181 ISDN_ACCESS_IND_FROM_FCI_182 CALL_DISCONNECT_LOCATION_183 CALL_DISC_LOC_TRANS_TO_IG_184 CALL_DISC_LOC_TRANS_TO_EG_185 NETWORK_CALL_REF_CALL_ID_186 NET_CALL_REF_SIG_PT_CODE_187 IG_ISUP_MIME_PROTOCOL_VAR_188 EG_ISUP_MIME_PROTOCOL_VAR_189 MODEM_TONE_TYPE_190 MODEM_TONE_SIGNAL_LEVEL_191 VIDEO_CODEC_DATA_192 VIDEO_CODEC_STATS_193 CUSTOMER_194 OVERLAP_ROUTE_REQS_197
CALL_SETUP_DELAY_198 OVERLOAD_STATUS_199

[allin99]

60. saved in code or not, the gov't is obtaining, and storing all of your phone activity.

if that doesn't bother you, okay, fine, that's fair enough, the fact that it bothers me and other people, doesn't make them racist or whatever else.

[snooper2]

62. what do you mean saved in code?

[allin99]

91. someone has to retreive that information...

and analyze it for content, right? i could be wrong. i don't know how to phrase that. oh, but only *if* they suspect me to be involved in criminal (not terrorist) activity of course, and they could really use it for anything down the road when it's convenient to them.

and you know there will be more bush's right? think they're gonna give a shit about who accesses that information? it's theirs, the gov't owns it.

[heaven05]

28. that's not

the point here. "buying into alleged scandals the second they arise", is the point. Not a proven time tested scandal.

[allin99]

55. even *if* people were "buying into scandal"...

still does not indicate racism. A person can buy into anything at any time, racist people can and so can non racist people.

IRS, whatever, bunch of horseshit
Benghazi, horseshit .
NSA, not just asking for phone records, but forcing telecomunication companies to hand over everyone's phone activity on an ongoing basis, not a non-issue.

[heaven05]

75. racism

is not in the picture with me when it comes to NSA. Scandal proven to be shameful and is time proven since it was initiated by the Bush-Cheney cabal. Our so called constitutional rights are no more. IRS, Behghazi all bshit. I agree, yet I feel many in our legislative branch are driven by time proven racism. A lot of amerikkkans just can't help themselves when it comes to being any type of racist bigot.

[allin99]

86. give obama a chance to make changes to not only this program...

but to the patriot act. if you believe he is earnest in his desire to protect americans right to privacy, now's the time to say you're not going to stand for bush era policies, that they can roll back or take out parts of the patriot act. Right now i think obama just brought back some privacy oversight committee that bush created and never used. I think it was yesterday the news came out. If liberal activists weren't upset that telecommunications companies are now required to hand over everything on an ongoing basis, obama wouldn't have done that. if you believe he cares about civil liberties, tell him you don't what's going on and give him a chance to use public opinion to be able to make changes instead of fighting against those who are upset about. fk the gd fucking republicans and their stupid bullshit, they can't do anything to obama, but you can give obama a chance to make changes to FISA, NSA practices, Patriot act, whatever.

the aclu has now 2 lawsuits i think, or 1 lawsuit and one campaign for feds and congress to remove section 215 from the patriot act.

the outrage from people who are liberal activists is a good thing, even if the bitchy-ass republicans want to use it to their favor, fine, it gives obama and oppty to use them back. Have more faith in him. I want to, although admittedly i am a bit naive cuz i keep having faith.

[heaven05]

96. i agree

reasoned and rational. Faith is a good thing, just who or what faith is in, well that gets problematic. Keep plugging away, I am.

[zeemike]

82. But you see if you thorugh it in that bag with the horseshit.

It will smell like horseshit too...which is the point of lumping them all together.

[allin99]

89. you can have 1 relevant issue...

and 3 non relevant issues and put them together, it doesn't mean all the issues are non-relevant.

[zeemike]

99. Yes

But that is what they want to do...and apparently have successfully convinced some here to buy into that obscuring device.

[The CCC]

41. Is the NSA dragnetting millions of peoples phone data a bogus scandal?

It is if you are claiming it started under Obama and/or it is because he is a Kenyan Socialist.

[pnwmom]

58. Yes, it was a bogus scandal.

It was falsely described as a program that was collecting the content of people's phone calls and emails.

And the actual program of collecting meta-data had been openly debated and publicly voted on as part of the Patriot Act during the Bush administration.

While there is every reason to debate the value of this program, to depict it as a scandal is bogus.

[allin99]

80. i don't like having my personal activity obtained and stored...

when i am not a person of interest, and who's looking at it? who knows. fisa courts don't HAVE to give permission to view them. Is this the first time we found out that EVERYONE's activity have been dragnetted on an ongoing basis? that was news to me. It's a problem when the u.s. gov't is requiring telecommunications companies to hand over all of it. and getting up in arms about it now that finally people are paying attention, actually kinda works in both of our favors if we didn't like it in whatever scale we believed it was going on in the first place. infact, the cat that's out of the bag, that EVERYONE'S activity is being stored on an ongoing basis, let's find out exactly how many. But the admin is not willing to say. Now's the time to be upset about it and demand it. does that mean it's a scandal because people are demanding it right now? of course not, we just found out it's millions of us.

(Not sure how many people here believe that their phone calls are being monitored, i've seen maybe 2 people say that out of 100's. Well, unless you're calling someone out of the country, then it's questionable).

[treestar]

155. Yes. It's a legal question.

If unconstitutional, the courts will decide. It's not a scandal to use the law in the meantime.

[allin99]

157. and the loopholes in the law could create "scandals" for decades.

as can the vague langauge and the law itself that allows the gov't to do things we don't think of.

[treestar]

168. To me it's not scandalous unless there is no legal question open

Congress did pass the FISA. It's like exploiting tax loopholes. They can be closed, but the people who used them in the meantime can't be prosecuted and didn't do wrong.

[allin99]

170. it's not about legal illegal, we know obama didn't do anything illegal...

the outrage is that for the first time people are finding out that they are collecting peoples phone activity en masse, on an ongoing basis, it it includes/can include EVERYONE. maybe you knew that, it's just old news to you, although i don't think you did cuz it was a secret. it was a secret order that the law allowed the admin to use. that's what people are unhappy with. you can call it a faux scandal if you like.

[treestar]

171. that system was there from inception of the FISA

so I don't see taking the current President as the only instigator of it to be valid, especially as it so far has not been deemed unconstitutional. We as a society should know what the laws are, so we should know we as a society have entrusted some things to the government to be secret. There are tons of laws in the US, so being outraged about finding out about one we didn't know about before doesn't make sense.

I don't think them having access to the metadata is as scary as some here find it to be. The government has never really bothered me, so long as I file a tax return every year. Some people may be spied on and it may not be fair, but admittedly it is tough for them to prove that without sounding paranoid at the same time.

[allin99]

172. "I don't think them having access to the metadata is as scary as some here find it to be" ...

okay, so it's a difference of opinion. you're cool with it, many people are not. aclu included, myself and many others. you were cool with it when bush did it, and so now it's the same. just a difference of what we feel comfortable with. millions and millions of people's phone activity being turned over to the gov't and stored on an ongoing basis is news to me.

[eridani]

241. So if I know that you called a suicide hotline but didn't listen to the call--

--I have not the faintest idea what you talked about, right?

[datasuspect]

3. i don't like him because he's a politician

and not a statesman. and we needed a statesman to undo the damage bushy caused - not continue almost EVERY bush regime policy.

and he sold a lot of weary people a bill of goods to get into office.

plus i'm a democrat, i don't vote for reagan or nixon era republicans.

[SammyWinstonJack]

15. +1.

[cali]

4. Could you please point out one instance of your having criticized the President

here? I'm genuinely curious. You're saying you have big issues with the President and his administration. I can't recall having seen any evidence of that, but of course I hardly recall every post by every duer.

And what do you consider a bogus scandal?

I agree about the use of right wing sources as criticism of the President.

[rhett o rick]

17. The OP is the second post I have seen today where someone surprised me by posting that they

thought it was ok to be critical of the President. If there is one more, I am calling it a conspiracy.

[cali]

36. well, maybe the author has been critical of the President, but I can't find

posts that back that up. A cursory search shows a lot of defense.

From '09:
Fuck the Mediawhores stupid talking point about the luster coming off Obama's presidency

and fuck the DU'ers who are happy to play along with them.

How many other presidents had questions come up with nominees?

Compare the issues with Bush nominees to the three people who made mistakes on their taxes.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4973290

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1551996

[KittyWampus]

218. Cali, why don't you search my journal from DU v. 2. And btw, whether I do or don't post my criticism

of Obama on this website has nothing to do with my having issues with his policies.

[Puzzledtraveller]

47. I noticed that too

[Marr]

22. I've never seen one, either. /nt

[quinnox]

48. this OP is by a diehard BOGer

I have never seen them post anything critical either.

[allin99]

93. what is bog?

[Marr]

124. Barrack Obama Group.

It's a subforum here-- more or less a fan club where criticism of the president is not welcome. They often (or at least they used to) use it to rally against threads with topics critical of the president in other portions of the forum, such as General Discussion here, and swarm it all at once with alerts and personal insults.

[allin99]

133. should be "groupie", lol.

[Inkfreak]

163. Jury results.

At Fri Jun 21, 2013, 01:46 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Barrack Obama Group.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3061195

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Disruptive, divisive, rude, and completely unnecessary.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jun 21, 2013, 01:53 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It's an opinion, like the one about a mom letting their daughter wear shorts that are too short...
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: The poster makes baseless accusations. And it's a moderated sub-forum. If the poster doesn't like what goes on there, he/she doesn't have to go there.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: "The person who sent the alert wrote: Disruptive, divisive, rude, and completely unnecessary." That's 3/4 of the Milestone Threads lately. I fail to see why this post should be hidden.


Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[KittyWampus]

221. you can't even spell the President's name correctly. I MAY have been in the BOG years ago in DU v.2

I left DU for a long time when it moved to v.3 and haven't visited ANY subforum on DU since then.

So your attempts to minimize my valid OP by trying to mischaracterize me is pathetic.

[Marr]

226. I merely described what the BOG is. Or rather was, when it was relevant.

Also, Barack. I pray that He will forgive my blasphemous incompetence.

[RetroLounge]

229. "you can't even spell the President's name correctly"

This is your criticism?

True believers just can't help themselves, can they?

RL

[KittyWampus]

220. Been here far longer than you have and I have no fucking idea what BOGer is.

[KittyWampus]

219. Been here longer than you have. Try searching my journal on DU2. And whether I post criticisms on DU

has NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER I HAVE THEM.

[Marr]

227. I've been here since 2001.

I had to change names when an old email address became inaccessible. Not that it means anything-- this isn't the Navy.

And whether you post criticisms on DU has everything to do with this. I'm not a mind reader.

[Aerows]

30. I'm waiting, too

And we aren't going to see one, nor will there be an example. If you dare criticize the administration on this board, you are a hater, you are a Republican (an insult I wish on no one) or a person that wants a pony.

[KittyWampus]

217. You know what Cali, I have been here since DU v.1. On DU v. 2 I had issues with his economic team

and posted about it in my journal.

That's for starters.

I then took a long break from DU.

Because of the hatred towards Obama.

And the perfect example of a bogus scandal? Where were you for the last month or so?

[ananda]

5. Agree.

The racism shows up in the kind of disrespect shown and the type of attacks against Obama.

Valid criticism and outrage is not racist. There is an anti-human and pro-corporate angle
in the Obama admin that needs serious protest and action.

[allin99]

9. if it's "disrepectful" toward other dems is that racism?

and if it's not, how come it is in obama's case? pretty sure someone called for clinton's death here the other day. And a whole lot of other lovely stuff.

[Aerows]

24. Valid criticism

and outrage are not racist. Defending Constitutional rights being taken away by declaring it racist, IS. I don't know if you are white, red, black, green or blue, but defending the NSA using the moniker of racism is the height of WRONG.

[Fumesucker]

6. Who is going to let us know the "scandals" are "bogus"?

Is there an approved source for vetting these scandals?

We have several real authorities on DU, I've been reading their threads lately and they know exactly what is going on.

Unfortunately they often disagree diametrically.

[Major Hogwash]

37. We will. We are BOG.

Cue dramatic music -
http://www.wavsource.com/snds_2013-06-09_7806069158793874/movies/monty_python_hg/holy_grail_music.wav

[BrotherIvan]

81. The only post with 100% truth I've seen from a BOrG

Perhaps inadvertent truth-telling but appreciated nonetheless.

[pnwmom]

66. Everyone can decide themselves, after waiting a few days to see how the truth shakes out.

The problem is that many people have been all too quick to jump at Republican bait.

[rhett o rick]

78. Who has been "jumping at Republican bait."? In the last couple of days, people have

posted the unusual circumstances of Michael Hastings death only to be hit hard with a broadside of "Stop blaming Obama" posts.

Is siding with Sen Wyden's cry for further investigations, jumping at Republican bait?

Again I say that speculation and skepticism are good things. Shutting down discussion with ridicule is not good.

[pnwmom]

110. Speculation after a death is pointless till the facts come in.

We lost an extended-family member at 29. It's unusual, but it happens. It took almost three months to get the toxicology results, and the results were ambiguous. (Nothing in his system but normal amounts of prescribed medications.)

I hope there are clear answers eventually with the Hastings' death, but even if there are, the speculation and conspiracy theories will probably never end. They provide too much entertainment to the speculators.

[rhett o rick]

145. Speculation is never pointless. It would be good if we had a button to push

to learn all of the facts and put our minds at rest. But that doesnt happen. We often get only part of the facts and in some cases only those facts that the powers to be (I mean other than Obama) want us to get. Do we know the facts about Tillman's death?

I dont see a problem with conspiracy theories. Some can be discounted immediately while others may have some truth involved.

Some believe that speculation is a bad thing, I think denial is the bad thing.

[AgingAmerican]

153. Watch FOX news for 15 minutes then get back to us on that one

n/t

[rhett o rick]

159. If you are trying to make a point, I guess I miss it. You dont believe in speculation? nm

[pnwmom]

187. Whipping up suspicion about Obama on every front imaginable is what Fox specializes in. n/t

[rhett o rick]

194. You just have to make me guess what the point is. I dont have a clue what this post and post 153

have to do with what I said.

I can tell the difference between right-wing propaganda and honest speculation. I hope you arent trying to equate the speculation that the NSA isnt telling us all, is "Whipping up suspicion about Obama on every front imaginable". Or the speculation about Michael Hastings death is whipping up suspicion,.....?

[AgingAmerican]

198. watch FOX news for 15 minutes

You will see a string of pointless speculations unfold.

[rhett o rick]

206. Your point? nm

[AgingAmerican]

236. See post #145

n/t

[rhett o rick]

239. Here's the deal. I am not going on a post hunt and try to figure out your point. You either have a

point or not. So far, no point. nm

[pnwmom]

199. In the context of all the fake scandals we've had since Benghazi,

speculation about Hastings' death before we've had an autopsy report or toxicology results seems to me to be playing into the hands of Fox and its legions of followers.

[rhett o rick]

207. I wont let Fox dictate whether I will speculate or not. I am free to speculate and I can tell the

difference between politically driven speculation and honest speculation. It appears to me that some are trying to suppress any speculation that might look bad for the current Admin, using the rational that since Fox News always speculates unfavorably toward the President then anyone that does so must align with Fox News. That's crap. And I am not racist, if that's the next rationalization. I am an open minded Democrat that abhors attempts to tell me what I can or can not think.

If President Obama cant close Gitmo, how can he reform the Bush spy machine? It was in place when he got in office and apparently he has to live with it.

[Major Hogwash]

108. Like all of that stuff Greenwald said about the President lying about the NSA program last week.

So, Charlie Rose interviewed the President last weekend and he answered lots of questions about the program.
And they held a hearing in the House of Representatives earlier this week with the people involved with the NSA program.

Stuff like that there.

[HardTimes99]

135. You have laid your finger on a subsidiary but not insignificant concern: we have

to trust some expert somewhere to know more about a given technical subject than almost all of us do.

And when those 'experts' disagree amongst themselves, what are even well-educated laypeople to make of it? Are we merely to surrender to our own latent confirmation bias?

Beats me. I have no easy answer to the question, but wanted to show my appreciation for your having raised it. It needs to be part of this discussion, imo.

[FSogol]

7. K & R. n/t

[Ms. Toad]

10. The NSA is not a bogus scandal.

So stop using racism as a weapon against those who have longstanding concerns about secret governmental spying operations, regardless of the letter behind the administration which conducts them.

As for not blaming him for things that need to be done by Congress - just because Congress permits something (unconstitutional, in my opinion) does not force the president to act to the limit of what is permitted. I expect him not to, based on the platform he ran on. The fact that Congress should also act does not mitigate his responsibility for his own actions.

[Aerows]

18. It seems to me

that this is a special brand of freaking out because it's Obama doing it, and everyone here knows it is wrong. It's wrong, he did the wrong thing, and there is no way to get out of it. He needs to put it in reverse, back out, and recognize that he is having his feet held to the fire on this one.

But some are upset because he isn't sterling, and some are upset because they delight in policies that they detest under a Republican awning while they excuse this one.

[Ms. Toad]

31. Except that, unfortunately, I don't know that the folks pushing the racism label

acknowledge the policies are wrong. They seem to me to have convinced themselves that there is something inherently different in the clandestine information gathering and crunching merely because those who wanted to (and were) spying all along took advantage of 9/11 to pass a law codifying authority for what was being done without authority of law all along.

(I still believe it is unconstitutional - but 9/11 at least gave it the color of law).

[Aerows]

32. I was against it under Bush

I'm against it now. I get your point, though. Suddenly it's okay because someone has a (D) behind their name.

[The Link]

11. Is esalated drone warfare bogus? Social security cuts? Civil rights for gays?

Domestic spying?

Is there a list compiled somewhere of legitimate issues?

[allin99]

235. killing a u.s. citizen without due process? a brown...

u.s. citizen at that.

[demmiblue]

13. Yet another Meta thread. n/t

[Aerows]

14. This entire board

is undergoing a nervous breakdown because a Democratic President did something wrong, and all of you recognize it and are having a heart attack over it.

[L0oniX]

40. It's more than one thing he has done against voters who believed what he said.

I actually went to a pre 1st term Obama rally and heard him.

[Aerows]

50. It's more than one thing

But this particular thing has him nailed to the Constitutional wall, and as a Constitutional Law Professor, many thought he could do better than this. That's what has them squirming in their boots.

[morningfog]

59. That is it to a T.

[Marr]

19. YOU'RE an example of a reasonable Obama CRITIC? Pardon me, but...

If every single person in the country was as harsh a critic as you, Obama would be deified by next Wednesday and proclaimed Emperor for life.

[liberal_at_heart]

21. so because you think PRISM is a bogus scandal that means I have to agree with you or I'm an Obama

smearer? Give me a break. We are not going away. I don't care what names you call us. We will hold all politicians accoutable.

[progressoid]

23. Who posts things from Breitbart?

Granted, I've been gone for a couple weeks so I may not have seen them, but I would think that Breitbart posts would be locked or deleted.

[Progressive dog]

101. Here, reworded from breitbart

Bet I could find more. [link:http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023052033|

[progressoid]

121. Looks like that's from The Atlantic.

[Progressive dog]

130. try Breitbart they've got it too

[progressoid]

149. So does USA Today and CNN

I've never been to breitbart (and hope to never go there again) but after seeing their version, it made me wonder if others had also made a comparison from 2008 to 2013. I searched CNN, USA Today and MSNBC and found that two of them did cover it. I'm sure there are more out there but I got tired of googling.

Clearly bretibart's is vitriolic and childish; while the Atlantic's seems to be just a boring comparison. Regardless, it seems a bit of a stretch to think that all these news outlets are doing breitbart's work.

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/us/2013/06/19/lead-nsa-scandal-dampens-obama-berlin-speech.cnn.html
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/06/18/obama-germany/2432583/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/06/19/obama-germans/2438461/

[mick063]

25. I call bullshit

The OP perpetuates racism. He does more harm than good.

[BainsBane]

26. It may be irritating

and ever Freeperish, but that doesn't mean it's racist. I haven't read most of these threads hurling charges of racism back and forth, but it strikes me as ugly, particularly when people are talking about legitimate differences of opinion on policy and civil liberties.

[Nye Bevan]

27. I know. Take that Tom Tomorrow for example. He's totally "bought into" the NSA "bogus scandal".

What a racist.

[msanthrope]

29. How about using Rasmussen polling to smear the President?

Googling my username and 'Rasmussen' and 'barrel' in the helpful box provided by the administrators of this site will reveal a very interesting thread from February.

[rhett o rick]

33. I dont know what to make of this OP.

"There are plenty of DU'ers who have big issues with Obama and his Admin. (I am one of them)"

I dont recall any time that you had "big issues with Obama". In fact it seems to me like you werent very happy with those that did. Apparently I misunderstood.

I think most all of us agree not to use attacks from right-wing sources. Not sure why you are bringing that up. When you see it happen, challenge it in the thread.

[L0oniX]

38. You might be a worshipper zombie if you never agree with legit criticisms.

[Puzzledtraveller]

43. Holy Cow

[whatchamacallit]

44. You might be an ignorant asshole

for casting, even bogus, criticism as racism.

[RetroLounge]

231. +100

RL

[HardTimes99]

46. Is pointing out that Obama's nominee for FBI Director, James Comey, signed

off on the legality of the Bush-era torture regime a 'valid Obama criticism' or a 'rightwing Obama smear'?

Is pointing out that Comey is a Republican a 'valid Obama criticism' or a 'rightwing Obama smear'?

Ironically, Cheney has an axe to grind with Comey because Comey opposed certain aspects of the Bush regime. IOW, Cheney would oppose Comey's nomination to FBI Director because Comey wasn't sufficiently fervent in support of the Torture Regime.

Despite his stellar credentials, Comey’s Senate confirmation won’t necessarily be a breeze. Two years ago, he was on the short list to replace Mueller—before the unprecedented decision by President Obama and Congress to grant Mueller a two-year term extension—and one of the factors working against him then was his key role in the Valerie Plame leak investigation and the indictment of vice presidential aide Scooter Libby. As one source said at the time, “Dick Cheney would call in every chit he has to torpedo Jim Comey.” The weeks ahead will determine whether the passage of time has muted that concern.

http://www.washingtonian.com/blogs/capitalcomment/fbi/what-you-should-know-about-jim-comey-obamas-choice-to-lead-the-fbi.php

(Thanks to DUer 'Cha' for posting the excerpt above in a different thread.)

OTOH, Cheney supports Obama's surveillance of innocent American citizens.

Is it a 'valid Obama criticism' to note that anything Cheney agrees with should be ipso facto suspect? Or is noting Cheney's endorsement of Obama's surveillance tactics a 'rightwing Obama smear'? If so, we're truly down the rabbit hole.

[Logical]

49. Hit and Run??? n-t

[morningfog]

53. This tripe is indefensible stupidity. I don't blame them for running.

[Puzzledtraveller]

87. makes you wonder then

what are they trying to achieve? stifle dissent? It won't work here, they need to understand that.

[morningfog]

88. Probably just flame bait, with hopes of stifling dissent. Who knows?

[demmiblue]

126. Here is how this all went down, as far as I can tell:

OP did not like this post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3052033


Instead of arguing her point in that post, she started this post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3056317


The previous post got locked, so she thought she would reword it so that it didn't violate the SoP. Hence, this post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023057807

She was disappointed that that thread didn't turn into a major flamefest, so here we are!


How do I know this? Too much time on DU (sick at home)!

[Logical]

197. Perfect analysis. n-t

[PDittie]

51. You know why threads like this are helpful?

They let me know EXACTLY who it is that needs to go on Full Ignore. Thanks for that.

[morningfog]

52. Oh my god. Give it a fucking rest.This racist under every rock bullshit

is fucking stupid.

[Skip Intro]

56. +100. n/t

[Lizzie Poppet]

54. Nope. None of that demonstrates racism.

None of those actions necessarily have fuck-all to do with race.

Jesus, it's like derp is raining from the sky on this issue...

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

61. I just take issues with liberals who claim that by virtue of them being liberal, they can't

be racist. I'm telling us dear liberals that that is not the case. Not only have I witnessed racism firsthand from liberals on DU, I saw it with my own two eyes during the Democratic primaries.

Yes, liberals *can be* racists, just like wingnuts and Teabaggers. Just because they think they aren't, or don't use the N-Word, or have black/Hispanic friends, or whatever, doesn't mean that they can't be racists.

[randome]

68. I don't think it's fair to 'call' anyone a racist on DU.

But I do think it's fair to ask the question. There is subconscious racism, I believe.

That doesn't mean I think anyone who denigrates Obama is a racist but...Donald Trump says he isn't. I think he truly believes that.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

74. I"M NOT CALLING ANYONE RACIST! I'm saying that I've SEEN racism here on DU.

I'm also saying that just because one considers himself/herself a liberal DOES NOT mean that said liberal can't be a racist. I've seen it.

[randome]

76. I wasn't saying you were. I was talking about all the threads going up on the subject.

No offense intended.

I'm basically agreeing with you, pointing out that sometimes there is subconscious racism.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

105. It is often difficult to provide evidence of subconscious racism. People think that only

explicit racist sentiment or expressions count.

With Obama, there is more of an implicit--or unconscious--form of insidious racism. The Black Tax is a great example of this.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

140. I think subconscious racism is a HUGE issue. I believe that's what we're referring to here.

But there are more explicit forms of racism directed at this president--by the Teabaggers, for instance and mainline Republicans. A good example is calling the president The Food Stamp President. If we're being honest about what the Southern Strategy was all about, then we should know well what "The Food Stamp President" means and that is alludes to the fallacy that blacks are the primary beneficiaries of food stamps (and other public assistance). "The Welfare Queen" depicted by Reagan comes to mind. If people can't see how The Welfare Queen is racist, then they are intellectually dishonest or have little recall of history.

[One of the 99]

73. True

Some of the worst racists I've known were liberal in every other way. There were even some who were all for civil rights and minority causes as long as they felt they were helping the oppressed but they couldn't handle a woman or minority who was an equal.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

77. You said: "they couldn't handle a woman or minority who was an equal"...

This is the racism/sexism that I've witnessed and I've experienced it firsthand, particularly during the 2007 Democratic primaries.

I am both black and a woman. I know what racism/sexism is when I see it. And I'm telling everyone that I've seen it here and elsewhere...in liberal circles!!

[liberal_at_heart]

92. does that mean I'm not allowed to criticize Hillary either? Come on. Whatever happened to

criticizing somone based on their stand on the issues? I don't like that Hillary has taken so much money from lobbyists. She did fight hard for true universal healthcare not this insurance backed ACA and she did fight for special education which I like. But I want someone who will fund all of K-12, not just special education and not just math and science like Obama wants to do. Howard Dean has a lot of moderate views on issues. He is fiscally conservative and in a time when we need investment in the public sector I'm not sure I would like him either. I do like his grassroots fundraising efforts. I want a liberal. Someone who will spend money on public education. Someone who will fight lobbyists and reform campaign finance. Is that somone Dean or Hillary? I don't know. but I will tell you I will make my decision based on the issues, not on race or gender. I will not automatically vote for Hillary just because we are the same gender. She has to earn my vote just like every other politician and right now none of the democrats in the White House or the Congress are earning my vote.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

102. Again, it's not about *legitimate* criticisms at all. Sigh...

[liberal_at_heart]

116. well I would guess we probably disagree about what legitimate means.

You think the NSA scandal is bogus. I happen to think that civil liberties is a fundamental liberal ideal, so when I see our President and our Congress abusing our civil liberties I will criticize them for it, all of them. I don't know if you have read any of my posts before but I do not only criticize the President. I am frustrated with the entire party right now. As far as I'm concerned they have all been bought off by the 1%.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

137. I never stated that the NSA scandal is bogus. Where did I write that? You must be responding to

someone upthread. Please do not put words in my mouth.

We're here to discuss. We can discuss/debate what legitimate concerns/criticisms are.

[totodeinhere]

148. I'm sure you would agree however that bona fide liberals are much less likely to be

racist than baggers are.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

176. I agree that EVERYONE is far less likely to be racists than the Teabaggers.

[Maven]

64. Disingenuous post that starts with a big lie ("I certainly do")

and then uses dishonest framing ("bogus scandals&quot to continue perpetrating another big lie, all while trying to appear the voice of reason.

[Apophis]

65. I'm a black man pissed off about the NSA spying.

Does it make me a racist to be pissed off at Obama for continuing Bush-era domestic surveillance on American citizens?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

79. Absolutely not. The OP is not referring to legitimate criticisms of the president.

[whatchamacallit]

84. What?!?

Last edited Fri Jun 21, 2013, 12:31 PM - Edit history (1)

The OP calls Apophis' criticism bogus. How is the same criticism more legitimate for one person than another?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

103. Sounds to me like an opinion. Why not debate that.

[AgingAmerican]

109. The OP is attacking a strawman

n/t

[treestar]

160. Yep, the problem is that it's hard to find legitimate ones posted here

There are so many stupid ones, and in the process of dealing with those, we get assigned to "groupie" by the ill intentioned.

A lot of these posters, I just disagree with their fundamental philosophy of how to look at things. Notice only criticism is good, praise is bad. I don't buy into that negativity.

[Logical]

128. LOL, great point!! I guess the OP thinks you are a black racist. Rare I admit. n-t

[noiretextatique]

147. ditto...black female who is critical of politicians

even black ones like obama. i am racist to the core, apparently

[allin99]

237. tritto, another black female that is tired of a bunch of young white people...

calling us and everyone else racist. They think all the sudden they are authorities on race and racism because they voted for a black person, then post all these ridiculous posts trying to explain it to us. ay yi yi. i can only hope they're all under 25. (although sadly, i know many are actually older than that).

[noiretextatique]

256. it's absolutely ridiculous

given the real racism on display by the right wing they can kiss my black ass!

[frylock]

179. that would make you self loathing..

or some other BS.

[One of the 99]

69. There are definitely Obama haters here but that doesn't mean their racists

Some I think are just so far to the extreme left that they will never support any President. Others I think may be Hillary supporters who still haven't gotten over it. Sure, there might be some who are racists, but not all or most of them.

[truebluegreen]

107. I don't know why people keep talking about the "extreme left"

on this site or anywhere. I doubt if there are 30 communists in the whole flippin' country, let alone here.

[One of the 99]

174. I never said anything about communists.

Conflating liberals with communists is very FAUX news type of thinking.

[frylock]

180. as is conflating FDR dems with the "extreme left"

[truebluegreen]

183. Very true, and thank you.

What so many don't seem to realize (remember? ever know?) is that FDR, far from being some crazed socialist, saved capitalism.

His safety net programs, progressive tax structure and regulations made capitalism acceptable to the majority in this country because they got a share of the pie. Without him, and without his programs, we could have gone the socialist route, or far more likely the fascist route (certainly many conservatives of the era were in favor of the latter). His deficit spending pulled us out of the Great Depression and built a manufacturing capability that, when retooled for peacetime, built the economic powerhouse of the 50s and 60s. The GI Bill was a huge part of it too. Passed in 1944, it provided returning soldiers with low-interest mortgages, or small business loans, or tuition with room & board for higher education (and prevented civil unrest caused by high unemployment after the war).

To me, liberalism is the sensible middle, the safety valve that prevents the pressure cooker from exploding. The fact that "liberals" have been recast as lefties says a lot about how far both parties have drifted to the right (well, one drifted and the other charged headlong).

[One of the 99]

185. I wasn't

I never said a word about FDR so don't put words in my mouth.

[frylock]

189. you may not have, but the OP certainly has..

along with several other BOG'rs.

[One of the 99]

195. So reply to them

not to me.

[truebluegreen]

181. Communists ARE the extreme left.

My point is there aren't any--on this site or in the Democratic Party or anywhere else in this country (except maybe under Republicans' beds along with the Muslim Kenyan Socialists).

Thanks for the attempted smear, though! Very FAUX of you!

[One of the 99]

186. And I never said a word about communists

So you're the one attempting the smear by trying to put words in my mouth.

[truebluegreen]

191. Quoting you, "There are definitely Obama haters here....

Some are just so far to the extreme left that they will never support any President." (Btw, I'd love to see an example of the mythical creature you have described.) Eta: incidentally, where do you get the idea that communists don't / wouldn't support their leaders, or are "presidents" some kind of exception to the class "leaders"?

If you are going to use a term, you need to understand what it means. "Extreme left" in political thought is communism. Which is exactly what I said in response to your first post.

Kthnxbye.

[One of the 99]

196. Again you dishonestly put words in my mouth.

I never equated the extreme left and communists. You did that. And it is the same tactic they used by the right wing and FAUX news.

[truebluegreen]

200. No, dear, the dictionary does that.

1. Far Left

10 up, 3 down

Also known as the extreme left, ultra left or radical left. The Far Left most often includes anarchists and communists. The Far Left refers to the highest degree of leftism in politics, and seeks perfect or near perfect equality. Often anti-property, anti-capitalist, anti-fascist, anti-liberal, and anti-conservative.

You were the one who claimed thar be extreme leftists here; I'm the who said there weren't, so if anyone is indulging in fux snooze-style smearing it isn't me.

Ciao, baby; I've got no more time for this.

[One of the 99]

204. Nice try!

But you're still dishonetly putting words in my mouth and you know it.

And all for a post where I was defending people being accused of being racists.

[Warren Stupidity]

85. Simple test number two.

If official republicans are not joining in, the scandal is a bipartisan cluster fuck and we should, all of us, be very concerned.

[obama2terms]

90. I have HUGE issues

With what he is doing. But I acknowledge it has been going on for years, but it needs to stop, because he's losing everyone's trust! Posting something from breibart though, come on people can't you find a better source than that?

[Enrique]

98. utter bullshit

worse than bullshit actually. This is really bad stuff and reflects badly on Obama. He has never done it himself, but the fact that his supporters do reflects badly on him.

[Cleita]

100. I don't think real liberals are posting stuff from Breitbart.

Just saying.

[AgingAmerican]

104. You left one out

"Disagree with Obama's NSA spying program"

[Comrade Grumpy]

106. Pathetic OP. Stinkin' up he joint.

[AgingAmerican]

114. And you might be racist for blanket accusations of racism

used against those who disagree with you politically.

[flying rabbit]

120. Racism?

Really? Do you have anything better?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

129. That's not "racist". It's stupid....

I know the two go hand in hand,...but still.

[HooptieWagon]

134. The only RW connection I've observed...

is the apologists backing apolicy employing a Bush Corporation, that's endorsed by Dick Cheney. Oh, and a couple of the apologists have linked to Little Green Footballs to support their case.
OTOH, the long time Obama supporters who are critical of this particular policy, share the position with Al Gore, Alan Grayson, Bernie Saunders, the ACLU, and many other Democratic keaders.

[Firebrand Gary]

143. Thanks for posting this, Kitty.

Its was not two days ago I got berated for calling someone out on their post. I too have disagreements with the Obama administration, however I do agree with the vast majority of what this President has done and is doing. I'm so sick of watching DU turn into nothing but a venue for people to criticize the President.

The last time people behaved this way we lost the 2010 elections. Coincidentally we are heading to mid terms once again. Shall we repeat the mistakes of the past, or shall we come together and get these nut bags out of office in 2014.

[noiretextatique]

144. bull...shit

utter and complete. you might be a racist if you express racist senitments...period, paragraph, end of story. instead of looking for racists under the covers here, i suggest you look to the gop, the teabaggers, the ku klux klan, free republic, etc, etc, etc. this is nothing more than a cheap shot at the people who disagree with YOU.

[Sissyk]

166. +

This is pathetic. I have watched over the past few days as the word racist is thrown around DU and it is making me sick.

Get out in the real world if you (not you, noiretextatique) want to see a real racist. They are there. DU, not so much (at least since I've been around). Someone is trying to divide democrats and they seem to be doing a fine job from the looks of things here.

[noiretextatique]

177. indeed, Sissyk...i just got an email from Hatewatch

the southern poverty law center. i don't dispute that there are some racists or racist trolls here, however, these blanket accusations against any criticism of obama are disgusting and, as you mentioned, pathetic.

[Android3.14]

150. Boolean logic might be helpful here

We start with the space of all criticisms of Obama (B)
There is a subset of of criticisms that Republicans have (R), end then there is the subset of criticisms that Democrats have (D).
Now, I think (D ? R) - R represents the set of criticisms for Obama that Democrats have, but which Republicans do not have.
Lucky for us, this is not an empty set, but appears to exclude anything to do with civil liberties.

[Savannahmann]

152. So now the determination of our opinions on race

Is to be settled by our browsing history?

I'm trying to find a word more absolute regarding my rejection than eschew. So far, no luck.

[treestar]

154. Well said

Especially buying into the scandals. And you can't even question them without being called a worshipper.

[GoCubsGo]

165. Yep.

None of it is black-and-white, especially the NSA thing. Liberal Obama critics are not racist, but the Obama administration is not the Stasi, either. It's all fucking ridiculous, and I cannot believe I am reading any of that shit on DU. The more I look at this Snowden shit, the more I am beginning to believe that it was set up to divide Democrats, because that is exactly what it's doing.

[eridani]

243. What scandals? I have yet to see a single example of the Benghazi crap or the IRS crap--

--being raised as issues on this board. The NSA spying on our population is a real scandal--it was one under Bush, and it still is under Obama, the candidate we supported to do something about this crap. The Repuke outrage is bogus--they cheered for NSA under Bush, and are only whining about it now because they've noticed that a lot of voters are upset about it.

[treestar]

249. It's not a scandal; it's a legal issue

Not a single soul on DU said they were supporting Obama for the Presidency over an issue like this. Not one person, anywhere. Obama did dial it back to comply with the law, which Bush had not been doing.

[eridani]

251. Yes, a law just like Citizens United

And similar in its effects on democracy

[treestar]

254. Citizens United is the law right now

there are going to be cases we don't agree with. Roe v Wade is law and there are many people who can't stand that.

We are still free to elect people to change it. So are they (who oppose Roe).

[limpyhobbler]

156. Obama is an undercover Republican,

He's conning liberals into supporting a corporate takeover of the country and the destruction of American democracy. Let me know if that seems like a racist comment. Thanks.

[Cali_Democrat]

161. Obama's been undercover for 5 years?

Obama has probably been the most closely examined human being on the planet the last 5 years....and yet you think he's still "undercover"?

[Matariki]

162. Were criticisms of Clinton bombing Kosovo or pushing NAFTA 'racist'?

Really, your post is ridiculous and cheap.

[rury]

164. K&R

Some people are racist, or at the very least, racially suggestive, without realizing it.
They don't CONSCIOUSLY dislike black people, but they judge us more harshly, are "disappointed" in us more easily than they are in white people for real or perceived infractions.
I encounter it ALL the time!!!

[meanit]

167. Scandal

The real scandal is that many Americans actually believed that the Patriot Act would never be used against them or that politicians on any side of the isle would ever be willing to give up having that kind of power once they got it.

[Kolesar]

175. & No rec's from any gungeoneers I recognize

How about that?

[hack89]

190. So only gungeoneers think the OP is bull shit?

you really want to go there?

[nessa]

193. Is it possible to dislike the Obama Administration and not be a racist? (nt)

.

[Tarheel_Dem]

201. The o.p. just answered yes to that question. Reading "comprehension" is fundamental.

[bvar22]

202. And WHO determines what is or isn't a "bogus scandal"?

YOU??!!!
I noticed you used the collective "WE" in the last line,
so is it YOU and The BOG who are NOW the self-appointed Star Chamber
deciding for the rest of us what is bogus or non-bogus,
what is valid or non-valid criticism,
and what is RACISM or NOT??!!!

Sorry.
No Sale.
To say YOU and the others you claim in the collective "WE" group are unbiased is a JOKE,
and everyone who reads DU KNOWS IT!

As a DEMOCRAT, Self-Appointed Purity/Moral Commissars are something I find repugnant,
on the same level as the conservative fundamentalist preachers holding THEMSELVES up as the model for the ONLY True Believers.
...beneath my contempt.

Your self-absorption and fundamentalism stuns me.

BTW: It was President Obama and YOUR group who ran away as fast as you could when Brietbart attacked ACORN.
It was the rest of us who were saying "Hey. Wait a minute."

Cheers!

[karmalk]

203. Most Obama criticisms ARE RW Obama smears nt

[tomp]

247. most criticism of "obama criticisms" is utter stinking bullcrap...

...from brainwashed democratic party worshipers who can't think for themselves.

welcome to du

[tomp]

248. ps: what just occurred to me...

...the people who are throwing out the meme that criticism of obama is right wing are actually supporting obama's right wingedness.

ironic, eh? even more ironic when we think of the general proclivity, noted here frequently, of republicans/conservatives to project their own faults onto others.

[Rex]

205. Got to watch it when someone posts a source from a Repuke site.

Then pretends it is gospel.

[Piasladic]

208. Racisim as a joke

not funny

[blkmusclmachine]

209. I'll post my concerns, irregardless of whether some Republican somewhere wrote it first or not.

[DeSwiss]

210. With BROAD NET like yours......

...you'd be a perfect fit at the NSA.

- Do you have the link to the Bogus Scandals Clearinghouse? Or I could just Google it.....

[cheapdate]

213. My ideas about society, politics, and government

frequently put me in the company of outspoken and unapologetic racists. This is merely a coincidence and in no way justifies including me in any sweeping generalizations. I'm different. It's about government not race. Most of the people who hold my views are the nicest, most non-racist people you could every hope to meet.

[JoeyT]

214. So to turn your last point around on you:

How often have you criticized something you thought Obama was wrong about openly and without hesitation?

Because what everyone else sees is a bunch of people that will defend him no matter what he does.

Speaking of stupid right wing racist talking points: You know what IS racist? Assuming everyone that disagrees with you and disagrees with Obama is white.

[cheapdate]

216. Who would assume that? It's obviously false.

The political awareness of anyone who would assume such an easily demonstrable false proposition would be awfully hard to take seriously.

[Number23]

215. The person who did that "Berlin then and now" thread should be laughed off the board

And this is the thing... someone NOT pushing an agenda when told that the event was invitation only would say, "oh, okay. I didn't know that."

But somehow, in this person's mind that was even MORE evidence of Obama's "diminished" stance overseas. I mean, it was so transparent and pitiful I almost hurt myself laughing. And the responses within the thread were hilarious.

Like I said before, I do think racism is a part of some of this. I honestly do. But I also honestly believe that some of this is deep overall unhappiness, paranoia, and a deep distrust of government -- ALL government. There is a reason that the vast majority of these people are on the margins. I honestly think they're happier there and it's where they want to be. Works for me.

[Bobbie Jo]

234. You're so right...

Some of these folks aren't like any kind of Democrats I've ever met, honest to god.

I understand that a number of them don't identify themselves as Democrats, but you have to wonder why they would want to hang out at a partisan website like this.

....and according to admin, DU is based upon partisan objectives.

The OP you mentioned is just one example of the disingenuous nonsense that passes for "legitimate criticism" here every day.

Yet they wonder why they're not taken seriously, even when legitimate criticism is warranted.

Hyper critical
Hyper negative
Hyperbolic

At some point, you just turn them off. It's like your crazy aunt that everyone just learns to smile and nod.

[Daemonaquila]

228. Oh for frack's sake.

Aside from quoting Breitbart, which is just beyond idiotic, this is such a troll.

Obama shares the blame with Congress on many things. Fair game.

Obama has now enmeshed himself in several very REAL scandals, and I'm not talking about the IRS garbage. However, even re: that situation people have a legitimate right to be concerned if the just don't get it.

Obama has brought some positive changes, but on the balance he's tipping negative. Sorry. Guantanamo? Not closed. Snooping? WAY too alive and well. National efforts to coordinate the suppression of dissent? You betcha. Drones used both for domestic snooping and foreign murder of civilians? Not a conspiracy theory.

The first step to getting a good government is admitting that the guy you voted for twice is part of the problem, not the solution. The second step is hiring a real progressive for the job.

[BrainMann1]

230. Joy Reid said this on Hardball (I'm paraphrasing)

After we put so much in the big elections we democrats tend to eat our own because the is nothing to do. I say: that is why we lost the major elections with the republicans in 2010. Wake up morons.

[eridani]

244. I see. You don't consider reinstating New Deal legislation as "something to do"?

Like a modern Glass-Steagall? Defending our safety nets instead of haring after deficit bullshit? I think I see the real problem.

[RetroLounge]

232. You might be an idiot

RL

[boilerbabe]

242. you are truly on one desperate roll tonight. that's ok though, i find it quite entertaining!

[sibelian]

245. This is a mess.

Could you stop doing things like this, please?

[sulphurdunn]

250. These "you're a racist if" threads

are becoming all the rage here. For those who feel the need to respond to them it is important to remember how nearly impossible it is to prove a negative i.e "I'm not a racist." It is pointless to defend against allegations that you are or might be a racist because you disagree with the Presidents actions or lack thereof on matters of policy. These "you might be a racist" threads are little more than an attempt to shame people into silence and serve as a diversion from discussing the actual policies of which they disprove.

[duffyduff]

252. Oh, for Pete's sake.

Any criticism of Obama's far right policies is rooted in racism. Good fucking lord. I don't have any doubt in my mind the backers of his candidacy put forward his candidacy for that very reason--he could do whatever he wanted because he could be inoculated from that criticism by somebody always throwing out the "race card."

I couldn't care less about his ethnic or racial background. It's his POLICIES that are ruinous and he deserves criticism for it.

[Democracyinkind]

255. I wish I had your special insight into other people's inner motivations.

You might want to consider writing a sociology textbook, as I'm totally impressed.

Not that I totally disagree with what you write here - but how many of these Breitbart-posting, Obama-hating posters are there if all you consider is their posts and don't speculate about their deeper motivations? I've never seen one. At least not one that lasted here for long...