Seriously, what are you doing here if you think Obama

[cali]

is an 'enemy of the people', or bush lite, or a "rancid puke" whom you want to destroy?

Strong criticism is one thing, but there's a small, determined and vocal group here who simply want to destroy the dems and the president.

I don't get why you'd want to post here if that's how you feel. If you hate the democratic party and think it's beyond redemption, if you loath this president and think he's the enemy, what, for the love of reason, are you doing on DU, where the expectation, as codified in the DU rules, is that you be generally supportive of liberals and dems?

Oh, and yes, those people absolutely exist here.

Isn't there a nice, friendly revolutionary anarchist site for people who feel this way?

[Jennicut]

1. Well I think they want a 3rd party instead. I understand that, the two parties are corrupt.

But be careful what you wish for. Voting blocs vs two parties, is it really that much better to splinter ourselves?

[Barack_America]

5. Well, if so, they don't gotta go home...

....but they can't stay here.

What they're doing now is the post-election equivalent of declaring a vote for Nader. And, last time I checked the DU rules, that ain't allowed.

[Jennicut]

7. True, its Democratic Underground. Of course, they will claim its

"just criticism". I am only talking about a very few here. Most who disagree with Obama on things do it in a reasonable constructive way. Heck, I don't agree with Obama on not lifting the gays in the military ban right now. Of course, I don't call him Bush part 2 either. How utterly simple thinking. Both parties are alike. Yup. President Gore would have been just like President Bush. Yeah.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

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

[Usrename]

144. President Gore would have been in the towers on 9/11.

President Lieberman would have been worse than President Bush.

[Number23]

2. Isn't there a nice, friendly hole in the ground for people who feel this way?

There. Fixed it for you. :)

And anyone who tries to pretend that the folks you're referencing don't exist or (even better) are simply doing their patriotic duty, it must be so maddening, so damn FRUSTRATING that folks ain't buying your sh*t.

[FrenchieCat]

3. They are mad at the system and will lash out at anybody,

and in particular at this President.

They ignore anything he does good,
and focus on anything they can link
to guilt via association.

You'd think they had succeeded in electing the big Denis!

[babylonsister]

4. You are right. Thanks. nt

[mvd]

6. He's obviously a capitalist. But a compassionate capitalist is a step forward

If we don't support him and advise him where we think he is wrong instead of abandoning him, we'll never get a leftist in. It will be a back and forth between Repukes and moderate Democrats.

[Jennicut]

8. Yeah, well I was not fooled into thinking I was voting for a socialist!

LOL.
There are not many around in the Dem party you know.

[mvd]

12. The Repukes still think he is

That's how far right wing they are.

[PatSeg]

70. They accused FDR of being a communist

and JFK of being a socialist. Its their fallback criticism when they know they are defeated. Their lack of originality is appalling.

[mvd]

99. It's all they have, since in even debates, they would lose

:hi:

[leftofthedial]

21. I was fooled into thinking I was voting for a Democrat.

My bad.

[cali]

39. you didn't pay attention then. Obama didn't misrepresent himself

Anyway, you never could stand him. And he's a democrat. You? Um, doubtful. Now why don't you answer the question in the OP. You're one of the people I had in mind as I wrote it? Aren't you happier hanging out on the site whose name must not be mentioned, bitching about how awful and right wing DU is and pettily shredding DUers with moronic lies?

[leftofthedial]

45. I liked and/or loved the guy until I read Geithner's resume day one and had a WTF moment.

I don't even know what site you're talking about.

Also, FYI, I already said "my bad." I paid attention, but I willingly chose to ignore the pre-general campaign Obama.

[MADem]

40. That's your fault. You should have spent less time chanting YES WE CAN and more time

reading his policy speeches.

His actions are completely unsurprising, to those who paid attention. If you were fooled, that's because you fooled yourself. Obama has been pretty upfront about his goals, his attitudes, and his plans. He gave several substantive speeches well before election day on the hotbutton issues of the day, and if you chose not to listen to them, but voted for him because you plastered your hopes on his candidacy and expected him to reflect your personal desires, that's your fault, not his.

[leftofthedial]

46. I said "my bad," didn't I?

I'm an ass.

[DevonRex]

127. Hear hear! I've been an avid supporter but I NEVER had blinders on.

Anyone who paid the slightest attention knew exactly what and who they were voting for. Obama is more conservative than I am but I made a conscious and deliberate decision to back him, work for him and vote for him. And I would do it all again in a heartbeat.

I wish we could have utopia. I'm smart enough to realize that'll NEVER happen. I go with the person who can move us the farthest to the left in 8 years, considering the absolutely idiotic RW wackos who STILL seem to have a firm grip on large parts of the country, and considering the ABSOLUTE mess we're in, from finance to health care to manufacturing to war.

[MADem]

157. I was rather late to the party, myself!

I supported Senator Clinton, and dragged myself to the polls on election day. I wasn't terribly enthused, to be honest.

That said, the guy won, he won decisively, and I am going to give him all the room he needs. Screw that hundred days--from me, he gets six months, like you give people in the military. He IS the Commander in Chief, after all.

I find it amazing that some of the VERY same people who were ripping me a new asshole here for not jumping on the Hope and Change Train, who were calling Senator Clinton some of the vilest names in the book, are the EXACT same whiners and scolders who are now calling Obama a traitor who should be impeached. It's a bit, er, mind-boggling, that! You've got to wonder at the agenda, if there even is one besides being a contrarian, with those folks.

[DevonRex]

177. That's my main question: their agenda. Divisiveness then and divisiveness now.

What kills me is that some say they were always supporters but one decision or one appointment changed their minds forever and now they're against him. That makes no sense to any rational person.

[MADem]

178. There's the dividing line--rationality.

Some people have a paucity of it, I suspect. Or they just like to create a bit of chaos to make themselves feel a bit powerful.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

47. Deleted sub-thread

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

[cali]

9. I've got no problem with what you're expressing

I do have a problem with people who feel as I described in the OP. And they are here and they post. A lot. And yes, they call him things like a "rancid puke".

[mvd]

10. Thanks, cali - I do try to keep a balanced view

:hi:

[Mithreal]

62. Are the mods not warning people for calling the President

these awful names? I don't get it.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

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

[LooseWilly]

24. I get the impression that opinions meant to advise/support...

are now being labelled as attacks.

There seems to be a conformist element voicing it's opinions loudly... and, from what I gather... hugely afraid that any criticisms will lead to Obama's downfall...

And, of course, as Obama is essentially a moderate Democrat... it's those of us on the "left" who are, as usual, being attacked.

Just FYI... I'm fine with the hostility. I feed on it. I might even kind of like it. But the "faithful" might want to tone down the "all criticisms of Obama are attacks on Obama and therefore heretical"-esque tone of their responses to criticism. It makes them seem a tad bit defensive... and there's really no need to be defensive on Obama's part... because he's basically doing fine work.
Get on with it. He is...

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[silverojo]

69. This place would become Free Republic if you had your way

They don't allow dissent, just as you don't want DU to allow dissent.

DU is for people who are Democrats to debate about issues of the day. It is not a fan club for Barack Obama.

DU isn't about what Michelle Obama is wearing, or when the Obamas are going to get the dog that he promised to get for his kids. That's fan club fodder, not political discourse.

Here's what matters about Barack Obama: Whether he's going to support Wall Street or Main Street. Whether his "Medicare reform" will screw over senior citizens the way Clinton's "welfare reform" screwed over the poor. Whether his "to hell with the automakers" stance will result in more lost jobs nationwide. You know, actual issues that affect people.

If those debates get heated, so be it. If anybody comes to DU without wearing asbestos underwear, then they've forgotten what it is to be Democrats.

[Occam Bandage]

79. This place is Free Republic.

They have the same internal debates we do. Theirs are just as acrimonious, and they eat their own just like we do. And their arguments are between pragmatists and whacked-out ideologues, too.

[mkultra]

161. thats the truth

I think the balance shifts back and forth from time to time and it may be time to do a little purging. Democrats dont come here to fight against obama-bashers though. We come here for a break from them.

[Cant trust em]

59. Criticism is OK. No one is perfect, so no one is immune to criticism

But equating him to another Bush/Cheney is an attack.

[dionysus]

81. calling him a reagan clone and shit is not "advice/support"

the "cluebama" thread was not "advice/support"

[Odin2005]

138. Get this man a cookie!!!

:applause:

[LooseWilly]

146. I suspect there's a backlash against some threads I missed.

So I will now *shrug* and step aside...

[dbackjon]

103. Recommend this post

[dbackjon]

104. Recommend this post

[geek tragedy]

25. Amen. His actions and policies should be criticized.

But, the attacks on his character, on his values, on him as a person--as well as the "He's just continuing Bush's policies" crapola are right out of Rush's script.

[Romulox]

72. The kind of "capitalist" who funnels TRILLIONS of taxpayer $$$ to private equity?

That's a strange kind of "capitalist". :shrug:

[mvd]

95. It's the kind of capitalism the U.S. has

The wealthy class likes to be protected in it, regardless of public/private.

But LOL - even your sig has him admitting he's a capitalist. :-)

[Pirate Smile]

11. Was there some site hoping for economic armageddon so a revolution could begin which was shut down

and gave a link to DU? It's freaky. They don't want any of Obama's plans to work because that would stop la revolution. Please, go the f@#k away.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted sub-thread

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

[leftstreet]

14. This isn't about Obama

This is about the Democratic party and its leadership, and the ideals for which they're supposed to stand.

If Hillary had been elected, or Kerry, or Kucinich - the voters and party members would still be talking about policies and ideals and evaluating the performance of the leadership.

[cali]

15. oh, puleeze. Calling Obama names and saying you want to destroy him

is not about policies. It's about fever dreams of some trotskyite or anarchist revolution or whatever. It may be about dogma, but it's not about policy.

And it ain't about holding Obama accountable. Mostly it seems to be about hate.

[leftstreet]

16. I haven't seen much of that

Mostly I see that whenever someone questions his policies, the cheerleaders screech "HATER!!!11!!!!"

...to distract and redirect from the questions about his policies.

This makes no sense.
It's childish.

[cali]

17. sorry, it's here. And most of us appear to have noticed it. Yes, there are a few

people that can't countenance any criticism. But most Obama supporters here don't have a problem with reasone3d criticism but with the off the wall crap that's piling up.

[geek tragedy]

18. That you refer to Obama supporters on a Democratic

website as "cheerleaders" is quite telling.

But, do not worry. I will not insult you. There are more appropriate ways to deal with things.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

32. Deleted sub-thread

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

[redqueen]

113. I like "Obamists"... it's something I expect from repukes...

but here?

[CakeGrrl]

27. I've personally read someone sworn at and called "Worshipper"

for simply stating nothing more than 'I support our President'. What I read was no exaggeration.

I'd call that hostile and belligerent. Ironically, I read two quotes about our SoS yesterday that fit the "worshipper" bill better than anything I've read about Obama:

1. "Hillary can do almost no wrong in my eyes."

2. "She's the only politician I love."

Imagine how those statements would have been pounced upon if someone had actually ever written that about Obama.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

71. People write those comments every day about Obama

If you haven't seen them, you must have a long ignore list.

[CakeGrrl]

92. I don't have anyone on Ignore. I just don't believe anyone has been that slavish

about Obama. I've scanned plenty of threads where people level the "Cheerleader" and "Worshipper" charges - are they bitter much? - but no quotable examples to back up the charges.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

97. Because linking directly to other people's posts is against the DU rules

It's considered a call out.

[martymar64]

118. The ones you describe remind me of Mao's Red Guards

[Vanje]

75. "Hillary can do almost no wrong in my eyes."

1. "Hillary can do almost no wrong in my eyes."

2. "She's the only politician I love."

These statements are as silly as they would be if made about Obama.

[Odin2005]

139. The neo-Naderites are Destroying themselves just as fast as the Pukes are.

Unfortunately I fear their BS will damage the liberal cause (REAL liberals, not so-called "progressive" neo-Naderites) and encourage the DINOs.

[emilyg]

28. Thank you.

We must keep our mouths shut and follow blindly.

[tbyg52]

129. That is exactly what I have seen as well.

And I've seen it in response to thoughtful, polite, well-reasoned posts.

[mkultra]

162. yes, and your broadbrushed attack against Obama supporters

is so very mature.

[goclark]

19. Bingo and it is getting extremely tiring for a site that supports our party

[Vanje]

74. "Calling Obama names and saying you want to destroy him"

I have never read anything like that here.
Granted, I'm not able to read DU all day every day (thank god), but I have not run across a single "destroy Obama " post.

I dont think that sort of post is typical of posts which are critical of Obama.

[Occam Bandage]

76. Here you go.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5360119&mesg_id=5360250

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

159. Deleted sub-thread

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

[Clio the Leo]

22. But is he not the leader of the Democratic party?

Here's what I'm not understanding. I dont have a problem with someone complaining about the President if they are so inclined. But there seems to be this notion (perhaps not by you, but in general) that one can complain about Geithner or whomever and NOT also be speaking ill of the President (again, which is perfectly ok I guess.)

To accept this notion, SEEMS to imply that Obama has no control of the people who work for him. Not only is this NOT the case, but he's made it ABUNDANTLY clear that he supports Mr. Geithner.

So if you're calling out the Treasury Sec. and his plans, you're calling out the President ... AGAIN ... that's fine if you want to do that, but let's call it like it is.

(and I'm speaking in general of the tone here and NOT about you in general.)

[leftstreet]

26. Yes, and as the 'leader' he should represent the party platform

The Democratic party platform which supports labor over big business, social programs over corporate handouts, etc. etc. and on and on.

That's what the party members and voters expect from the leadership.

[Clio the Leo]

30. ehhh ..... maybe ......

.... or perhaps the party platform should be transformed by a leader who clearly has the backing of the American people, regardless of party affiliation.

I suppose we could argue about the ethical nature of that, but it's certainly a good way to win more elections. I'll be honest with you, that's ultimately all I care about. Better a Democrat than a Republican in office any day ..... any way.

[leftstreet]

33. I would not change the party platform just to win elections

On that we'll just have to disagree.

Although I think it'd be interesting if the Republican party pulled its head out of its ass and changed the platform to win elections.

}(

[TBF]

117. If the party platform is being "transformed" then I would call on

the party leadership to be honest about that.

I will say that I don't think Obama has been particularly dishonest about his positions. As I got involved in his campaign, and got more involved in politics again, I've gotten more critical of some of his policies/decisions. But I think he has been fairly honest about his intentions.

As to Cali's OP, I would say I guess it's up to DU site leadership as to whether we on the so-called "fringe" are accepted here or not. In many cases we did work on the campaign because it was the best we felt we could do given the situation. Maybe part of the problem is that some people want intense discussion of ideas while others like the "fan club" stuff more. There's probably a place for both. For instance I rarely look at the photo threads, but they are there for those who want that sort of thing.

[leftofthedial]

20. I don't think any of those (your favorite mis-applied criticism!) strawmen.

And I'm here standing up for actual Democratic principles. These days, I have to do it from the underground.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

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

[leftofthedial]

35. Have you ever posted anything substantial, or does your job description

preclude that?

[MADem]

36. You've managed to post your share of insults on this thread, and you're carping about

"substantial" posts?

Meet the kettle, pottsy.

[leftofthedial]

38. on this thread, I asked you if you ever posted anything substantial, which

is quite vague as insults go. As usual, the facts do not support your spew.

[cali]

41. oh, for pity's sake. Your disingenuity couldn't be more embarassingly

obvious. Don't tell me that it's raining when you're pissing on my leg, sweetie.

[leftofthedial]

44. Umm, that's not your leg.

[MADem]

43. No, you didn't. You tossed a bit of 'rightwing' snark at me, after you failed to

read my post for comprehension.

FWIW, the word "spew" is overused on the internet--and pretty inappropriate in this context.

But then, you don't read, you just, er...spew. You don't even bother to take note of whom you're, uh, spewing at, either. A bit too quick on the keyboard, you are!

:rofl:

[geek tragedy]

48. I wish I could read what you're responding to.

Must be a hoot!

[MADem]

51. Ahhh.

You hit that button, I take it?

I've only done that once, and it was necessary.

[geek tragedy]

54. I was going to get myself banned here if I didn't hit the Ignore bottle.

Now I'm chronically self-medicating.

[MADem]

57. In some circumstances, it's a good thing.

It's especially useful if you just can't avoid interaction, no matter how hard you try. That was my situation. It gets old being followed about.

[Cant trust em]

61. THis is the first time I've been using the ignore button since the primaries.

When you're so used to whatever comes off of the poster's keyboard that you don't need to read, it's time to ignore.

[FrenchieCat]

64. I don't know who this person is either! Must be a repeated offender

:rofl:

[cali]

37. lol. dozens of substantial threads on everything from Tibet

to the psychology of secular end-timers. You're the one that post NOTHING substantial. All shit stirring and hate. That's the sum total of you.

[Occam Bandage]

77. Here you go.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5360119&mesg_id=5360250

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[avaistheone1]

50. I thought this was the Democratic Underground

not this or that candidate's underground. Is there to be no critical discussion of our own candidates particularly when members believe their actions deserve question.

[pnwmom]

53. The OP isn't talking about reasonable criticism.

It's talking about semi-hysterical rantings.

[cali]

55. go read the rules. then read my post.

I'm not suggesting in any way, shape or form that there shouldn't be criticism. I'm all for it. I'm not for incessant bashing on false premises by people who have avowed that they think dems are as bad, or almost as bad as pukes, and that the President is an enemy of the people, etc.

[avaistheone1]

58. Okay. Most reasonable people agree that things have gotten so

out of control in Washington that the Dems have almost as bad as the pukes. Only 8 Democrats in the Senate voted against Glass Steagall Act, Joe Biden voted for the horrific Bankruptcy bill, as many Democrats as Republicans received major campaign donations from Wall Street. So we the people have to fight for the ideals of the Democratic party and to try and keep our politicians honest. And as one DU poster moniker's says: Obama, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. If we can't get our leaders right or our party right, we still must and will advocate and fight for our Democratic ideals and values.

[cali]

91. uh, no. your definition of "reasonable people" hardly rules the day.

and one more time: I. Am. Not. Arguing. Against. Criticizing. Obama.

And you don't own dem ideals and values either.

[pnwmom]

52. It's obvious what they're doing here.

Same thing they've been doing all along -- trying to recruit progressive people to their causes.

[cali]

56. yep. revolution now! trotskyism forever!

[Two Americas]

60. this is good

Clarity is the main thing we need, and the hostility on this thread could not be more clear.

The right wingers never attack the Left with this sort of venom and ferocity. Stunning.

Most of the people included in this "they" that is under assault on this thread are simply people advocating the traditional principles and ideals of the party once stood for.

40 years ago you would never hear Democrats talking like this. This sort of attack on the political Left only came from extreme right wing.

But I know - I have now supposedly "attacked" you by complaining about the mean-spirited attacks on many, many good and loyal longtime Democrats and DUers.



...

[geek tragedy]

63. Yes, the Obama bashers are the real victims here.

You always are.

Making my list, checking it twice . . .

P.S. My condolences that Baby Daddy turned out to be a fraud.

[FrenchieCat]

65. Hedge fund Baby Daddy?

Yep...some never got over him.

[geek tragedy]

66. Baby got his eyes.

If she's lucky, her hair will be pretty like his too.

[FrenchieCat]

67. Funny,

but sad.

[Two Americas]

150. no idea what you are talking about

I don't bash Obama. I do argue with some self-proclaimed Obama supporters because I think they are using that to do some very destructive things to the party.

I don't know what "Baby Daddy" is about. Some story the MSM is pushing, I assume.


...

[varelse]

198. They're attacking you for supporting John Edwards in the primary

and of course, sinking about as low as a person can sink in the mode of attack. I am seeing at least one DU'er I respected, with new eyes now :(

[Romulox]

73. This is not GD: Center Right. Quit trying to bully people into silence, would you? nt

[Occam Bandage]

78. So you believe that anyone who doesn't want to "destroy Obama" is a rightist?

Seriously?

[Romulox]

80. This is also not GD: Strawman. nt

[Occam Bandage]

82. The OP is strictly about people who have said the things in the OP.

Which are not strawmen, but rather are actual posts that are actually still standing. The following has been written by a DUer who remains in good standing, and it still stands for your reading pleasure:

"Yes, he is the master of bullshit. One thing for sure, I am no longer a Democrat. This is the party of Wall Street and that ain't my party. When a new party emerges that represents liberal values I will be ready with my blood, sweat and vote. In the meantime I will chuckle at the centrist, middle-o-the-road DLC puke Democrat, and when I can I will help destroy him and his rancid party."

Do you believe that kind of person really should be on DU? Do you really think that claiming that the desire to "destroy Obama" is not in accordance with the spirit of DU is "rightist?"

[Romulox]

83. Right. But discussion is *interactive*. nt

[Occam Bandage]

86. And birds have wings. Your point?

[redqueen]

114. Hahahahaha...

I can't see the post that brought out that response, but your post there gave me a chuckle. Thanks. :)

[ZombieHorde]

120. Wow, "I will help destroy him" is pretty blatant. I thought R/T was a little ruff. nt

[burythehatchet]

135. It is also a lie.

[Occam Bandage]

158. That's what you're going to go with, bury?

Not, "I was drunk," or "I was carried away by emotion," but rather "I didn't say that?" You're just going to run away from your bullshit? Once the mods have safely thrown your crap down the memory hole, you're going to pretend you never said anything of the sort? Tell me this: if it's "a lie," and if you didn't actually say it, then explain the posts by cali, cliffordu, and myself which stood in direct reply to yours in the original thread and quoted/directly replied to individual parts of it (and I'm being generous and ignoring the posts made by HFPS and others in related threads). But even assuming that all of us independently made up that post, and that your post was deleted for reasons unrelated to what we claim the content was, why didn't you correct us in the original thread?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5360119&mesg_id=5360119

No, you didn't claim you said nothing of the sort then. No, instead you defended your words by complaining about "the centrist virus" that you believed was "already in full control of the board." If I were to quote you as saying something you absolutely did not say in the previous goddamned post, why would your responses be to justify it instead of being to set me straight?

Hell, I don't know why I'm asking. You obviously don't have the courage to stand behind your own damn words.

[burythehatchet]

197. see post #196 ESAD n/t

[Occam Bandage]

200. Where you again say that you want to destroy the Democratic party? Yeah, good clarification.

[Name removed]

202. Deleted message

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

[Occam Bandage]

203. I can only assume at this point you are trying to kamikaze. nt

[burythehatchet]

204. After attacking for two days unimpeded by any rules or guidelines you can assume

whatever the fu@k you like.


ESAD

[Occam Bandage]

205. No, see, you're confused again.

I'm obeying all the rules. I avoid publicly mentioning your handle, only posting your words as an example of failed moderation. I do not engage in personal attacks. The worst, I believe, that I have said is that you lack the courage to stand behind your own words, which I think was reasonable given that you were claiming that a direct copy-paste of your own words was "a lie." But cutting to the real point of our disagreement, I only say what is objectively true: that you do not belong on this site, since you repeatedly have claimed that you wish to destroy the Democratic party.

You, on the other hand, engage in a bevy of personal attacks that would be at home on a playground, from "puke" to 'baby.' Meanwhile, you have continued to outright declare that you literally wish to destroy the Democratic party. This, of course, is in violation of not just a DU rule, but in fact an entire section of the DU rules, and more than that the entire ostensible purpose of this site.

The purpose of this site is not to work for liberalism by demolishing the Democratic party. It is not called "Destroy the Democrats Underground." Rather, the purpose of this site is to work for liberalism by supporting the Democratic party in its fights, and correcting its course when it is headed in the wrong direction. I can't see any reason for you to be on this site except to disrupt; it would be like a fervent creationist insisting on posting repeatedly on a closed, moderated science board because "they want to help find the truth" but "science is rancid."

[cali]

84. having a good time humping on that strawman?

kind of embarassing to watch, dear.

[Romulox]

87. LOL. The Angry Centrist in Chief arrives. nt

[cali]

88. oooh, dishonesty as a side with the strawman

how cute. Yes, all centrists support single payer healtcare and fully ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Not to mention, cutting the military budget and nationalization of certain industries. that's where I stand politically. If you're way far to the left of that, well, that's certainly interesting. Anarchist? Trotskyite? Whatever it is, it's not liberal or even European Socialist.

[Romulox]

89. What about the "angry" part? LOL. nt

[cali]

90. uh, what about it?

What about the OP is so angry? Do tell.

[Odin2005]

142. EWWW, Cali, that put a really sick image in my head, LOL!

You are SO, SO bad!!! :rofl: :evilgrin:

[mkultra]

164. isnt that what your doing in this very post?

[paulk]

85. yeah, I would happily see those types kicked off of here

if the equally small, determined, and vocal group that attacks anyone who even breathes a hint of dissatisfaction with any one of Obama's decisions as a PUMA, freeper, whatever insult happens to be on the tip of their tongue, etc - gets kicked off of here with them.

[martymar64]

119. Although we've disagreed in the past . . .

I agree with what you just said 100%.
We don't need self-appointed hall monitors or latter-day Red Guard types stinking up the site.
If somebody is seriously out of line, the admins will deal with them.

[mkultra]

165. The admins are not dealing with them

They are standing back watching the fray sort itself out.

[Cha]

93. Or writing "Fuck you Obama" on

this board? WTF..why does that get to stand?

[dbackjon]

102. I will say that whenever Obama, through his actions, says that to me

If you don't like it, I am sure there is a nice fascist party somewhere for you.

[Cha]

128. Why don't you go join the fascist

party since you're all about "Fuck you, Obama" to our Democratic President?

[dbackjon]

130. I want DEMOCRATS to live up to what they claim to stand for

Which is equality for all Americans.


Clearly, you don't, so why the hell are you here?

[Cha]

131. Get a grip..oh wait you can't..all you can

think of is to tell our Democratic President, "Fuck you, Obama".

[dbackjon]

149. No, I can put a brainless troll like yourself on ignore

And improve this site.

[tomp]

94. isn't there a website for the perpetually wrong?

you might want to go there.

[cali]

96. care to explain precisely where, in the OP, I'm wrong?

oh, of course not. And sorry, sweetie, I'm not going anywhere. But I love that my OP bugs you. yummy.

[WI_DEM]

98. Alot of them voted for Nader in '00 and gave us Bush for 8 years

they are the purist on the left.

[DevonRex]

100. That explains why they're so eager to blame Obama for Bush's mess.

That way they can wash the blood off their own hands. We know they didn't vote for Obama this time around any more than they voted for Gore in 2000 or Kerry in 2004.

[dbackjon]

101. HEIL HITLER!!!

No dissent allowed.

We must all worship our dear leader.



The only people that should leave this site are the ones that think we should march in lockstep with Obama, and never question or criticize him.


People like that are NOT DEMOCRATS.

[CBR]

105. Hitler...

"Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)<1> is an adage formulated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."<2><3>"
Wikipedia

[dbackjon]

106. Exactly. I always try to get them in as early as possible on stupid threads like this

I HATE suspense.

[cali]

107. Liars suck the big one.

hey, genius, I was referring to a small group of people who have made it clear that they want to destroy Obama. They've said it here. That's hardly legitimate criticism- something I'm all for. Hell, I don't even mind harsh criticism of the prez. I couldn't have been clearer.

Now don't forget to swallow, honey.

[Occam Bandage]

121. Because everyone who doesn't think Obama is a complete failure is a Nazi. nt

[Odin2005]

143. Cali clearly said he was not against criticism of Obama.

He said that the "Obama is a evil corporatist, fuck him" crap is over the line and beyond the pale for a Democratic website.

[mkultra]

166. or NO

since this is a private board. Anyone who doesn't support the democratic part should leave. You freedom of speech will remain preserved elsewhere.

[freemarketer6]

108. I disagree. I've been coming to this place for a long long

time though just started posting recently. For the first time I can remember people are not being summarily deleted because they disagree with the favorite son's position. And the documentation and explanation of different positions is superb. So one has a basis for developing a position, and can do so without being eradicated. I voted for Obama, contributed to his campaign and even campaigned for him. There are things, however, that I am real non-plussed about. Then there are things I am real plussed about. So DU has become a better place to come, imo.

[cali]

110. oh fucking please. you don't know anything about DU if you think

that posts have ever been deleted for simply being critical of a dem. And why are you being so purposefully obtuse? I couldn't possibly have been clearer that I wasn't talking about the sort of legitimate criticism that you're noting.

DU is not a better place when people who hate dems and the prez simply fling lying shit about.

[freemarketer6]

112. Thank you for that. I'll return to responding to those whose ostensible

liberalism is no greater than two standard deviations from the mean. Have a nice day.

[Occam Bandage]

122. Your reply implies you believe

that the majority--or, in fact any--of the criticism on this site comes from the center, when in fact it comes entirely and completely from the far left.

[freemarketer6]

124. Just the opposite, actually. I meant I would converse with

the center, as they are not as criticism prone. It is the same on most boards I visit. If you say the wrong thing to the left, they get down and dirty, and after 8 years of GW, I don't really need that.... Already today, I thought I was saying something nice to a lefty, and she jumped all over my case.

[mkultra]

167. your being obtuse

The OP is contrasting between real discussion and outright bashing. Please check the top item in this thread for more information.

[freemarketer6]

176. The OP's originating line may have caused a channeling away from

the writer's alleged intent. It is one of those cases where the writer's history may have influenced the character and severity of the responses. Also, it's "you're". Expand the contraction to verify the efficacy of the use.

[mkultra]

179. i think this would only be the case if

one had stopped reading after the first line. As such, the rest of the op made the point very clear.


Also, thanks for the copy edit. You keep correcting my typing and help you with comprehension.

[freemarketer6]

180. Lol. Okay............nft

dd

[mkultra]

181. wow

I think that's the first time that a snark has not garnered a return snark in the history of DU. Well done sir or madam, whatever the case may be. I retract my snark.

[freemarketer6]

183. I'm a guy. My picture is that of Agnetha of ABBA, my favorite

woman singer of all time. She may be before your time. Nice talking to you. Laterz.

[CJCRANE]

174. "favorite son"?!

That's a classic copycat and projection maneuver

(taking a LW name for Bush and projecting it onto Obama).

[Fire1]

109. I think the question from MOST of us is, WHY ARE THEY

ALLOWED TO POST HERE under the guise of being 'Democrat' or 'liberal?'

[mkultra]

168. BINGO!

[rucky]

111. Why don't you ask the people you're quoting?

[Name removed]

136. Deleted message

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

[rucky]

163. Maybe the "no call-outs" rule should be modified to read:

If you're going to call out a DU-er, at least have the guts to mention them by name, instead of making a strawman out of them or any other passive-aggressive BS.

[tama]

115. I'm here

just to share experience and opinions with other people. If the conclusions I've come to about world situation are in the right directions and others can benefit from hearing them, like I benefit from hearing from other peoples experience, I see no harm in that. I don't know many tolerable places to talk with American people and I'm used to this.

Yours, friendly revolutionary anarchist & gardening student :)

[LanternWaste]

116. I'm here for the free drinks...

I'm here for the free drinks... and I'm staying for the salsa. :)

It does seem to have gotten a bit troublesome here as of late. I thought the primaries were just a bump in the road, but I'm beginning to think that they were a springboard to something much more... rude.

We can all easily differentiate between the valid criticism of some posters and the petulant ugliness of others, but maybe those who engage in the latter don't know that-- blinded by a self-validating cleverness? :shrug:

[cliffordu]

123. Some clown was wandering around in here screaming "fuck Obama"

A while ago...

I dunno...

[DevonRex]

126. And the other clown was wandering around screaming "I'm gonna destroy the party!"

[DevonRex]

125. They've got their own little tinfoil hat Manchurian candidate thing going.

Some of it rivals the freepers' Manchurian candidate version.

[Laurab]

132. K&R nt

[Eric J in MN]

133. We should judge Obama by his actions...

...not support him just because he's a Democrat.

[mkultra]

169. as we judge posters by thiers

and not support them because they are registered.

[Odin2005]

137. They are Marxists and Neo-Naderites who want to "bring down the system" and don't care that...

...it would cause enormous suffering because the "ends justify the means" in order to create utopia.

"Do not allow your dreams of a beautiful world to lure you away from the claims of men who suffer here and now. Our fellow men have a claim to our help; no generation must be sacrificed for the sake of future generations, for the sake of an ideal of happiness that may never be realized."

--Karl Popper

[burythehatchet]

140. Poor Cali, your obsession with me is really getting sort of creepy. I hope you don't have my

address.

:scared:

[Name removed]

152. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

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

[mkultra]

170. Well, if your feeling unloved

Im sure its not the first time and i seriously doubt it will be the last.

[Danger Mouse]

141. Meh. It doesn't really matter. Maybe there can be two separate forums.

One for people who are supportive of Obama and one for people who hate his guts. Sort of a 'cooldown' room for each side, so people have a place to go when they're sick of the fighting.
Then they can come back here and continue the battle.

[mkultra]

171. sounds great. Let me continue this idea

we call the pro-democratic board something like "Democratic Underground" and the anti maybe something like "free republic"


Just an idea.

[MadLabrador]

145. I just think everyone really wants to like their president, and

we want him to succeed. So when he says something stupid (like the marijuana answer) we are quick speak up. We have high hopes, and I think "criticism" may be the wrong word to describe the language here. If you want criticism, check out AM radio; there is still a major difference.

[Lord Helmet]

147. mostly anarchists and people po'd their candidate didn't win the primary

[Name removed]

148. Deleted message

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

[cali]

153. yes indeedy. anyone who disagrees with holy roly you

must be a nazi. stupid is as stupid does. thanks for demonstrating why it doesn't do so well.

:hi:

[Political Heretic]

151. Goodbye.

[mkultra]

172. dont let the door hit you in the ass.

[dcindian]

154. I am a democrat what the hell are you doing here?

If you are so dead set about discussion? This is a forum not the Pravda or did you not know that?

[cali]

156. try learning to read for comprehension, dear.

You can't have a conversation or discussion on line, until you get some help in that department. I'm all for discussion and criticism of the President and his policies. Hurrah for Krugman and Stiglitz. Think Obama is making mistakes? So do I. And I've made that clear. I've also made clear that that's NOT what I'm talking about in the OP, genius.

Some people here are fucking hopelessly incapable of reading for comprehension. That or they're disingenuous little critters.

[redqueen]

187. I vote for bad reading comprehension.

At first I thought most were bein disingenuous... but lately I think it's just... yeah.

I mean you pretty much spelled it out in the OP... but still with the apparent confusion.

[dcindian]

193. You internet gang members have a 200+ recommended thread which shows your

tactics are not welcomed.

[redqueen]

195. No, it shows comprehension skils are abysmal. (nt)

[dcindian]

192. Try being a human being.

Really try a bit harder. Ignore the ones you feel threaten you and participate with the ones who bring up points you wish to discuss.

[Name removed]

173. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

194. Deleted message

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

[endarkenment]

160. series? you're endless posts are not incompent at all!

hugh make my day.

We will get these posters. Keep at it.

[Marie26]

175. Ah, shut up! Enemies of the people!

Marxist-Leninist-Troskyite-DLC-Republicans! They're everywhere! I think we should make some sort of list of these people so that they can be successfully purged from DU. Then only right-thinking people will express their opinions here.

[mkultra]

182. perhaps that can be the long term plan.

For now, we can just start with the Obama bashing freeptards.

[Marie26]

184. And who is going to be the judge

that decides who's a "Obama-bashing freeptard" & who's a permissible poster? Let me guess - you? If only there was some administrator or moderator who would be in charge of making these decisions... oh, wait. There is. And it isn't you, or Cali.

[mkultra]

189. well thats true

but i wouldn't count on their unending grace as a long term residential plan if i where you.

[Marie26]

190. Or you. nt

[krabigirl]

185. LOL! God forbid liberals actually want a LIBERAL president!

[ShortnFiery]

186. Hyperbole? Most of us admire Obama but unlike rigid GOPites, we say WHEN we disagree.

Obama is a good listener. Listen? The people of London are talking. After all, they're not royalty or big money lobbyists - protesting is their only means of getting Obama's attention. :-)

[dysfunctional press]

188. i thought that marching in mindless lockstep was for the other side of the aisle...

what are YOU doing here?

[AtomicKitten]

191. It's a convenient venue to try to suck all the life out of support for the new president unscathed.

[burythehatchet]

196. Kicking to bring attention to post #196

[JayMusgrove]

199. those people who do that are... well......

probably only capable of posting on a message board, NOT getting elected as Harvard Law's Law Review President....probably have NOT ever held public office, probably have NOT traveled to 10 nations outside of the USA, probably have NOT managed a budget for even a household, when collecting $12K while being a community organizer.

In short, the pot smoking freaks here, combined with those who never ever earned over $50K, nor have a plan for supporting their family based upon their own skills..

I am sorry so many people who post here just want free pot, (so do I!!!!!), but I don't see this as a major national or international issue....wars on drugs are NOT about free pot, they are about other substances people become addicted to......it costs us all a lot of money, but sanity and coordinated approaches work better than just making pot legal.

[burythehatchet]

201. You are fast becoming one of my favorite comedians

:thumbsup: