It's very frustrating on this board to be on the progressive side of things 99% of the time,

[Ed Suspicious]

but the one time you point out a minor negative for consideration in a policy by a democrat and suddenly the offender who dares question and marches slightly out of step, and he's labeled a concern troll or a right wing plant or whatever. Damn, it's annoying. I love progressives and I love the president, but his moves aren't always right. They usually end up right, but he's playing politics on a higher level that I'm capable. It's sometimes hard to understand the full repercussions of a policy. Why do we feel we need to be so on message or in control of the message or why do we need to march in lock step all the time? People, real people who think critically can question a policy from the president. We need to do this, or we end up not much better than the Bush years republicans. Honestly, I just don't get it.

[elleng]

1. We shouldn't need to march in lock step,

we should recognize the complex nature of matters, and we should encourage everyone to learn as events unfold without being so critical as to cause harm.

[BlueStreak]

3. We should not give ANY public official any benefit of the doubt

At least not any official that has to raise millions of dollars to get elected.

And frankly, I have a pretty low opinion of people here whose first instinct is to cheer-lead for their favorite official before they even understand what is going on. The truth is found by challenging ideas, not by blindly accepting everything at face value.

And, by the way, sometimes Republicans are right. Sometimes Democrats are wrong. It doesn't happen all that often, but only a fool buys everything they hear without challenging it.

[Skittles]

8. the really strange thing is

Obama himself would find them absolutely ludicrous - he TELLS us to challenge him, like real leaders do

[patrice]

2. That's not good. People shouldn't!! substitute labels for thoughts.

Try to turn that kind of stuff toward actual information either published stuff or anecdotal stuff from experiences, don't let them pull you off of analysis of the issue at hand. Honest topic related insightful questions are GOOD, because when you do that you are seeking engagement on your own terms.

[abelenkpe]

4. You're not alone

[AceWheeler]

5. You don't get it?

Neither do I. I get the Washington Post. But seriously. You can't get what don't happen. Ain't nobody marching lock-step here. You got yourself a Straw Man argument. Hmmm...maye that means....Nah, I say that and you'll just say I'm trying to make you march lock-step.

[demwing]

26. yes, it happens

maybe not as frequently as some have said, but certainly more often than "never"

[JDPriestly]

6. The President promised transparency and has been better about letting us know what

is really going on than recent previous presidents. But those of us who watch carefully and think base our reactions on the reactions of the press to what is going on. We don't really know what is going on, and President Obama only tells us after it is done. Perhaps he himself only knows at that point.

I am still confused about whether there will be cuts to a lot of social programs in the next year or two, especially Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, etc. I don't understand this deal as preventing such cuts at a later day, and so I am not as delighted with it as many might be on DU.

I just think I don't know the full story yet. I know how the immediate fiscal cliff was avoided, but as I understand it, this was just a first step.

[grahamhgreen]

9. It's called the shock doctrine. Passing crisis bills at the last minute without real debate.

[JDPriestly]

19. Yes.

[Skittles]

7. they support the prez the way groupies support rockbands

just ignore them; they are not worth your time, believe me

[MrModerate]

10. This is a sometimes-noisy community . . .

And like all communities, it has its fair share of noodniks.

Emulate a duck and you'll be fine.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

28. Do you come with subtitles?

Noodnik? Emulate a duck?

Say wha?

[MrModerate]

33. Noodnik:

. . . a very irritating person.

And, "water off a duck's back . . ."

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

34. Thank You...

I'll have to invest in a decoder ring!

[MrModerate]

35. I was perhaps overexposed . . .

to the "Toward More Colorful Speech" articles in old Reader's Digests in my grandparent's house as a child.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

36. Ha! I remember those...

Increase Your Word Power
Humor in Uniform

I haven't seen a copy of Reader's Digest in years.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

11. Things I have learned in the last 11 years on DU.

#1. This is an internet website where anonymous people can pretty much post what they want. As such, you are not necessarily having a debate with who you think you are debating with. I, for example, could be a 62 year old Hippie or I could just as easily be a 16 year old in my mommies basement, stirring up shit because I don't have anything better to do. After over a decade here, there are probably only three people who actually know who I am.

#2. The "ignore" feature is probably your best friend. In the "old days", we actually had many good policy discussions here. As of late, I find that no matter what the topic, there are people who just want to stir the shit rather than discuss the issues rationally. The gun issue is a good example. The people who hate guns seem to consider anyone who owns a gun to be a "nut". Not the best way to start a rational dialogue in my opinion. If you find people who do not want to actually discuss an issue, but rather scream at you for whatever position you take, put them on ignore! Your blood pressure will thank you. Remember, you have no idea who you are actually talking to.

#3. We have a trash feature here. I trashed Meta a long time ago because it seemed to me that most everybody there was just whining about what they thought the politically correct rules should be and how to make everyone else tow the line while I think everything should be discussed because if you don't talk about things, that does not make them go away, it just censors them. This does nobody any good.

#4. I stopped serving on juries for the same reason I trashed meta. Too much PC whining and not enough discussion about the real world where politically incorect discussion actually takes place.

You can do what you want but DU is much more tolerable for me.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

17. Agreed, except for what I perceive to be an inconsistency.

You are, of course, exactly right when you recognize,

"there are people who just want to stir the shit rather than discuss the issues rationally."

But then you seem to disregard that observation in the following sentence when you say,

"The people who hate guns seem to consider anyone who owns a gun to be a 'nut'."

I could be mistaken but I believe that there are some insincere posters who simply want to stir some shit and are using a pretend hatred of guns to do so.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

21. Point taken.

[99Forever]

25. Oh yes...

... EVERYTHING is about the Delicate Flowers and their *the precious*.

[Tigress DEM]

12. I support those who think for themselves.

I think the MAIN time, I prefer to have us be "on message" is during election season, when the other side is drowning the airwaves with negatives about our guys. I just don't want to give them more ammunition. THEIR objections are often really stupid, but trolls come here and can get legitimite gripes they'd never think of on their own.

But I think Obama is a strong Prez and he can take the heat from his own side as well. We just have to have a vision we are pushing him TOWARD vs just pushing him cause he's pissed us off.

I just keep thinking of how concerted the attack has been against him. That he's been able to get anything done with all these tea baggers around is a wonder.

I'd like him to stay strong and compromise less.

I want to see what things are like in 2014 when we get a DEM Congress again. How much work can get done when he only has to convince DEMs and not cater to Rethugs to get things brought to the floor for a vote.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

14. A Dem Congress would mean more Blue Dogs.

Obama is a Blue Dog. Almost everyone in Washington DC is employed by corporations. In 2009 I came to the conclusion that hoping for change is pointless.

[Tigress DEM]

22. More labels. THAT really solves problems.

You said:

In 2009 I came to the conclusion that hoping for change is pointless.

I'll tell you the same thing I tell whining rethugs..... "If you have no vision for a future government that can function, step out of the way of people who can clearly see it and achieve it."


We need real campaign finance reform and then when DEMs don't HAVE to get big money to be elected and in fact rely on money from the electorate, they'll do an even better job. The reason the top 1% for the most part won't support DEMs is that we may take money and consider the source in planning, we aren't OWNED by the corporations and THEY KNOW IT.

History shows that DEMs have consistently served the people better and when one of ours really goes off the rails we don't go and hire them lawyers, we hand them their hats. Even when they do well, we are at them to break through and do more.

I come from MN and Wellstone was my Senator, so don't go lumping every DEM in with your pessimistic analysis. It's a really offensive and useless tactic.





Obama is facing unprecedented opposition and abuse.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

24. I always vote a strait Dem ticket.

I wouldn't vote for a Green or a Republican.

[Tigress DEM]

30. Well, maybe you're just discouraged lately. It's understandable.

Thing is I'm not fond of blanket statements, so THAT'S what got my back up.

I believe if we take that thought to heart, that a DEM congress will be all Blue Dogs and what I took from that, no better than having rethugs in the same seats.... it's like giving up.

There are days when I'm just about out of hope. I crash and burn just like anyone else, but like a typical DEM I do a little self care, lick my wounds and Phoenix up out of it because there really isn't much other choice.

WE HAVE to WIN.

WE HAVE to KEEP FIGHTING to preserve this Democracy. That's what DEMs do.

Defeat at the hands of the current group of thugs is NOT an option. So we are in agreement about SOME things... the most important thing anyway.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

32. Fair enough.

I like your fighting spirit!

[snot]

13. TOTALLY AGREED, except I think you're overly apologetic.

[ZombieHorde]

15. Because burning witches is fun. nt

[Demo_Chris]

16. Bubbles are not restricted to one side

I try not to think badly of the Obama faithful. He's OUR GUY, we've all spent the last four years countering right wing smears about him, and I think for some Obama loyalists defense has become habitual. It no longer matters what they are defending, the defense is an end in itself.

[JoePhilly]

23. And many of the attacks follow the same pattern you suggest, in which ...

the attack is an end in and of itself.

[leveymg]

18. Be factual, don't make (or take) it personal, stay calm and you'll have a happy, long stay.

Expect push-back, and welcome it - sometimes you can learn from those who disagree with you.

[Tigress DEM]

27. This is a big old town hall where everyone comes to vent and/or bicker and find solutions.

People want to be heard. Not taking their push-back personal is really good advice.


@ the OP:
DU was the FIRST someplace I knew of where people could actually SPEAK UP. Back in the day during the *ush II rule you couldn't say a bad word about the Chimperor Prez having no damm clothes on without being shouted down and called a traitor.

Maybe a lot of "loyal DEM" frustration stems from the comparison. *ush II didn't DESERVE to be treated respectfully, but DEMs still tried. Obama has made mistakes, but the quality of his effort is MILES above *ush II and several other recent Prez examples.

Because we CAN speak up, it's understandable that those who aren't as "loyal" to the sitting Prez, because they have a higher vision WILL speak up and get frustrated. THOSE voice DESERVE to be heard and RESPECTED TOO. So without taking it personal, remind folk that you deserve a little DEM courtesy, because your opinion DOES matter and DOES count, just like your vote..... here at least.

You already have a balanced attitude it seems. Only so much CAN be done and while we can do the analysis after and arm chair quarterback the plays, Obama has to keep moving at Mach I and get it done on a daily basis.

I DO think that DU has been effective in the past at demanding better public policy from DEMs. When we rear up thousands strong, they can say, "HEY, I'm just respecting the will of the people." When we demand more of them, it can seem unfair because so much of it is out of their hands, and yet, if we phrase it right, as something we believe IN THEM about rather than merely criticizing them for not getting it right - because undoing the past is impossible, whereas moving in better directions is DO ABLE... then we are EMPOWERING our leaders rather than tearing them down.

We want more, we demand more because our DEM leaders ARE more capable of ACTUALLY DOING the job they were elected to do in comparison to the rethug contingent by exponential factors that blow the mind.

[Lex]

20. People disagree with other people.

That's what happens on a message board.

Sometimes they agree. Sometime they disagree. Simple as that.

My advice is to not take it personally.

[alcibiades_mystery]

29. Except your premise is simply not true

It's very frustrating on this board to be on the progressive side of things 99% of the time, but the one time you point out a minor negative for consideration in a policy by a democrat and suddenly the offender who dares question and marches slightly out of step, and he's labeled a concern troll or a right wing plant or whatever...

Am I the only one who actually reads this board? I'd say it runs 60%-40% between support for the Admin most of the time and vociferous, even strident dislike for the Admin and even the President personally. The notion that people criticizing the Admin are silenced, trollified, or otherwise marginalized is belied by even a cursory glance at the post titles in General Discussion or Politics. Close to half of them at any given snapshot are anti-Admin from the left. To claim otherwise is simple bullshit.

Which makes one wonder why this completely false point is brought up over and over by people. I have no doubt that the people who post stuff like this actually believe this nonsense. But I think there must be something vaguely satisfying about perceiving oneself as somebody who "marches slightly out of step," or resists the "lockstep" marching of some other force.

So mostly, I chalk posts like this up to some psychological need in the poster. They certainly aren't empirical descriptions of the board, so there has to be something else going on.

[tama]

31. It can be frustrating

to be part of and on the side of 99%

and vote and support party of 1%