Just a little Terms of Service reminder about bashing Democratic Nominees.

[trumad]

Bashing a Democratic nominee during the election season is a no no. Oh and if you post a story meant to bash the nominee and then add a one line caveat saying ---at least he or she is better than the tea bag candidate---you're still full of shit.

Terms of Service:
'But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side".

[joshcryer]

1. Since there aren't any moderators anymore it's not as strong.

The community must hide posts of that nature, which it has consistently failed to do. Just look at Better Believe It in the runup to the 2012 elections. That vapid troll got to post some of the most egregious crap possible here (most notably the whole "Stuff That (Increasingly Desperately Disillusioned) Obama Supporters Say" thread, which was allowed).

The jury hasn't hidden those posts. Hopefully the new jury rules remedy that, but we'll see.

[B Calm]

3. Has anybody alerted on those posts?

[treestar]

144. True

There are times when there are enough posters of a certain type to make up a majority. They won't count it as bashing, but will leave it.

[cali]

2. I've made perfectly clear that I support McAuliffe over Cuccianelli, trumad.

But facts are facts. I'm not going to pretend they aren't. That's YOUR thing. That and making stuff up- like that I "pimped" the false AP story when I did NOTHING OF THE FUCKING KIND. Never posted it. Never endorsed it. EVER.

Find ONE post of mine doing that. You can't. Doesn't fucking exist.

You've finally stopped calling me a troll. Now stop making up shit that I didn't say.

[trumad]

8. .

[1StrongBlackMan]

24. Chuck a rock ...

the dog that yelps be the dog hit.

[msanthrope]

102. You got that right. Look who yelped. nt

[Ishoutandscream2]

11. Good lord

Typical.

[Surya Gayatri]

16. Tell me, Cali, have you ever just dropped an argument as unproductive and self-defeating?

(Not to mention potentially deleterious for a high profile Dem candidate during a crucial election season...)

Just a tip garnered from 68 years of real-time experience. Doctrinaire and obdurate positions, whether on-line or off, rarely produce positive outcomes over the longterm.

[cali]

18. Yes, when I believe that an argument is unproductive and self-defeating.

I don't believe this one is.

I don't like denial of reality and facts. On a more personal note, I don't like being lied about and I don't like liars.

I don't think corporate dems are good for the party- to put it mildly. I don't think that whitewashing reality is healthy.

[Surya Gayatri]

22. A few words of wisdom...

“Choose your battles wisely. After all, life isn't measured by how many times you stood up to fight. It's not winning battles that makes you happy, but it's how many times you turned away and chose to look into a better direction. Life is too short to spend it on warring. Fight only the most, most, most important ones, let the rest go.”
― C. JoyBell

[1StrongBlackMan]

27. Perhaps ...

he/she has?

[Surya Gayatri]

37. From his/her posting history, I'd say he/she is rather inclined to charge into

any looming conflict like a medieval crusader with bloody banner flying. To hell with measured, civil exchange.

[1StrongBlackMan]

46. Agree ...

whether it be to bash a Democrat or the President; but never (rarely) to SUPPORT a Democrat or The President.

From this moment's Greatest Threads Page:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023821262

183 posts ... Absent

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014616810

147 posts ... Absent

Just saying ...

[Surya Gayatri]

56. Glaringly absent from any thread that promises

to be vaguely laudatory or even positive about Dem candidates or policies.

[MyNameGoesHere]

186. If they do their jobs properly

then no comment is needed. However the opposite is closer to the truth, they continually have to be scolded, exposed, cajoled, manipulated and coerced into doing what they should. If they do right then they get the biggest comment or accolades they deserve, another term. If not they get the pen and mouth.

[bvar22]

131. That is just creepy, Commissar.

Hey!!!
Lets bring back the Loyalty Oaths!!!
that'll smoke out those people that WE think are disloyal to The Party!!!

Are you REALLY going to take attendance, and keep a list?
Are you REALLY going to imply that
one's absence in those threads is an indicator of whether they are a good or bad Democrat?

In the old Soviet Union, the Party assigned Commissars to live in the villages and towns and "report" on those they thought were disloyal to The Party
who were then sent to the Gulags. They kept attendance lists too!




Clue:
Historically, there have been cultures and nations that HAVE chosen blind loyalty to a Party over Principles of Good Governance.
Historically, those societies and nations have always ended badly.

Check Yourself.



You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS.[/font]

[1StrongBlackMan]

171. I guess you missed my point ...

that could have easily be determined if you had followed the thread.

But anyhow ... check YOURself ... no one is talking about blind loyalty or principles of good governance ... other than you.

[cali]

30. sorry, I do consider those words. I don't fight every fight.

but yeah, the dem party is important to me and I am deeply concerned about how corporate it has become.

[Surya Gayatri]

45. I share your concern, but bellicosity isn't necessarily the

optimum demeanor for accomplishing one's ends.

[BillyRibs]

84. He who knows

when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious.-Sun Tzu-

[Surya Gayatri]

95. Yes, Sun Tzu has much to say about "The Art of War"...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3827857

[KittyWampus]

93. I had to look up the word "obdurate". Thanks for helping me reclaim lost vocabulary...

and you also reminded me of a beloved 11 & 12th grade English teacher, Mr. Blake

[Surya Gayatri]

101. Glad you love the English lexicon, too, Kitty.

What a wealth of wonderful words we have to play with--like a linguistic Alibaba's cave!

By the way, it's "obdurate" rather than "obsurate".

[KittyWampus]

108. yes, I caught the typo. Be Well.

[FSogol]

19. Crap like this is how we ended up with Bob McDonnell and Cuccinelli in the first place.

Creigh Deeds wasn't pure enough for the true "progressives" and our state got fucked as a result. Now the exact same thing is happening. Is it only a coincidence that this started at the same time that Karl Rove's PAC turned its evil gaze and millions to VA's election?

[reddread]

31. must be a shitload of hardcore progressives in VA?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_elections,_2009

they really stayed home, didnt they?
better luck this time. seriously.

[FSogol]

34. I wonder what kind of person would join DU just to advocate against a Democratic candidate

one month before the election?

[reddread]

50. not me

but let us ignore each other and clean up some of the mess your vomit makes

[Bobbie Jo]

117. Yes

Please ignore what I'm doing.

Move along, nothing to see here......

[Pretzel_Warrior]

146. lolol.

and above all, don't call people on here "suckers" for buying the anti-Obama hype. that will get your post hid--even if it's several hours later.

[SidDithers]

82. +1...nt

Sid

[BlueCaliDem]

104. + 2

Some people don't understand the idiom: cutting one's nose to spite one's face.

[enlightenment]

152. Cutting OFF one's nose . . .

is the idiom.

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/106875.html

[frylock]

136. the same kind of person that would join DU and support republican policy..

because it was put forth by a democrat?

[FSogol]

138. Educate me. What Republican policy do you think I support?

Or am I making people here mad by supporting Democratic candidates and bashing the GOP (which seems to be the opposite of what many people do here)?

[frylock]

140. i don't believe that i singled you out..

if you don't support renewal of USAPATRIOT, NSA surveillance, fucked up trade policy, etc., then we're good here.

[Raine1967]

43. +1 --- this is it in a nut shell.

I really tire of this. WE are barely a purple state and Cuccinelli would be absolutely horrible for us. These are our choices, Weare a few weeks away from the election -- this has to stop.

Why are we talking about McCauliffe like this on a democratic website with barely a mention of the shit that Cucinelli has pulled and had brushed under the rug? Things like his association with Johnnie Williams, Star scientific -- his lack of reporting his stock portfolio?

I don't like this. This nonsense is all shit put out there by the Koch Brothers and the cucinelli campaign, they are throwing whatever they can and trying to see what sticks: http://www.bluevirginia.us/diary/10232/scandals-vs-shaggy-dog-stories

Take all the blather over Global Crossing, for instance. The WaPo irresponsibly mimicked the misleading language of Cuccinelli's Swift Boat campaign, claiming that "McAuliffe sold some of his Global Crossing shares before the stock price plummeted and made an estimated $8 million before the company went sour."

How terrible! But here are the facts: McAuliffe was simply one of many investors in the company with no management role. He made his money, as many successful investors do, by selling most of his shares when the company went public, in 1999. The company did not fail until THREE YEARS LATER, in 2002. So how in the world is it fair to blame him for the management problems that caused this company to fail?

[FSogol]

44. +1. Well said. n/t

[joshcryer]

61. 3 year gap? WTF. People. Read this.

[Raine1967]

75. Amazing, huh?

I like Cali -- I do, but she is inadvertently doing the work of the Cucinelli campaign.

He sold his stocks after the company when public. There is not there there unless one wants to believe the Koch Bros and Citizens United. This election is just is too important.


Take a look at another post from Blue Virginia:

The Republican Swift boat campaign against Terry McAuliffe has now begun in earnest. As is typical of GOP message campaigns, it is being spread in a coordinated, multi-media fashion with similar talking points being repeated by a variety of sources to create the illusion of a "bandwagon effect". This was only to be expected as Ken Cuccinelli's chief campaign strategist, Chris LaCivita, was media advisor to the infamous Swift Boat Veterans for Truth organization that so brutally smeared John Kerry in his 2004 presidential campaign.

http://www.bluevirginia.us/diary/9884/the-swiftboating-of-terry-mcauliffe

[cali]

67. NO, it's not. I've made it clear that I support McAuliffe over Cuccuanelli

you have to be completely dishonest to pretend otherwise.

at all the disingenuous lying crap.

[FSogol]

69. The election is on Nov 5. Go bash someone else.

This is only helping Cuccinelli. How clear do I have to make it?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

147. just lay off of McAuliffe and get back to bashing Obama. At least he's done with elections

[VanillaRhapsody]

153. +infinity!

[dotymed]

29. This is why our political process will

never improve to the people-first (FDR) party that it used to be.

Even though you supported the democratic candidate and said that the repub was even worse, it doesn't matter.
Don't you know that if you don't put "party first", no matter what the truth is, people who believe that party trumps any truth will always ignore facts.

We have had many stories (Richard Trumka, stating that corporate dems are making it hard for Unions to keep supporting what used to be "our" party) about the party going in a direction that is not in the best interests of average Americans.
I do not want to keep voting for the lesser of two evils. Cali has stated that people should vote for the lesser of two evils, but she has been honest in her critiques. Is honesty not allowed on DU in your mind?

Stop the insanity. Support "people first." Maybe by OP's like hers, politicians will realize that no matter their party, their unscrupulous ways will be known and not tolerated as business as usual.

[Pab Sungenis]

58. ..

[Fantastic Anarchist]

4. What are you, a hall monitor?

Annoying.

[liberal N proud]

5. We all are!

[trumad]

7. Terms of Service reminder...

and I'm a hall monitor?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

9. What's the need for the reminder?

If people can't follow the rules, the real authorities will take care of them. Your post is just childish.

[trumad]

10. The need for the reminder is people breaking the rule.

You don't like my post---trash it.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

14. I'm offering my opinion that it's annoying.

I'm sure the moderators will take care of the people who are breaking rules.

[BlueToTheBone]

72. FA, we don't have moerators anymore

we have juries.

[JustAnotherGen]

76. +1

And they often don't hide those posts. If you are bashing Cory Booker just days before the election - I have zero tolerance. I don't care if he is a DINO, a corporatist, etc. etc.: Lonegan wants the women of NJ (I am one) shackled in their homes and forced to breed. <---- Call it hyperbole - but he's a monster. He's also the head of the TEA Party in NJ and he can suck it for all I care.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

121. I had just woken up and was cranky ...

But yes, the juries will be sufficient to deal with any problems.

[Bluenorthwest]

26. What about the 'rule' that says there is no whining about DU in GD?

Remember that the admins got rid of Meta. Now say 'breaking the rules again'!

[trumad]

51. Posting a Terms of Service reminder is whining

[Bluenorthwest]

59. Yep, it sure is. Now had you simply said 'a reminder' and posted the actual TOS that would

be less egregious than the addition of your own materials to what you are claiming is Skinner's TOS. What you posted is not just the TOS of DU. It also contains your own whining about DU. You break the TOS to whine about those who break the TOS. Green grass grows all around, all around.

[Cha]

35. It's not "annoying" to me.. it's encouraging. I'm glad there's

rules like that around election time. We need all the help we can get. There will be so much garbage and toxic trash out there stinking up the cyberwaves.

[joshcryer]

13. What authorities?

The only thing enforcing rules here to any significant extent are juries.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

15. I actually prefer it that way, but that's just me.

[joshcryer]

17. So do I.

[1StrongBlackMan]

32. As your screen-name would imply. eom

[Fantastic Anarchist]

123. What does my screen name have to do with anything?

[VanillaRhapsody]

156. Anarchist's are not really big fans of rules are they?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

158. Oh, it's you.

Nice try, FBI!

[VanillaRhapsody]

162. Yeah its me...

still posting the truth about Anarchy...

[Fantastic Anarchist]

164. Hehehe ...

Keep dreaming.

[VanillaRhapsody]

165. I don't have to dream....words have meanings.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

167. Still "Black-Baiting," I see.

Yes, complex philosophies have meanings, too, punchy. But we've been through this before. I read your comments, you didn't read mine, and arrived at a conclusion about a subject you clearly didn't have a clue about.

And round and round, we go.

Did you ever finish that dissertation on Plato's Republic using just a couple of dictionary definitions, yet?

Didn't think so.

[Hekate]

175. Can you explain what you mean by "Black-Baiting" as applied to a DUer?

Or anyone else for that matter.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

176. Black Flag ...

... anarchist or socialist baiting.

[Hekate]

177. Oh I see, as compared to baiting BY an anarchist.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

178. I guess you do.

[1StrongBlackMan]

170. Think about it. eom.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

174. You said it, you tell me.

Be a man, punchy.

[1StrongBlackMan]

179. Okay, ...

Definition of anarchy (n)

Bing Dictionary
an·ar·chy
[ ánnərkee ]


1.chaotic situation: a situation in which there is a total lack of organization or control
2.lack of government: the absence of any formal system of government in a society

One of the most frequent criticisms of DU's jury system is the recent feel of mob rule; where the "verdict" is more a function of WHO is on the jury, than the content of the post.

One would think that one would know the meaning of the words one uses in one's own screen-name. That would be fantastic, Judy !

[Fantastic Anarchist]

183. Okay ...

At least you came out with it.

So, with that, will you please describe Confucianism using a couple of dictionary definitions?

If you don't like that subject, then you can pick one of your choosing. I'll even be happy to offer some for you:

Hegelianism
Mysticism
Marxism
Zurvanism
Taoism
Secular Humanism

Those are but a few. I tried to provide a wide area for your use.

Now, if you can try and describe the above, or something of your choosing, comprehensively, using just a couple of dictionary definitions, then we can suffice to say that a dictionary is adequate to define a philosophy in total.

If not, then you'll understand as to why using a dictionary is not adequate to describe complex philosophies.

Oh, and also, as to your original point about my anarchist philosophy and juries (which you weren't somehow man enough to come out with), it's totally consistent. I'm on this site at the discretion of the owners/moderators. If I don't follow the rules, and a jury/juries decide that I have broken them repeatedly, or in a manner that's inconsistent with being a member of this site, then I"ll be banned.

My belief and actions are entirely consistent. You could have just asked, but you wanted to prance around it for some reason.

[1StrongBlackMan]

184. An Honors college freshman, I see ...

Okay.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

185. Incorrect.

[1StrongBlackMan]

187. Okay. n/t

[Pab Sungenis]

63. And the Admins.

They see every alert. Anything that rises to the level of TOS gets zotted.

[joshcryer]

66. I don't think admins can / will hide posts though.

So if it passes community standard scrutiny, it'll stand.

They'll just ban obvious disrupter's.

[Pab Sungenis]

68. Which is the point.

The disruptors go bye-bye.

Even long term DU'ers have been cremated by the Admins for third party advocacy, homophobia, misogyny, and other violations.

[joshcryer]

71. We'll see.

I know a few high profile trolls who continue posting but they've toned it down significantly since the rule change. We'll see if it's because of Obama's steadfastness about the shutdown / debt ceiling or if it's more about the rule change (I hope the latter, because it's a lot more civilized around here these days).

The rule change / Obama's steadfastness sort of coincided so it's not clear why the most obvious trolls have calmed the rhetoric.

[rhett o rick]

85. "you're still full of shit." Your words from the OP. Not included in the ToS.

This is a call-out thread.

[trumad]

87. Who Am I calling out.

Reiterating TOS is a call out--- then let it be a call out.

[rhett o rick]

89. Who do you really think you are fooling?

Just trying to sow dissension among Democrats.

[trumad]

90. Really---that's your comeback?

Posting a TOS that says do not go after Dems in an election cycle?

Wouldn't be helpful if posters went after the opponents of the Democratic nominee rather than the Democratic nominee?

This TOS goes to everyone who is breaking the rule.

You don't like it---tough shit.

[ScreamingMeemie]

41. Technically? Yes. Community Standards here have us "monitoring" each other. n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

49. Technically? SOP of General Discussion says 'no whining about DU'

So this is not the proper way to 'monitor'. We have a jury system.

[ScreamingMeemie]

52. I was just giving an answer. Yes it's our responsibility. No. It's not worth yet another argument

with someone.

To self,"Welcome back to DU, Laura. Nothing really ever changes... we're still looking to pick fights with each other..."

[Bluenorthwest]

53. Forgive me for pointing out that this OP, chiding rule breakers, is also breaking the rules

I'm not fighting with you, so stow your snark. Pointing out that some feel the rules only apply to those other people.
The rules of GD say 'no whining about DU'. Just a fact of the matter. This OP is a whine about DU.
Others also get to point out facts, and other rules do in fact exist.

[ScreamingMeemie]

54. Have a wonderful day, you.

[Bluenorthwest]

65. Explain to me why you are allowed to comment but I am not.

I don't see you as having special status. Posing as offended because I made a comment is puzzling and rude.

[valerief]

70. What, are you a sixth grader? nt

[Fantastic Anarchist]

142. No, are you?

[Kingofalldems]

6. Yep.

This rule should absolutely be enforced, otherwise why even have the rule.

[TreasonousBastard]

12. Go for it "hall monitor"! Not much is...

more annoying than the refrains of DINO or calls to support and vote third party because our guy just isn't good enough.

This is not a free speech issue-- it is a troll and/or asshole issue.

[cali]

33. except I've done no such thing. I've made it clear that I support McAuliffe

I think it's an asshole issue too. We just disagree about who is an asshole.

I know what I believe.

[TreasonousBastard]

57. I never said you did. Is there...

something you want to tell us?

[RC]

110. And what happens when 3rd party is a better fit, i.e., more Liberal/Progressive, than the

DINO DLC Democrat running?

That is a legitimate question. Always voting for "Democrats" pretty much guarantees more shifting to the Right, when the party leaders are DLC and worse. How are we to move back to being Liberal and Progressive again, when our own party marginalizes those candidates?

[TreasonousBastard]

132. So what? This isn't "liberal underground"...

and who decides who is progressive enough, anyway?

Whining about who is DLC accomplishes nothing since it's the voters who end up deciding who to put in office and we have to deal with serious gerrymandering, so for any chance at all we have to put up with relatively conservative candidates here and there. Besides, we get it wrong a lot-- there were a huge complaints about Gillibrand because of how she acted as an upstate Congresswoman, but now that she's a Senator working for all of NY, everyone shut up about that.

In Congress, it's entirely a two-party system and even conservative Dems caucus with the liberal ones because that's what they do, and their vote means a lot toward keeping the worst of the Republicans at bay.

Voting third party is always a wasted vote-- that's just the way it is. Might as well just stay home.

[RC]

139. And there ladies and gentle is the problem.

Nothing matters as long as they have that (D) by their name. And we wonder why the current version of the Democratic party are the Left wing of the Republican party.

[TreasonousBastard]

143. That's the problem? When was the last time you saw..

left wingers take over Congress? Or your town council? Don't blame me for that. I'm just reporting, not causing, it.

Liberals and progressives may be great, but they don't get the votes in most places and tend to run suicide candidacies. Besides, a whole bunch of them are just mirror images of teabaggers with their own unsupportable plans and ideas. Not quite as whacky as the teabaggers, but with the same blinders on.

You want more liberals elected? Get your ass out there in the primaries and get them nominated and then get them out there in the general and make the case.

And barrels full of money won't hurt, but that's another story. Most of us don't have that, but we do have phones and feet to help get someone elected.

[RC]

149. The last time Liberals and Progressive were elected was before the DLC took over leadership of the

Democratic party.

Liberals and progressive do try to run. They are ignored by the party, in favor of the name recondition of the DLC and DINO's, fostered by our famously truthful "Liberal Media".

Liberals don't get the votes because they don't get the media exposure. They don't get the media exposure because the media is all but wholly owned by the Right leaning rich Republican organizations. The DLC and DINO's are sufficiently to the Right to please our owners, so they get mentioned in a positive light. Actual Liberals and Progressives are not, so they get ignored or slammed. Maybe it would help if you would not be pushing the DLC types and get behind some on the Left yourself.

Alan Grayson is an exception because he has his own money.

[TreasonousBastard]

172. Horse... Cart...?

[VanillaRhapsody]

157. and build a "Liberal Underground"

[A Simple Game]

20. Blindly accepting a candidate may make you a good partisan,

but it makes you a poor voter.

Knowing the truth is always better than having your head in the sand.

There are good partisans and there are good Americans, they are not always the same.

No more lesser of two evils.

[randome]

21. Can we still bash trumad? Kidding!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[HappyMe]

23. This kind of sounds like you have

a problem with a particular poster or posters.

Dems and Dem candidates get bashed here every day.

[Cha]

36. He's pointing out the rules around Election Time.

[HappyMe]

47. Sure.

[Bluenorthwest]

25. Is this Meta? Or is this what the centrists do when Jury does not do their bidding, whine about

DU in GD, which is specifically against the Statement of Purpose of GD? "Statement of Purpose Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU."

So you got to break rules in order to enforce other rules? Positively Republican!

[scheming daemons]

28. once the nomination is secured, bashing a Dem candidate is a nono

Wait until after the election.

Anything that aids a GOP nominee should be deleted.

[Bluenorthwest]

48. Tell it to Kendrik Meek. He was trashed here openly in favor of Third Party candidate

and recent Republican Charlie Crist.

[SwampG8r]

78. now i have to speak my piece

after reading through this silly op and its silly replies I finally have to speak
I am a Floridian and I supported Kendrick meek in the senate race
he won the dem primary so he was not only the best choice for the job but the actual democratic party nominee
during his run I tried to get du behind him and was told "he has no chance" "crist is 3rd party now he isn't a republican" "3rd party advocacy is ok when the dem candidate will lose"
all of these were here on du
many of the posters who supported a republican,charlie crist, over the official democratic party nominee , Kendrick meek , are on du now demanding party unity
they will go to no limits to advocate for 3rd way right wing light folks like McAuliffe and at the same time work to stop progressive democrats from building support
I even went begging in ATA and was basically told a watered down version of the above quoted areas
I suffer every day ,as a citizen of florida , from what these people did and continue to do.
I remember a time when informed voting was important and that includes being informed of the flaws of the candidates
the people of va deserve to have complete disclosure of the facts pertaining to the candidates available and if the dem candidate loses because his assholery becomes public then maybe next time we wont nominate another asshole
none of this is directed to you and thank you for remembering the betrayal of meek

[laundry_queen]

160. I remember all of that. Shameful.

As is this passive aggressive OP.

[VanillaRhapsody]

159. When did Crist revert back to Republican?

[SwampG8r]

173. what revert?

he is a republican
he always has been
when he said he was a democrat he was a big fat lying liar
if he says today he is a democrat he is a big fat lying liar
we here in florida know damn good and well who Charlie crist is and he is no democrat whatever letter he sticks behind his name
he is jeb bush's lickspittle

[VanillaRhapsody]

182. You are also the people that elected Rick Scott

AND Jeb Bush....so there is that.

[SwampG8r]

191. did we?

how can we be sure who we elected? I worked hard against scott but I see that makes me as a Floridian responsible for electing him.
I guess I am also responsible for Rubio even tho during his campaign I had to fight tooth and nail against a bunch of dlc 3rd way dinos here on du who were allowed to push for the former gop candidate who did not win the primary and was running as a 3rd party guy.
someday I hope you are enough of an adult to realize many of us here in florida work tirelessly and endlessly to get democrats elected and almost never receive any type of reward other than the snotty snideness of people like you who likely never have to actually flip a state politically.
thanks for your words of encouragement having to read the witless prattlings of the uninvolved is always the best way to fire people up for a lost cause!

[Puzzledtraveller]

38. It's the DAWG!

[RandiFan1290]

39. *

*

[SwampG8r]

79. thank you as a floridian for remembering the betrayal of kendrick meek nt

[madokie]

40. Since I've been paying attention I've not seen another that was better for us than the Democrat

candidate is. Oh and yes us MADs have to stick together so if I need to be kicking ass and taking names just let me know

Hope this is seen as what it is and not as it seems.

I'll add the just in case

[TransitJohn]

42. Signed, Kendrick Meek. eom

n/t

[SwampG8r]

80. thank you for remembering the betrayal of meek nt

[Capt. Obvious]

94. Co-signed, Cynthia Dill

[Pab Sungenis]

55. Cory Booker IS better than Steve Lonegan.

Miles better. I'm voting for him and think everyone else should, too.

But I still wish we had a better Democrat on our ticket.

[madrchsod]

60. oh no ,what did i miss this time....

[cali]

62. my comments on Terry McAuliffe starting with a factual WaPo story I

posted yesterday.

[B Calm]

64. Same old shit, bad mouthing democrats just before an election!

[libodem]

73. It would be hellish

To spend your fun tickets bashing and then be sent to, the site we do not name. (Although I have recently wondered how it is going over there, I can't bear to look.)



Yes, hellish.

[MannyGoldstein]

74. Also, let's make sure to always support our Democratic President!

After all, it was a damned Republican who said this:

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
-Theodore Roosevelt

[LWolf]

77. Is it election season? Really?

No elections happening here; no candidates to discuss.

Plenty of already elected politicians are on the table for discussion, though, and that includes criticizing them, when they've earned it. That's no TOS violation.

I haven't criticized a politician in several days; maybe I should jump in to the fray, since you brought it up.

[msanthrope]

91. Are you unaware of the election in VA? Then why are you commenting on this thread? nt

[LWolf]

169. Yes, I'm unaware.

I'm 2100 miles away from VA. Why would I be aware that the thread is specifically for VA, if it is? Or that someone has been "bashing" a candidate from VA? It isn't referenced in the OP I responded to.

I think it's a pretty clear response to a cryptic OP.

[SidDithers]

81. DU rec...nt

Sid

[HappyMe]

88. Happy Thanksgiving!

[SidDithers]

92. Thanks!...

Big turkey with all the wonderful fixings this weekend.

My favourite holiday meal.

Sid

[HappyMe]

99. It's my favorite holiday meal as well.

I enjoy cooking it too.

Enjoy your dinner, family and friends.

[rhett o rick]

83. Singling out and trying to bully another DU poster is not helping

unite Democrats.

[grantcart]

86. That's hysterical. He didn't mention anyone. I had no idea who he was talking about

until someone jumped on the thread and said "I shot the sheriff but I didn't shoot the deputy".

[trumad]

106. Someone posted something pretty succinct ...

OK---if you're going to bash the Democratic nominee then be sure to post something about the Dem's opponent --- you know---to make it fair and balanced.

Made me kind of think---bingo, that is it in a nutshell.

[hobbit709]

96. There was more than one Democratic candidate I voted for while holding my nose

and carrying a barf bag. if that's bashing, then that's just too bad.

[Capt. Obvious]

97. This friendly reminder should help others not get their posts hidden

[cer7711]

98. Really?

Well that has the whiff of unabashed Sovietism about it!

I'm with you in spirit, certainly. I well understand the pressures and group-think that produced it. But that line [paraphrased] re: "If you criticize one of ours during election season . . . we'll assume you are rooting for the other side" would have made fine fodder for the biting, satirical wit of a Mark Twain, Mencken or George Orwell. Or Christopher Hitchens, for that matter.
...................................

Re: Christoper Hitchens' Letters To A Young Contrarian

Editorial Reviews

From Barnes & Noble

From The Critics

. . . In an environment of political correctness and overly polite discourse, Hitchens' appeal is in his desire to challenge and shake up the system. The author reminds us that "human beings do not, in fact, desire to live in some Disneyland of the mind, where there is an end to striving and a general feeling of contentment and bliss." While most desire harmony and peace, Hitchens argues for the usefulness of strife and debate: "In life we make progress by conflict and in mental life by argument and disputation."

For Hitchens, "a state of praise and gratitude and adoration" is analogous to a "world of hellish nullity and conformism." Hitchens is deeply skeptical of those who criticize the politics of division, "as if politics was not division by definition," he points out.

The author is most effective when challenging us to resist the merely familiar and popular. The contrarian, Hitchens asserts, must be bold and aggressive, must not let weak assertions andbeliefs get by. Moreover, he or she must be willing to tell people what they don't want to hear.

Recall how Hitchens, in his book The Missionary Position, was highly critical of alliances that Mother Teresa, esteemed and sacred to many, had formed with politicians and businessmen. Equally valuable is Hitchens' advice about overcoming self-doubt. "I am consoled, when I suffer this very same apprehension, by the thought that the Pope and the Queen and the President (or a Democratic candidate, eh?--CER) all wake up every morning with a similar gnawing fear. Or that, if they do not, they deserve to be doubted and distrusted even more, if that were possible, than I doubt and distrust them now."

Hitchens' articulate and perceptive arguments have enormous appeal, as does Dershowitz's keen scrutiny of the American legal system, and their books effectively hold the reader's attention. In an age shaped by pervasive opinion polling, both writers advise us to stand alone and passionately resist what others—guided by habit, good manners or conformity—too easily accept. Surely such a lesson is beneficial to us all.

—James Schiff

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/letters-to-a-young-contrarian-christopher-hitchens/1100304750?ean=9780465030330

[stonecutter357]

100. K&R

[msanthrope]

103. Donald Segretti had a term for this. nt

[FSogol]

105. Exactly. n/t

[msanthrope]

107. I was accused of homophobia the last time I used that term--even Skinner had no

idea that the term in question had even been considered homophobic.

In fact, no one on this board has ever had the courage to state precisely why they think that term is homophobic.

[FSogol]

112. Yeah, I saw that. Bad hide. n/t

[msanthrope]

113. Bad hide....and the poster who alerted still hasn't explained himself. Because if the term is

actually homophobic, I think it should be cause for banning, right???

[freshwest]

168. Possibly the alerter suffered from said phobia, himself. Just sayin'

Last edited Sun Oct 13, 2013, 04:41 PM - Edit history (2)

Is it possible that this guy has an account at DU?

Rand Paul: Same-sex marriage ‘conundrum’ leads to marrying animals

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/26/rand-paul-same-sex-marriage-conundrum-leads-to-marrying-animals/

It's the kind of analogy a RWNJ would make and it was outrageous. The hide was far fetched, there's no correlation between gays, straights, rats, sex or any combination of those elements. Why say the term had anything to do with being gay, unless the alerter claimed that being gay leads to beastiality, as Paul does?

No Democrat would make such a correlation! It counted on a knee jerk reaction or lack of knowledge. It is the action of a troll to do that, or someone with a sordid mind.

More than one gay member has said he is angered by the use of the alert system by some, who did not support gays before, and doesn't appreciate their cause used by others for their agendas.

I posted an educational thread on the Nixon era practice and its continuing into the present day. It has won many elections for the GOP since then, very important ones that have reversed progress. They have not stopped using it. Segretti is still active and in 2000 was employed by McCain.

But election season isn't just after a nominee is chosen, it's the entire atmosphere that is created year around. A steady deluge of anti-Democratic media stories, even if soon disproven, are like water dripping to demoralize and take a lot of energy from DU.

And Democrats at large will feel embarrassed, even by lies. There is an old proverb, that a when a person would repent and seek to undo a lie, that it would be like chasing the wind. Metaphors which relate natural phenomena to political discourse are apt. Poisoned well, bad smell, storms and earthquakes are not that much different than the effect on the human heart and mind, and some things cannot be reasoned away.

Negativity always discourages people who come to DU to meet Democrats, or who are Democrats, but feel from their reading DU there is no hope and future in increasing their knowledge and getting help with activism. Many have left.

If we were not confined to the current definition of support kicking in after primaries are done, we would be better off. Any kind of national situation draws high interest and to new people joining up to find the solution, or respectful, with fact filled, positive discussion all year round. But they haven't found it at times.

Things have been much better lately, and we need to come together and not go over the past. I posted my thread in response to your post being hidden. We need to not target other DUers, but the issues.

JMHO.

[jonsiee]

109. Does anybody really think posting controversy about McAuliffe

is going to have an effect on the Virginia gubernatorial election in any way?

[trumad]

111. OK---then lets have full on bashing of Dems before any election.

[jonsiee]

114. Do you think anybody really cares?

Other than the few active members of this discussion board?

[trumad]

116. Well obviously---yes

[rug]

115. Everyone assemble in the yard tomorrow at 6:30 am sharp for calisthenics.

[In_The_Wind]

119. Do I really have to ...

[rug]

122. Read the TOS, Private!

[In_The_Wind]

124. Again

[img][/img] [img][/img]

[quinnox]

118. Meh

If you have a problem with a duer who post threads you don't like, just post in the thread. Either that, or say directly what you are referring to, I dislike threads like this where they are pussy-footing around.

[trumad]

120. meh back at you

If you have a problem with TOS... talk to the admins.

[quinnox]

125. I don't have a problem with the terms of service

I find threads like this annoying, where you aren't directly saying why you made it. Just say something like "I have seen threads bashing Mcauliff" so at least we have a reference.

Instead we have to read this whole thread to figure out what you are really talking about.

[trumad]

126. then trash the fucking thread

[quinnox]

127. Seeing that response, one wonders why you can't be as direct in your OP

you can call out duers, there is no rule saying you can't. All those rules were left behind when it became DU 3. Unless you think a jury might hide it, I guess there is that.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

129. "then trash the FUCKING thread". Ah, that's the trumad that I remember.

Where have you been? For some time now, somebody has been posting under your moniker without using obscenities, or profanities, or other vulgarities.

Welcome back.

Keep up the good work.

[trumad]

130. Really

An imposter....no fucking way!

[Walk away]

128. Then why is this post still up?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023826799

[Whisp]

133. you can't get freaking lower than helping out a Teabagger.

jezuz. I want to barf.

[frylock]

134. just a reminder that today is October 11, 2013, and not "election season"

[FSogol]

190. Bullshit. Election Day in VA is 11/5/2013.

Virginia has off election year Governor races and this election is very important to the State. The primary was 6/11/13. Election season for this race is 6/12/13 thru 11/5/13.

[1000words]

135. And .... a reminder that "trash thread" is functioning fine

*click*

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

137. Is criticism "bashing"?

Does being a nominee elevate a person seeking office above the right of the people to criticize other people? Do they become sacred deities?

[laundry_queen]

161. Apparently they do to some. nt

[LadyHawkAZ]

141. It's not called "bashing" these days.

It's now called "holding feet to the fire" or "disagreement with policy" in the interests of "earning my vote". Or something.

"Bashing" is doubleplusungood. The new dictionary came out last Thursday. Do try to keep up.

[Whisp]

145. To be honest, I don't even know why there is a TOS.

Why even bother with wording it when a jury trumps all. And if you get the 'wrong' jury, then you be fucked no matter what.

[Rex]

148. Dam, I thought that in bold was the ToS. Wow! What an update!

I like the way you say it better.

[pintobean]

150. GD is becoming Meta.

call-outs, pile-ons, troll accusations...

Are we going to keep this up until GD gets shut down, like Meta? What forum do we move to, then?

[Rex]

151. GD was Meta long before there was a DU3.

Evidently some Meta threads are worth more than other Meta threads in GD.

[pintobean]

154. Mods could, and would shut them down

jurors and hosts don't.

[Rex]

155. Jurors and hosts seem to be lost at sea.

I remember when they were a big deal at the start of DU3. Now...meh.

[OmahaBlueDog]

163. Remember: DU is supposed to be fun — don't make it suck.

Just because it isn't listed here, doesn't mean it's ok.

Democratic Underground is not intended to be a platform for kooks and crackpots peddling paranoid fantasies with little or no basis in fact.

If you seem to be ruining this website for a large proportion of our visitors, if we think the community as a whole would be better off without you here, if you are constantly wasting the DU Administrators' time, if you seem to oppose the mission of DU, or if the DU Administrators just don't like you, we will revoke your posting privileges.

Do not post or link to pornography. (Note: You may have to obtain a Ouija board and channel John Paul Stevens to determine if you are violating this one)

DU members are not qualified to give you the help you need.

In determining what constitutes bigotry, please be aware that we cannot know what is in anyone's heart, and we will give members the benefit of the doubt, when — and only when — such doubt exists.

Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like)

When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them.

Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

[MattBaggins]

166. Still don't like Cory Booker

How about when the gunstrokers were out in force the day after the Colorado elections to rub it in everyone's faces that they defeated Dem candidates?


They were allowed to do it.

[davidpdx]

180. I disagree

I did see a thread that was similar to what you are referring to (it is possible that there were several, I don't read everything). One person expressed reservations about a candidate but still said he was voting for the person.

If this is what you are talking about it is far from a violation of the TOS. If this were against the TOS we'd have thousands of less people on DU.

I support the party and the candidates, but if I had doubts about a candidate I would most assuredly be candidate about them.

[trumad]

181. Said person---if that's the person we're referring to...

only posts negatives of the Democratic Nominee, and never any Ops or posts of their shit bag republican opponents.

[davidpdx]

188. Then it was a different post

I saw one that was similar, but about Booker. Someone posted something similar about the TOS in that one, hence the connection.

[Hutzpa]

189. Glad I saw this thread

there is no better advocate here for democratic nominee than myself, but I have to admit, I made a
schoolboy mistake by using a word that some consider to be racist, as a black man I should have
known that using such word will rile up the wrong crowd even though my intention was not to be racist,
but to point out that the said individual is not a liberal/progressive, but corporate spokesperson as we
found out during the 2012 election with his comment regarding Obama and wall street, as the democratic
nominee I see no reason not to support him, but will not change my feeling toward him until he can prove
otherwise.

I accept the responsibility of my bad judgement and will remember not to use such word again as it was
pointed out that such word is not acceptable within our community.