do you think most things you don't agree with here, are posted by freepers?

[sniffa]

just to set us off? or do you think it's just the "big tent" pLaying itseLf out?

simpLe question, but feeL free to expound in any direction.

[Dhalgren]

1. No. Unfortunately most of the things I disagree with, here, are proffered

by Democrats. The Democratic Party can only be considered "progressive" when compared to the Republicans, sad to say...

[antiimperialist]

2. There are plenty of freepers posing as "moderates"

I believe many of those who came strong against Moveon's ad against Petraeus were Freepers.
I don't think they are the majority, though. Still a significant number.

[cali]

6. Yep. I'm really a freeper.

I strongly believed that MoveOn's ad was a tactical erro, though I've long supported them. The body of the ad was, I thought, quite substantive. The cutsy General Betray Us? stuff? Not so much.

It's called a difference of opinion. And portraying those who disagree with you as "the other", is disappointing to see.

[antiimperialist]

25. Did I say you specifically were a freeper?

no. Did I even say the majority of those opposed to the Moveon ad were freepers? no. I said there were many, IMO.
But you see the world in black and white.

[Forkboy]

34. Guilty conscience?

:hide:

:evilgrin:

[rpannier]

7. I don't know how many are 'freepers' But there's still a number of Progressives who are too busy

fretting over the possible negative public reaction that may hurt our chances...blah blah blah

Whether they like it or not...one of the things that aided the republikkan rise in the 80's and 90's was an image of confidence. Willing to take a chance.
The Dems were painted as weak and vascillating.
Those who whined about the Moveon ad are the successors to the vascillating class

[HughBeaumont]

8. I think it's the reverse.

:)

[Echo In Light]

10. The "tsk-tsk" tone...

...of supposed superiority, coupled with condescending finger-wags at the "loony" left are often dead give-aways ... not that one would know if the person is a "freeper" necessarily, but definitely shifted-to-the-right, whether they're cognizant of it or not.

[cali]

14. Right. Not.

Love the little totalitarian whiff from your post. It sort of boils down to: 1) If you don't agree with me on all things, you're "shifted-to-the-right", and 2) projection about where a person stands on YOUR perception of whether they're being condescending. Also, a claim of purer and leftier than thou.

Oh, and some spuriously claimed ability to mind-read and know more about a poster you've never met, than that person himself/herself.

[Echo In Light]

16. Why do you assume it's directed at you?

I've noticed this recurring theme of yours, Cali. That, and as I've recently written quite a bit on authoritarian projection (the 9/11 forum), you're suddenly using the reference, attempting to apply it to me while simultaneously accusing me of precisely what you yourself are doing, the "ability to read minds," etc

Perhaps I'm guilty of making generalizations to convey a concept. Not making claims to harbor psychic abilities though. That's your own smear.

Just to clarify things, Cali, I frankly am quite uninterested in your views. You've set your sights on my postings, apparently due to perceiving my views as an affront to your own. I'm not here to engage little poster-to-poster battles, okay, so I suggest we simply agree to disagree. Feel free to keep on harping on my posts if it suits you. However, I won't be responding. Carry on.

[sniffa]

17. eh, bitterness wears off after a whiLe

i finaLLy had to make it disappear.

[dajoki]

37. That's what really bugs me...

"claimed ability to mind-read and know more about a poster you've never met, than that person himself/herself." I've had numerous run-ins with people who think they know everything about you based on one post. People should stop assuming and putting words into your mouth that you never even thought of saying, too many think its just black or white, and nothing in between. We are a diverse group here at DU and even if I don't agree with some people, I still respect their opinion, I would just appreciate the same in return.

[SlingBlade]

11. So True antiimperialist

I was singled out on a K.C forum by one of our D.U brethren for being too hard on a Re-Pug.
And he was a nasty one too. Funny this Alan Colmes wannabe never had anything bad to
say abouit the loud mouthed freepers.

[CreekDog]

13. I'm no freeper, but I thought the "Betray-us" thing was stupid

I don't mind snark, but only if it helps us.

However, I didn't think the House should be voting to condemn political speech, bad, bad precedent.

[liberaldemocrat7]

30. I like the betray us ad. I created Betray us material in our store in March.

I refer to GW Bush as General Betray us or pResident Betray us.

In my view we need to smear Republicans with the facts and give it to them hard and fast until they crawl away and stop attacking progressives and liberals.

My beef with moveon comes that they don't hit the RepubliKLAN party hard enough with petitions threatening boycotts against GOP contributor companies that depend on the general public buying their products.

If you won't call a GOP contributor and demand progressive legislation from them under threat of boycott YOU abdicate power.

[CreekDog]

32. But if you won't call a GOP person a ridiculous name

That doesn't mean you are abdicating --look up the freakin' definition.

Not thinking it was helpful to call him "Betray-us", which it sure as hell was not, the points could have been made in a snarkier way without calling someone a traitor. That's the issue, or at least that became the issue once we were talking about "Betray-us" instead of the Iraq war.

Anyone who refused to do that wasn't abdicating, but protecting the cause.

[rpannier]

3. The Democratic Party is so fragmented that there will always be varied opinions on everything

Although...The true purity of my thoughts and deeds make me the living definition of a true progressive. :evilgrin: :crazy: :silly: :sarcasm: :hide: :yoiks:

[skyblue]

4. Freepers are EVERYWHERE. Not limited to what I agree with or disagree with.

[Echo In Light]

5. It's a wonderful world of colonized minds! n/t

[On the Road]

9. People Often Have a Strange Mix of Opinions

the majority of people don't fit cleanly into stereotypes.

A lot of liberal support aggressive military interventions. And a lot of DUers seem to hold to old-fashioned economic conservative views, sometimes without realizing it.

[Gman]

12. I think there is a substantial number of Free Republic members

that have accounts they only use during election time. They are probably most characterized by having 500 posts or less and no star, but have been around for several years now. Generally, they seem to be the people who are bashing Hillary the most.

[JMDEM]

19. Well gee -- might as well kick me off right now...

You think there MIGHT be an outside possibility that:

People with low post counts have other things to do, like jobs and families? But maybe their interest in DU peaks around elections for natural reasons, like trying to find inside information on what is happening?

Maybe a lot of people spend 95% of their time on DU just using DU as a source of alternative news to get around the MSM, but don't usually have time to post? Posting is time consuming -- especially if you want to check back for responses to your posts, and need to reply to those, etc.

So freepers can often be identified as those bashing Hillary? This is odd for at least two reasons:

1. Under this criteria, it appears that a substantial group of DU members are freepers. Worse than that, they are SLEEPER FREEPERS -- those that have oodles of posts and have PRETENDED to be progressive for years, then all the sudden crawl out of the woodwork to attack the annointed queen!

2. Of all the candidates a freeper would want for the Democrats to elect, I would think that Hillary would lead the pack. I would imagine most freepers are drooling over that possibility.

[sniffa]

20. nope, it's just freepers who bash hiLLary

she's the goddess of peace here.

[saracat]

15. I do not think there are many Freepers. I have differences with both sides of the spectrum

so both sides have called me a Freeper. But I have also been called a DLCER. I thought the MoveOn ad was in questionable taste, I didn't like the Code Pink disruption of the hearings, I don't like what Cindy Sheehan has become, but I do not support Hillary Clinton and am furious about a lot happening in DC. Choice is my big issue.But I feel strongly about health care and outsourcing.I am a huge fan of John Edwards.But both sides have managed to attack me.I think we are way too free with calling those that do not hold our particular point of view in every issue, Freepers.

[Echo In Light]

18. lol ...as for the Code Pink "disruptions,"

I differ in that I wish tens of millions more people would make time for such democratic interference i.e. "disruptions"

...the American landscape would be quite different from the present.

[saracat]

33. I had a poor word choice. I approve the "disruptions/" Protests.just not how

they are presented. They look trivialBut I do wish we had more people standing up and fighting.They are to be commended for that!

[JNelson6563]

21. No, more Keyboard Commandos & right wing Dems

are much more of a blight here than freeps.

Julie

[wyldwolf]

29. of course, the bigger blights are "holier than thou" types and ....

leftwing Dem wannabes.

[Totally Committed]

31. Amen, my friend!

Well-said!

TC

[Raejeanowl]

22. Oh, We Don't Need Freepers

If DU is a microcosm of the Democratic Party, and the almost standardized and predictable digs are any indication, our greatest collective weakness may be the pervasive intolerance for individual variables of ideology. For example, I'm sure it's tough to be either a practicing Christian or a a pro-lifer around here.

If freepers walk among us (They want to eat our BRAINS!), I'd be a little embarrassed that reports about divisiveness and infighting may be going back to Puke HQ.

[wyldwolf]

23. only in the lounge

[LoZoccolo]

24. I like this poll.

It gets my seal of approval.

[Pyrzqxgl]

26. No I think a lot of you are sarcastic sons of bitches (as am I) who enjoy stirring the pot to see

what rises to the top.

[redqueen]

27. No.

*sigh*

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

28. The really telling point is that it's indeterminable because

The really telling point is that it's indeterminable because many DUers post precisely what a freep disruptor would post, if he were clever.

And the comical part is that the idealogical divide is so bad on DU that people cannot even agree what a disruptor would post because the split on DU includes a split on theories of what republicans even want. I have had my Dem credentials questioned for defending Nancy Pelosi or speaking favorably of Bill Clinton's presidency. Maybe a disruptor would come over here to defend Clinton... I don't know. It's a fun-house mirror world these days.

The mechanics are so subtle that there's probably no point in disruption any more.

If I was causing trouble at Free Republic I wouldn't know where to start... would I boost Rudy or trash him? Would I be pro-immigrant or anti?

I don't even know which Republican candidate is the best to run against! I can make a case for any of them as the weakest candidate.

Here's a perfect example: Would I encourage a christian third party? It would ensure that the Dem won the presidency, but it would also encourage fundy turn-out and thus might hurt all other dems on the ballot. I have no idea how it would work out overall.

I watched Hannity last night because I had already seen the debate earlier in the day, and the first half hour was indistinguishable from reading DU.

So there is no freeper Turing test anymore. The real is indistinguishable from the mock.

[Forkboy]

35. I wish it was that easy to just discount them as freepers.

Sadly, I think many of them really are Dems.

[Progressive Friend]

36. It wouldn't surprise me if there are some freepers here, trying to push us to the right