Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Keith Ellison: [View all]NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)175. Well, Ken...
Ken Burch 171. There was nothing in my post to be "blunt" about.
That statement makes no sense. Bainsbane was direct and blunt. I know you don't resent strong women, so I'm wondering what your problem is with her.
I wasn't attacking anybody or doing anything harmful.
Irrelevant. Unnecessary distraction. Nobody said you were.
That poster acts as if everything I say is part of some sort of plot...
No she doesn't. Why would you accuse her of that? I know you're not paranoid, but the things you're saying leave you open to suspicion and ridicule. You should probably choose your words and retorts a little more carefully. Actually, I had to chuckle because it kind of reminded me of that old saying "you're not paranoid if people really are out to get you" ... right?
as if it's all an attack on her and those she fights for.
Are you projecting? I hope not. I can assure you that Bainsbane is confident enough and intelligent enough to not have such feelings of inferiority or paranoia or victimhood.
None of what I posted there was an attack on anyone.
Again... who said that it was? Nobody. Nobody said that. That's twice now (in this message) that you've used that distraction technique. You do that a lot. It's annoying. Some friendly advice: you need to stop.
Here's what happened: Someone disagreed with you and challenged you. In response, you get all huffy and pretend that they are over-reacting... that they are somehow "disrespecting" you... and that they're treating you as if you're the attacker (when in reality, you're just the "victim", right?)
You're changing the subject, pretending to be victimized, and in so doing, you avoid having to address (or even acknowledge) the valid points that someone else made. And you also avoid having to answer to the valid criticisms. People aren't as clueless as you imagine them to be, Ken, and they're catching on to you. (It's not just me.)
It was just a respectful call for change.
No, it was a tactical maneuver. A repetitive one, a tiresome one. It's old and predicable. It's not as effective as you may imagine. (Frankly, I didn't notice anything particularly "respectful" in your post/s. As per usual, it was a bit on the preachy side and having none of the deference that you apparently demand from others. One would think that if such things were truthfully so important to you, then you'd give them in return... to set a good example as it were. But you don't... and that's fine... we're all adults here. But the fact that you don't makes your sorrowful "hurt feelings" claim ring a bit hollow.
It's time to admit the war is over. We aren't Sanders people or Clinton people now...
Ahh... that's another predicable passive-aggressive defense. I didn't say anything about "Sanders vs Clinton" in this subthread. Did Bainsbane? Did anyone other than you? If so... well... shame on them. If not, shame on you.
So, okay... we're all one-big-happy-family (united-against-Trump) and this means what, exactly? That because of our common enemy, you are now immune from criticism or having your worldview challenged? How convenient for you (if it were true, but it's not).
...we're just people and we all have a right to be here.
You like that one, don't you? You use it a lot. It's the verbal equivalent of a pro-sports player faking an injury... just for the automatic time-out... so the s/he can catch their breath, rest and regroup. It's obvious and it's ineffective.
The old "I have a right to be here" retort is one that suggests (falsely) that someone has told you don't have a right to be here. But, alas, that would be untrue... because nobody has said such a thing to you.
Anyway... I hope you have a wonderful week. You're the greatest! I like you a whole lot!
[center]
#BeLikeKeith
[/center]
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
209 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
But there seems to be a few trying really hard to keep up the schtick here on DU.
KittyWampus
Feb 2017
#4
He's absolutely correct. Having the two of them working together as a team...
WePurrsevere
Feb 2017
#6
No, you ain't "heard" nothing except whatever assumptions you got going on in your head..
JHan
Feb 2017
#22
You seem concerned. Please feel free to air more of your concerns, and enjoy your stay. nt
msanthrope
Feb 2017
#118
Correlation does not imply causation. You need to spend more time looking into
stevenleser
Feb 2017
#49
Each issue is different, but one thing is certain, correlation does not imply causation.
stevenleser
Feb 2017
#85
That is not really true...she was a terrible fund raiser and starved the states...
Demsrule86
Feb 2017
#84
So it's "dredging up the past" to consider past failures and how to prevent them
ciaobaby
Feb 2017
#37
We need a plan. We could live with that. Let's see what Perez does, maybe he will start shifting
JudyM
Feb 2017
#39
Wrong...we are not supposed to use right wing sites against fellow Democrats.
Demsrule86
Feb 2017
#122
What do you think the immediate and practical result of refusing money would be to the Democratic pa
LanternWaste
Feb 2017
#156
We lost everything during those years...did you ever think banning the money
Demsrule86
Feb 2017
#123
The passion is not coming from people pushing sanders failed platform but from people against trump
Gothmog
Feb 2017
#71
It serves no good purpose for you to keep treating the Sanders movement with contempt and derision.
Ken Burch
Feb 2017
#96
Of all the posts on this thread, I can't believe this one got alerted on.
Crunchy Frog
Mar 2017
#203
And with that, Keith proved that the suspicion and distrust directed his way was out of line.
Ken Burch
Feb 2017
#19
Wrong. The distrust wasn't toward Keith. It was never about Keith the Man...
NurseJackie
Feb 2017
#83
Very well put, NurseJackie, thank you. I loved Keith's comments after the vote was announced....
George II
Feb 2017
#86
I never really got the impression that "grassroots funding" was one of Keith's issues.
NurseJackie
Feb 2017
#113
I don't accept that you're an insider simply because you've been in office for awhile.
Ken Burch
Feb 2017
#130
And I'm not sure why it seems to be so important to you to label every possible candidate an insider
Ken Burch
Feb 2017
#132
You're assuming that Keith was CALLING for the party to reject the Obama legacy.
Ken Burch
Feb 2017
#138
I strongly disagree with your analysis and conclusions but you are getting off track
Gothmog
Feb 2017
#141
Great post-real life is very different from amusing posts on an internet board
Gothmog
Feb 2017
#157
To clarify my intent...I was talking about two DIFFERENT constituencies in that post. My bad.
Ken Burch
Feb 2017
#160
If we assume we only lost because of racism or irrational hatred of Hillary,
BainsBane
Mar 2017
#167
Oh, please! BainsBane wasn't being hostile. It was being direct and blunt and not mincing words.
NurseJackie
Mar 2017
#168
That really depends on how you define the word "harm", doesn't it? Based on ...
NurseJackie
Mar 2017
#193
I accepted that Perez has won. Nothing I said in the post you just responded to was about Perez.
Ken Burch
Mar 2017
#189
I've worked on campaigns for decades. I've worked on ground game for decades
Ken Burch
Mar 2017
#177
tbh I don't want to make this about this singular issue because it's a side track..
JHan
Mar 2017
#198
After you have worked on some campaigns in the real world, things look differently
Gothmog
Mar 2017
#188
Again, after you have worked on some campaigns in the real world you will have a different viewpoint
Gothmog
Mar 2017
#194
Thanks for posting this. These are ideas and observations that have been swirling in my brain ...
NurseJackie
Mar 2017
#181
+1, Alan Dershowitz shown what a petty little man he was when he injected his rhetoric into this
ck4829
Feb 2017
#150
I have heard that Tom and Keith are friends and the deputy move was in the works no matter who won
Gothmog
Feb 2017
#79
But Perez is the one in charge, right? Deputy chair is not a "co-chair" with equal powers and ...
NurseJackie
Feb 2017
#114
I've got a great idea: If you like Keith, then pay attention to what he advocates, and do it!
NBachers
Feb 2017
#111
I thought Perez did the right thing, they're both progressive and both sincere.
BeckyDem
Feb 2017
#117