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)193. That really depends on how you define the word "harm", doesn't it? Based on ...
... your absolute and total misunderstanding of what the word "attack" means it wouldn't be very prudent of me to either agree or disagree with you with regard to your most recent non sequitur.
Nothing I'm saying does harm or has the potential to do harm.
It would also depend on whom (or what cause) you think is (or isn't) being harmed. And it would depend on whether the person listening to you (or reading your words) decided to take action (or do nothing in particular) because of something you wrote which happened to be completely inaccurate or short-sighted.
So I'm assuming that you were able to process everything else I previously wrote and that you took them to heart. I arrive at this conclusion because you've got nothing specific to say about them, and you have (thankfully) not accused me of trying to chase you away, or "silence" you, or other such emotional "victim" statements.
We simply disagree on a great many issues and when you're wrong about something (or when you have a misunderstanding or misguided notion) then it's important for me (and others) to correct your incorrect statements, or to bring some some reality and common sense to the thread.
For many of the topics that you desire to appear as an expert, sadly, it's easy to see that you exhibit a bit of tunnel-vision. Often, this is to the exclusion of all other data and information that's readily available. Also, it seems that you're unable to adjust or accept new information whenever things change. You may see it as being your own personal "resoluteness" but in reality, it's more like an inability to adapt to fluid circumstances, and it is a weakness. The narrow and almost obsessive focus on a very limited range of topics is what I believe is why some have characterized it as not being a part of the "real world" or being "unrealistic".
191. I spend as much time fighting Trump as you do.
Are you kidding me? What the fuck does this even MEAN? It's unclear to me how you believe that you're able to make such a statement with any sense of accuracy or authority. How would you know, one way or the other? Are you stalking me in real life?
So... of course you aren't stalking me. You live much too far away. But here, once again, is a perfect example of how you're prone to say things (or type things) without thinking them through. It's very reactionary and even without so much a proof-reading, you hastily click the "Post my reply" button with very little regard to what you've actually said, or the potential consequences. (Let alone whether or not your message or your point is being made.)
Symptoms of this would include excessively editing messages (beyond correcting spelling, punctuation, or formatting) or having to completely delete one's own OP when it becomes obvious that it's hopeless taken a turn for the worse. I think you can relate to that, can't you?
Anyway... I'm sure you're a good guy for the most part. Perhaps you're just misunderstood because of your passion and haste. That would help to explain why it is you apparently rub people the wrong way. My advice to you would be to slow down and think. Maybe wait a few hours before replying to someone. Or compose your message offline, print it, read it on paper (instead of on screen) and see if you still feel the same way one hour later. If not, make changes, and then cut and paste your reply.
If you'd done something like that with your most recent reply, maybe you'd have realized how (unintentionally) creepy-stalker it comes off sounding.
Have a lovely rest of your day. Peace and blessings to you.
#BeLikeKeith
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