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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
71 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This from Cenk Uygur, so-called ally of Democrats. Reminder, Uygur was the co-founder of.... (Original Post) George II Nov 2018 OP
That shit-stirring motherfucker was NEVER an ally ismnotwasm Nov 2018 #1
He's the major reason why I have little trust or respect for Justice Democrats or BNC... George II Nov 2018 #7
I stopped paying attention to cenk and his young turks a long time ago Gothmog Nov 2018 #11
Shades of Ed Shultz. sigh.... allgood33 Nov 2018 #70
I thought he was a right winger with a history of harassing women? WeekiWater Nov 2018 #2
Until recently Uygur was a hardcore supply-sider, a fervent neocon, and a Federalist Society drone dalton99a Nov 2018 #36
FTG. nt The Polack MSgt Nov 2018 #3
+1 Docreed2003 Nov 2018 #6
+2 sheshe2 Nov 2018 #8
+++++ infinity JHan Nov 2018 #12
+1 dalton99a Nov 2018 #38
+1 uponit7771 Nov 2018 #59
Useful idiot says what? MrsCoffee Nov 2018 #4
I wonder if he just cuts and pastes from what Moscow sends him? Johonny Nov 2018 #5
Ding Ding Ding. We have a winner! Am I allowed to say Cenk works for Putin, because he does! Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #28
Absolutely. Anyone to the left of Hillary Clinton is in Moscow's pay. Jim Lane Nov 2018 #69
Go away Cenk mcar Nov 2018 #9
Jeffries is 48 (hardly young), Lee 72. This type's main interest Hortensis Nov 2018 #16
This made me smile Gothmog Nov 2018 #10
Yep. I guess some of the "dissenters" were only able to talk the talk but not walk the walk. George II Nov 2018 #17
I disagree with his sense of establishment democrat motives, but I still appreciate his perspective JCanete Nov 2018 #13
You appreciate so-called "Democrats"* saying this about our party.... George II Nov 2018 #15
I still like people who refuse to look at our party with a critical lense, and want to simply puff JCanete Nov 2018 #20
So you do appreciate someone who calls our leadership "useless" and "corrupt". Good to know. George II Nov 2018 #22
Right...so Republicans also don't take money from industry because its illegal. Fucking christ. JCanete Nov 2018 #26
This corporate dem bullshit, cant stand it anymore. Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #52
Democrats are literally corrupt? Who? betsuni Nov 2018 #32
Don't put words in my mouth. I never said democrats are literally corrupt. I said I disagree with JCanete Nov 2018 #39
I never said you said it, Cenk did. Who does he mean? betsuni Nov 2018 #63
I've heard him be specific. I don't agree with him when it goes to motives, but JCanete Nov 2018 #65
This message was self-deleted by its author Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #30
Who are your referring to when you say evil, Democrats? sheshe2 Nov 2018 #27
I'm saying its our job to police our own, and motives are one thing, actions are another. I'm not JCanete Nov 2018 #29
Cenk Uygur is a republican-funded RW troll. A total waste of flesh. Worthless. Why is the... NurseJackie Nov 2018 #14
whatever...not a right-wing troll. Has far worse things to say about republicans day in and day out JCanete Nov 2018 #21
:rofl: NurseJackie Nov 2018 #40
loyalty to the party. what the fuck is that? I have no loyalty to the party. I am a part of JCanete Nov 2018 #43
Okay, fine. I'll take your word for it. NurseJackie Nov 2018 #53
Come on...do you really think "loyalty to the party" is the kind of rhetoric you want us JCanete Nov 2018 #64
No need to elaborate... I believed you the first time. NurseJackie Nov 2018 #68
You do understand?...cuz I kind of think you don't if you think loyalty to a body rather than JCanete Nov 2018 #71
This is the guy who was still insisting after Super Tuesday that Sanders was going to be our nominee Garrett78 Nov 2018 #18
I remember... JHan Nov 2018 #42
No cenk you. betsuni Nov 2018 #19
Bazinga! George II Nov 2018 #24
Lol! sheshe2 Nov 2018 #47
Justice Democrats and their Siamese twin Brand New Congress Hortensis Nov 2018 #23
The purpose of Justice Democrats Eric J in MN Nov 2018 #25
Who decides which Democrats are "better"? Isn't that the job of the voters? George II Nov 2018 #35
We aint seen nothing yet. Eliot Rosewater Nov 2018 #31
Cenk Uygur was outraged that Eric J in MN Nov 2018 #41
He should run for Congress as a Democrat, win the seat, and THEN he has a say. George II Nov 2018 #45
He has as much right to post on the internet as you do. NT Eric J in MN Nov 2018 #50
Classy follow up from Indivisibles for Barbara Lee. And this is how it should work Cha Nov 2018 #33
Excellent post, thanks. George II Nov 2018 #46
Hot dayum. sheshe2 Nov 2018 #48
Young Turks are alright. Sometimes I agree and sometimes I don't rockfordfile Nov 2018 #34
Isn't jeffries pretty damn progressive? NewJeffCT Nov 2018 #37
Glad you said that. Of course he's progressive, but I think perhaps we're dealing once again... George II Nov 2018 #44
It's not like it was Barbara Lee vs Dan Lipinski NewJeffCT Nov 2018 #51
Thank you sir. George II Nov 2018 #58
Sometimes Cenk makes sense, and other times he is just a sheer blowhard. He doesn't get that not LBM20 Nov 2018 #49
My issue with Cenk... Lobo27 Nov 2018 #54
Uygur can fuck off. BigDemVoter Nov 2018 #55
Rep Barbara Lee on Working with Hakeem Jeffries.. Cha Nov 2018 #56
Jeffries is my rep and I've been happy to be in his district. I think he's a good choice.. Cha Nov 2018 #57
Cenks input isn't a progressive as he thinks it is and few have told him that yet, done with em.. uponit7771 Nov 2018 #60
The current slamming of Hakeem Jeffries as moderate or conservative by folks who should know better Cha Nov 2018 #61
I've pointed out there relative "progressive rating" several times since the vote this morning.... George II Nov 2018 #62
Since when is Cenk an ally? Trumpocalypse Nov 2018 #66
Certainly not in my mind. George II Nov 2018 #67

ismnotwasm

(41,921 posts)
1. That shit-stirring motherfucker was NEVER an ally
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 02:32 PM
Nov 2018

I used to try to listen to his show because TYT was so popular. It was very loose with the truth, and manipulative as hell. I’d fact check it right after. UGH. Cent gives me the same feeling I get when I think about Assange

George II

(67,782 posts)
7. He's the major reason why I have little trust or respect for Justice Democrats or BNC...
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 02:46 PM
Nov 2018

...But I guess this makes him glow in the eyes of his benefactors - Buddy Roehmer and RT.

Gothmog

(144,005 posts)
11. I stopped paying attention to cenk and his young turks a long time ago
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:14 PM
Nov 2018

cenk was one of the founders of Just Us Democrats and does not like the party

 

WeekiWater

(3,259 posts)
2. I thought he was a right winger with a history of harassing women?
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 02:37 PM
Nov 2018

Seriously. I did. Pretty sure I'm right considering he is calling a Pelosi led group corrupt.

dalton99a

(81,073 posts)
36. Until recently Uygur was a hardcore supply-sider, a fervent neocon, and a Federalist Society drone
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:30 PM
Nov 2018

He started Justice Democrats to primary Democrats on single payer - in other words, to help the Koch brothers

Fuck him

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
69. Absolutely. Anyone to the left of Hillary Clinton is in Moscow's pay.
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:33 AM
Nov 2018

I heard this kind of bullshit from Republicans, attacking progressives during the Cold War.

I did not expect to find it on DU.

SMH.

mcar

(42,210 posts)
9. Go away Cenk
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 03:21 PM
Nov 2018

Hakeem Jeffries' peers voted for him in a fair vote.

Isn't it interesting that one of the main agitators for younger, more representative leadership is outraged that a younger, AA man got the nod?

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
16. Jeffries is 48 (hardly young), Lee 72. This type's main interest
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:44 PM
Nov 2018

in truth and reality is scrutinizing it for possible assets and weapons, tweaked as needed to advantage.

Extremists have to be dishonest to support their beliefs, and, by definition, they can't know it or they're not really extremists, just opportunistic poseurs.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
13. I disagree with his sense of establishment democrat motives, but I still appreciate his perspective
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:19 PM
Nov 2018

and think it worth having these kinds of critiques. See no evil hear no evil speak no evil does us no fucking good. If you want to challenge his assessment, that's a worthy conversation to have. Dismissing it and making him the enemy of Democrats(since democrats is a bigger pool than those with the tightest grip on the reigns) is convenient, but not convincing to anybody but those who already share your perspective.

George II

(67,782 posts)
15. You appreciate so-called "Democrats"* saying this about our party....
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:42 PM
Nov 2018

"They are useless. Guaranteed this corrupt Democratic leadership will do nothing but middling knick-knacks."?

Sorry, what he said is not constructive but grossly divisive and, as a 40+ year Democrat, highly offensive. I don't care what you think about my "perspective", I do NOT like people who claim to represent Democrats but never shows it in either words or deeds.

*Over the years he's been a Democrat, a republican, and an independent.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
20. I still like people who refuse to look at our party with a critical lense, and want to simply puff
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:48 PM
Nov 2018

ourselves up as the bastion of all that is good, but I don't think that is any more valuable than those who look at it only critically.

As to Cenk, over the years people can change their minds and hopefully, if they are evolving based on new knowledge that is what they are doing. What Cenk is, is progressively situated on the issues, complaints about our party not withstanding. He's critical of the way we think it is best to get business done. He goes further and thinks its because we have democrats who are literally corrupt. I just think its because we have democrats who are wrong, and who don't realize that the very fact that they are taking money from industries means those industries approve of them on some level and are doing their best to prevent their rivals from overtaking them in the primaries.

I assume that in most cases our democrats motives are sincere, I just don't see why thats relevant if the results are that big money still influences the field.

George II

(67,782 posts)
22. So you do appreciate someone who calls our leadership "useless" and "corrupt". Good to know.
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:57 PM
Nov 2018

By the way, this isn't the first time I've seen you use that false refrain that Democrats (yes, that's capital D) who are taking money from industries. It simply does NOT happen because it's illegal!

But I'm glad to see you're on record as saying that "we have democrats who are literally corrupt".

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
26. Right...so Republicans also don't take money from industry because its illegal. Fucking christ.
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:08 PM
Nov 2018

So how does corruption show up so blatantly with republicans? Illegal my ass.


And where am I on record saying that? I said that Cenk goes too far in saying democrats are literally corrupt and that I disagree with him.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,097 posts)
52. This corporate dem bullshit, cant stand it anymore.
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 07:03 PM
Nov 2018

Can you take the time to explain in detail WHY the DLC was created in the first place, it no longer exists but it always comes back to that.

The DLC was founded by Al From in 1985 in the wake of Democratic candidate and former Vice President Walter Mondale's landslide defeat by incumbent President Ronald Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. ... The model on which the Democratic Leadership Council was built was the Coalition for a Democratic Majority.
?Founding and early history · ?Positions · ?Criticism · ?Electoral and political ...


It was a reaction to the LANDSLIDE defeat.

It is gone now. But Wall Street and the democrats became sort of friendly for a period of time and to some extent this is WHY the party was able to make a comeback, you dont get something for nothing, though.

and then this


Bill Clinton presented himself as a "centrist" candidate to draw white, middle-class voters who had left the Democratic Party for the Republican Party. In 1990, Bill Clinton became the DLC chair. Under his leadership, the DLC founded two-dozen DLC chapters and created a base of support.


Now, who TODAY is telling us we need to appeal to those folks the way Clinton did...one guess.

It took PEOPLE and MONEY...Now, the party is moving away from corporate funding as it should. Continuing to BEAT us over the head about our history makes no sense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrats

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council


I should add that throughout this time the VAST majority of ACTION by democrats was for the benefit of the average person NOT for Wall Street.

betsuni

(25,137 posts)
32. Democrats are literally corrupt? Who?
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:20 PM
Nov 2018

You're saying Democrats are taking illegal bribes from industries? What is "big money"?

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
39. Don't put words in my mouth. I never said democrats are literally corrupt. I said I disagree with
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:31 PM
Nov 2018

that assessment. AS to you and George going through all this effort to pretend that industries have no financial footprint on campaigns ...why? Money from industries does go into races and strangely enough, you can typically find a correlation between donorship and how friendly a politician is to said industry's needs. It doesn't matter exactly how this is arranged, but it isn't a simple matter of people just putting money into the candidates who they believe in.

betsuni

(25,137 posts)
63. I never said you said it, Cenk did. Who does he mean?
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 10:25 PM
Nov 2018

He must give examples of who he means when he says these things, right? Otherwise, it's just an empty talking point that "Democrats are beholden to corporations and wealthy donors."

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
65. I've heard him be specific. I don't agree with him when it goes to motives, but
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 04:25 AM
Nov 2018

I do sympathize at times with why he's drawn his conclusions.

Response to George II (Reply #15)

sheshe2

(83,355 posts)
27. Who are your referring to when you say evil, Democrats?
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:10 PM
Nov 2018

I am a little confused here.


JCanete
13. I disagree with his sense of establishment democrat motives, but I still appreciate his perspective


and think it worth having these kinds of critiques. See no evil hear no evil speak no evil does us no fucking good. If you want to challenge his assessment, that's a worthy conversation to have. Dismissing it and making him the enemy of Democrats(since democrats is a bigger pool than those with the tightest grip on the reigns) is convenient, but not convincing to anybody but those who already share your perspective.
 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
29. I'm saying its our job to police our own, and motives are one thing, actions are another. I'm not
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:14 PM
Nov 2018

so thin skinned that I can't take criticism of my party from within or from without, and we shouldn't be. If a critique has merit we should address it, and if it doesn't we should challenge that critique. Plain and simple. Just characterizing the messenger at every turn is only valuable to people who already agree with us, and doesn't serve to enrich our own level of discourse either.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
14. Cenk Uygur is a republican-funded RW troll. A total waste of flesh. Worthless. Why is the...
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:38 PM
Nov 2018

Cenk Uygur is a republican-funded RW troll. A total waste of flesh. Worthless. Why is the RW-funded "TYT" still allowed here as a source?

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
21. whatever...not a right-wing troll. Has far worse things to say about republicans day in and day out
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:51 PM
Nov 2018

and REPORTS ON THEM at every bad turn. Its not like he just bashes democrats and then says when challenged..."of course republicans are worse but lets talk about democrats." That would be shilling for the right wing, and I'd agree with you. But that's not the reality, though I wouldn't expect you to know this. I doubt you watch or listen.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
40. :rofl:
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:34 PM
Nov 2018
I doubt you watch or listen.
I've heard plenty. In spite of being well-funded, he and his amateur crew are total hacks. I've seen better podcasts and youtube videos being recorded in someone's basement or garage. Cenk is a pompous asshole... his airport tantrum proved that beyond any shadow of a doubt. He's no Democrat, he has no loyalty to the party... he's here to disrupt and divide. I have the greatest contempt for him and anyone who defends his abominable behavior.

Its not like he just bashes democrats and then says when challenged..."of course republicans are worse but lets talk about democrats."


Whatever.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
43. loyalty to the party. what the fuck is that? I have no loyalty to the party. I am a part of
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:41 PM
Nov 2018

what makes up the party. I'm not simply going to speak good of the party because its my team. That's gross.

You know who asks for loyalty oaths? Yeah....


We're about fighting on issues, not FOR party names. Democrats are consistently better than Republicans across the board, and for that reason, in spite of my irritations with the direction, or at least our sluggish pace towards that direction, I support Democrats. I don't want loyalty to our party. I want loyalty to the issues that matter. I want our party to be loyal to those issues.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
53. Okay, fine. I'll take your word for it.
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 08:00 PM
Nov 2018
loyalty to the party. what the fuck is that? I have no loyalty to the party.
Okay, fine. I'll take your word for it.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
64. Come on...do you really think "loyalty to the party" is the kind of rhetoric you want us
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 04:23 AM
Nov 2018


to be espousing as democrats? Doesn't ring a little authoritarian to you?

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
68. No need to elaborate... I believed you the first time.
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 08:10 AM
Nov 2018
do you really think "loyalty to the party" is the kind of rhetoric you want
No need to elaborate... I believed you the first time. I've heard enough already, thank you very much. I'm old, but I'm not feeble. I understand many things better than you may realize.

Have a nice whatever.
 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
71. You do understand?...cuz I kind of think you don't if you think loyalty to a body rather than
Thu Nov 29, 2018, 09:52 PM
Nov 2018

the things it is supposed to stand for, is ever a good idea. You literally repeated my words as if they say something negative, but I'd love for you to take a shot at actually articulating how my point was off-base.

But in lieu of that, you have a nice night.

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
18. This is the guy who was still insisting after Super Tuesday that Sanders was going to be our nominee
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:44 PM
Nov 2018

Hard to respect someone who is that delusional.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
23. Justice Democrats and their Siamese twin Brand New Congress
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 05:59 PM
Nov 2018

used Cenk's past sexist writings as a power play weapon to toss him out a while ago. The men who run those radical groups clearly currently think they can use Ocasio-Diaz, who they helped elect, as a conduit to power. They may be mistaken. Too soon to tell, though.

Saikat Chakrabarti, who's unfortunately been named her new chief of staff, was spouting in very similar tones to Cenk up until this week or so. He even suggested Ocasio was a "chip" they could play and might need to sacrifice in their great crusade against us evil conservadebs (his word).
He's pulled it back in this week, to neutral environmental messages mostly, but the same dishonesty and malicious poison about Democrats as Cenk's still seeps through practically every seam.

Btw, Chakrabarti had a lot more power before her election, but Ocasio has far more now and does not need them. She may be afraid of what they'd do if she cut them loose, they are very media competent, but both her tweets and statements and his suggest she may be both becoming more independent of these men and taking action to rein Chakrabarti in. Notably, this week he is not directly contradicting the positive, sensible and cooperative statements she's been making since arriving in DC. (!)

Eric J in MN

(35,619 posts)
25. The purpose of Justice Democrats
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:03 PM
Nov 2018

...is to elect better Democrats than the ones who chose centrist Hakeem Jeffries over progressive Barbara Lee.

George II

(67,782 posts)
35. Who decides which Democrats are "better"? Isn't that the job of the voters?
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:25 PM
Nov 2018

How do we define "better"?

As for our Party leadership, they are chosen by the members of the House and Senate, all of whom have been elected by the voters, Democrats and republicans.

By the way, I sure as heck wouldn't want to put our election prospects in the hands of candidates chosen/endorsed by a group like Justice Democrats. In 2018, despite the huge blue wave we've seen this year, candidates backed by Justice Democrats had a dismal record in primaries and general elections, overall it's 8.9% success rate.

Governor - 0 for 5
Lt. Governor - 0 for 1
Senate - 0 for 4
House - 7 for 68

If I was a member of Justice Democrats, I'd reflect on the candidates that we throw our support behind.

Eliot Rosewater

(31,097 posts)
31. We aint seen nothing yet.
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:17 PM
Nov 2018

Nothing like a strong WOMAN leader brings out the best, if you know what I mean

The more this asshole whines the more I know Nancy is doing her job.

Cha

(295,929 posts)
33. Classy follow up from Indivisibles for Barbara Lee. And this is how it should work
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:22 PM
Nov 2018


Here's a Tweet from our Ferret on Cenk..



rockfordfile

(8,682 posts)
34. Young Turks are alright. Sometimes I agree and sometimes I don't
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:24 PM
Nov 2018

There is hardly any liberal TV on YouTube. I lost count to the number of FauxNews streams put on there. It's good to have the Young Turks on there.

George II

(67,782 posts)
44. Glad you said that. Of course he's progressive, but I think perhaps we're dealing once again...
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:44 PM
Nov 2018

...with "purity".

According to this site:

http://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?house=house

Of the 435 members of the House, on the "progressive" scale Barbara Lee is #20 with a lifetime score of 97.34%, whereas Hakeem Jeffries is #35 with a lifetime score of 97.02%

That means that there are FOUR HUNDRED members of the House who are rated lower than Jeffries, and his lifetime score is a mere 0.32% lower!!

Bottom line there's not much daylight between the two.

 

LBM20

(1,580 posts)
49. Sometimes Cenk makes sense, and other times he is just a sheer blowhard. He doesn't get that not
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 06:52 PM
Nov 2018

all areas of the country are as far to the left as he is. He needs to see the whole picture. He doesn't.

Lobo27

(753 posts)
54. My issue with Cenk...
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 08:27 PM
Nov 2018

Is that I feel he wants the Democratic Party to be fully progressive (or his form of it). While I consider myself a progressive. I fully understand that not everyone who is a Democrat is a full blown progressive. For example, I fully support abortion, and they may not after certain amount of time. But we both support banning of assault weapons. It does not mean that we're not both democrats, and that we both can not come to an understanding.

George II

(67,782 posts)
62. I've pointed out there relative "progressive rating" several times since the vote this morning....
Wed Nov 28, 2018, 10:00 PM
Nov 2018

....and after republican*/independent*/Democrat* Cenk Uygur attacked us in the OP tweet.

Jeffries 97.02, Lee's is 97.34, less than one third point! Sure, he's not as progressive as she is.

The underlying thing that bothers me is that in my defense of Jeffries (a native New Yorker like me) and others' defense has the effect that we're not happy with Lee, which can't be further from the truth. They're both great.

Who knows, if they chose Lee today it wouldn't have surprised me if Uygur would have said something like "they passed off a vibrant younger person for the older Lee"!! No matter what the choice, he would have put a negative spin on it.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»This from Cenk Uygur, so-...