General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe personality rabbit hole.
the further down it we go, the farther away from discussing issues and policy we get. Viewing everything through the lens of personality diminishes just about any discussion. Discussing people is valid, but viewing everything through that lens, sucks.
I don't suppose there's any way to convince staunch and uncritical supporters of the President that the vast majority of the criticism of administration policies on DU, aren't personal expressions of hate for the President. And yes, there are some people here who have a personal animus toward the President and that shows and I think it sucks.
I do understand how many supporters of the President are kind of backed into a corner where as they see it, the criticisms are personal attacks and they feel compelled to blanket defend him against any criticism.
Some of the President's critics are over the top. Greenwald really does seem to have a very personal and ugly animus toward the President, so while I may agree with Greenwald on policy, I really dislike his over the top criticism of the President. Same goes for Chomsky.
And yes, it's easier to focus on the administration than on Congress and Congress deserves at least as much criticism as the President.
We fell down the personality rabbit hole with Edward Snowden as well- on both sides of the debate. There were more threads about Snowden personally than about the issues of national security surveillance and what that means or doesn't mean.
If we were honest, we'd acknowledge that calling people shills, apologists, racists, haters, etc, is really about telling people to shut the fuck up.
I don't know that there's a solution to this. DU, at this particular time, seems about as divided as I've ever seen it.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
H2O Man
(73,622 posts)There's a lot of hostility here lately.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)
randome
(34,845 posts)It doesn't appear he had the access he claims because the most he could smuggle out of NSA were internal office documents.
His lack of evidence, in fact, denigrates his case instead of supports it. Right now, based on what Snowden says, the NSA should take a hard look at how it lets trainees get access to confidential office documents.
Although it's possible his previous role in the CIA allowed him a greater degree of trust.
I don't see many people saying the NSA should have more secrecy instead of less. I'm sure there will be changes after the dust settles on Snowden.
But it gets to be very tiresome to hear some saying that the NSA is watching our thoughts form as we type and is downloading the Internet on a daily basis. The pendulum swings both ways.
When we don't have evidence, character and motives come into view so Snowden is responsible for making himself part of the story.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)they are watching our thoughts form as we type 
We DO think they are downloading our email and our browsing data daily. 
False equivalency. 
Of course Snowden himself is part of the story. It takes a human being to call out the Bots stealing our personal data. People these days must have drama or they don't pay attention. Others have been saying what Snowden is saying but until he took the personal risk of revealing that which was not supposed to be revealed, it was easier to ignore. Call him what you will, but his methods have finally exposed the lies and hypocrisy behind these egregious policies.
We have all been betrayed. Whatever you want to say to cloud the facts and lure people back into a state of delusion is not going to work. Snowden will go down in history as the geek that shook the world. No matter how hard people try to tell others there's nothing to see here.
Many have been awakened. Permanently.
randome
(34,845 posts)There is no evidence to support that our email and browsing is being downloaded. Snowden himself was unable to get anything of that nature to show us. If he had, we would all be having very different conversations about this.
I'm not going to take someone's word for this 24/7 spying nonsense unless there is evidence to back it up.
Since Snowden has -so far- not produced anything other than a PowerPoint slide that was roundly criticized by all the companies involved, I don't see that his word can be trusted.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
cali
(114,904 posts)you're obsessed with Snowden as the issue. I don't see it through that lens.
so forget it. it's clearly a waste of time for us to interact unless our comments are meant for other readers.
bye bye.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And immediately make it about the person.
randome
(34,845 posts)..."Snowden himself is part of the story."
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And this OP is not about Snowden.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)marions ghost
(19,841 posts)I do not support randome in any way. I support the OP in general. Duh.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)marions ghost
(19,841 posts)
I don't want to unfriend, project negative thoughts to a kendo artist (me--judo, karate in the past. Taiji, incl sword, & yoga now) 
never got to use that sword smilie before...carry onKatashi_itto
(10,175 posts)marions ghost
(19,841 posts)I have not much in common with randome, which should be obvious.
I made an independent rhetorical comment about Snowden.
The (immediate) story IS about Snowden, because he stuck his neck out, but the big Picture goes much deeper. I implied that in my post. But let me make it crystal clear for the comprehension challenged--I support the OP's basic point, which is, can we um...not think the worst of people around here and stop allowing this divisiveness?
The OP's statement is food for thought and gets to the point.
"Don't make it about the person" --or the poster. Take your own advice.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)I was just being snarky...I know what you meant.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)--all is forgiven. But be careful who you're associating with whom. 
Thanx for apology. We should do more of that around here.
Carry on 
<<<<<< snarkless peace offering
zeemike
(18,998 posts)And will try to think before I do that again.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)cali gave herself excellent advice
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)no issue.
it is only the personalities against the president that have made the two of the them personalities
(and egotists as both have major egos and are aligned with Rand Paul who has never been on the correct side of anything)
but as there is no issue, I have just discounted everything as a smear like the 150 older smears all thoroughly debunked
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)I cut and pasted the phrase "the NSA is watching our thoughts form as we type " from your post and entered it into the du search
every time the phrase has been used on du you used it...only you
if it upsets you that "some" people on du say "the NSA is watching our thoughts form as we type "
maybe you should stop saying it
since you are the only person saying it
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
what I don't understand is why this tiny bit of overstatement for effect is a sticking point
I cant imagine you think he meant the nsa can actually read your mind
do you believe that because he exaggerated it makes him less credible?
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)yes we have the official denials, which is what you are buying, however I go with these statements:
Forget Snowden--let's investigate our own practices and get some information out that is Truth (like Australia and other governments are doing)--for a change. Because we are being lied to. Good grief
can't you smell a cover-up?
-----------------
Senator Mark Udall (D-CO)
June 9 "I don't think the American public knows the extent or knew the extent to which they were being surveilled and their data was being collected." "I think we ought to reopen the Patriot Act and put some limits on the amount of data that the National Security (Agency) is collecting," "It ought to remain sacred, and there's got to be a balance here. That is what I'm aiming for. Let's have the debate, let's be transparent, let's open this up".[47]
Representative Todd Rokita (R-IN)
June 10 "We have no idea when they [ FISA ] meet, we have no idea what their judgments are",[54]
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)
June 6 "When the Senate rushed through a last-minute extension of the FISA Amendments Act late last year, I insisted on a vote on my amendment (SA 3436) to require stronger protections on business records and prohibiting the kind of data-mining this case has revealed. Just last month, I introduced S.1037, the Fourth Amendment Preservation and Protection Act,"[55]
June 9 "I'm going to be seeing if I can challenge this at the Supreme Court level. I'm going to be asking the Internet providers and all of the phone companies: ask your customers to join me in a class-action lawsuit."[46]
Representative Luis Gutierrez (D-IL)
June 9 "We will be receiving secret briefings and we will be asking, I know I'm going to be asking to get more information. I want to make sure that what they're doing is harvesting information that is necessary to keep us safe and not simply going into everybody's private telephone conversations and Facebook and communications. I mean one of the, you know the terrorists win when you debilitate freedom of expression and privacy."[53]
(Wiki)
randome
(34,845 posts)When there is no evidence that this is occurring. None of them have apparently been paying attention to -or simply did not bother to attend- the Congressional briefings.
So I say let's push for more transparency and less secrecy and see if there IS a cover-up.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)have access?
only corporations have access to gov't secrets apparently...
because they're so fucking trustworthy
randome
(34,845 posts)He said the NSA 'targets everyone'. And then used a PowerPoint slide (good God!) to 'prove' it. All the companies involved say this isn't so.
If he had the 'authorities' he claimed to have, why didn't he show us an email, a diagram, something more official than a PowerPoint slide?
And did Udall attend the briefing sessions? Did he ask for assurances, ask questions? Congress can force the NSA to answer their questions. It's their job to oversee this.
And really, this is all I will say about Snowden since this thread is not supposed to be about him.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
cali
(114,904 posts)I look at it from the perspective of the reigniting of a debate about the extent of national security measures, particularly mass surveillance and lord knows there's a lot of evidence about that from a large number of sources- including the government. Furthermore, concrete things are being done, from hearings to lawsuits to corporations addressing the NSA issues. There's more awareness, due to Snowden's actions, of programs and issues like the role of private contractors in national security.
randome
(34,845 posts)But stealing internal office documents, fleeing to Hong Kong and then making outlandish claims makes him untrustworthy, IMO.
His lack of evidence 'inspires' others to make even more outlandish claims about what the government is doing behind our backs.
We should still have the debate about privacy versus secrecy. And as you pointed out in another thread, some of the transparency that should go along with this is publishing the employment figures of the NSA, their true operating budget with some details, etc.
Snowden got the ball rolling. It's too bad he chose to do it in a very screwed up manner.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Monkie
(1,301 posts)some of us saw the OP, and thought it was a good idea to reflect?
randome
(34,845 posts)I've seen very few threads that start off with anything other than "Snowden is a hero" or "Snowden is full of shit".
Less secrecy with the NSA would be a good thing but there is always a fine balance to be struck between secrecy and transparency when you deal with national security.
Where did those threads go? Down the rabbit hole.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Monkie
(1,301 posts)that is what the OP was asking, and you ignored the plea to attack snowden, once more.
if you have not seen many threads that dont start of with anything else than snowden is a hero/full of shit, that is not my problem.
i dont hero worship any man, nor any prophet.
in the end i "couldnt care less" about snowden, i dont know him, i will never have any interaction with him, the furthest i have gone is to admire his undoubted bravery in challenging the huge $80 billion a year industry he took on, and right or wrong, agree or disagree, i dont think anyone can deny that this was brave, unless you are one of the people who thinks that is a sign of insanity.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Monkie
(1,301 posts)the topic here is clear, i think its best we leave the NSA out of this thread?
BrainDrain
(244 posts)In the denials that are later retracted by government spokespersons/Directors of the NSA, members of congress, further revelations from the telcomms, etc etc etc.
How much more do you need?
randome
(34,845 posts)cali, I apologize if I misdirected your OP. Leaving Snowden out of this, what changes would you like to see at the NSA?
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
cali
(114,904 posts)I'd like to see a close examination of the practice of outsourcing to corporations. when a profit motive is so entwined with national security, that's a dangerous thing. I'd like to see Church Committee type hearings held in the Senate. NOT the House. I also think there's no possible reason for not disclosing such information as the number of employees and budget. That's just for starters.
randome
(34,845 posts)Although I don't know for certain if the actual analysts (spies) at the NSA are contractors or employees. I would hope they are employees.
A Church Committee-type investigation (yes, not in the House!) would go a long way toward giving us all some peace of mind.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Coccydynia
(198 posts)us evidence of thwarted terrorist attacks. Frankly, the government retains the burdon of proof, not the people.
OneGrassRoot
(22,920 posts)
Some people just can't discuss abstract issues, so personalities are more important to them.
Monkie
(1,301 posts)you are actually one of the few people who i disagree with on the NSA issue who actually recommended this thread.
i tried to take the sentiments of the person who started this thread at face value and it looks like you did too, so, "hats off" to you.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)I have a real problem when the focus is entirely on blaming everything that one perceives of as wrong with this country as solely the creation of or somehow evil plan of the President, as if there are no other people in government given power to make decisions at any level. When people start stepping up and lighting a fire under Congress and demonstrate some understanding that the system, as designed, has been subverted by the right wing of our nation, then I will back down and not before. I firmly believe that the President has been trying at different times to force Congress into positions to do its job. If we didn't have some edge in the Senate, the bills successfully passed would have gotten nowhere. Time and time again we've seen these people sit on their hands and do nada. The only reason anything approaching work on immigration reform is being down now is because the Rs think they are going to suddenly be able to convince Hispanic voters that they really aren't bigots and want their votes. I would just like to see some realistic focus to once in while be directed to the other players on our legislative scene.
cali
(114,904 posts)but I think you're simplifying it. look at the language you're using. You seem to believe that critics of the President at DU see him as the formulator of an "evil plan". I don't think there's much evidence that many people do, just as there's not a lot of evidence that many here see him as a savior.
And people here clearly do try and "light a fire" under Congress through contacting their congress critters on any number of issues. Furthermore, there is a shitload of criticism of Congress here which you completely ignore.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)The failure of not knowing how much he is hated by the GOP. The offering of CPI. Where's single payer health care? War criminals are on the loose ...banksters run wild. Look ..I am not going go dig up all of them but there are plenty of negative facts about Obama's decisions and moves that should bring on a lot of criticism. As much as the Obama lovers feel attacked so do the x-trusters who feel and were betrayed ...and all this goes on while congress continues to represent only the rich. It's a damned mess and IMO we are not going to get out of it now. Obama for many represented a last chance to correct a lot of things for the betterment of the 99%. I personally feel betrayed and like I am a sucker. Of course I am going to attack Obama. I was a Dem ...now I am a DemZombie voter only because the other side will only bring on our demise that much quicker.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I have never seen anything like that here. And I've seen a whole lot of criticism of Congress, Diane Feinstein, Boehner, King and all the others who are not just NOT doing their jobs, but voting for policies that take away more and more of our Rights.
Why doesn't the President simply state that if what has been leaked is true, something will be done about it?
Instead, he agrees with it. I will not remain silent when a president we all worked so hard to elect supports Bush policies and boasts about it 'I have kept Bush policies'. Yes, he has and THAT is the problem and people are not going to be bullied into silence about it.
And each time he nominates another Republican to his cabinet, rather than put Democrats in those positions, which is WHY we supported him, to get rid of Republicans, he is going to get criticism.
The way for this to stop is for the President to start nominating Democrats to positions such as FBI Chief. If we wanted Republicans that's who we would have voted for. And to rid the government of all the Bush holdovers and replace them with Democrats. We won, did we not? That's one of the things you get to do when you win.
And he can start talking about ending Bush policies rather than stating as he did last week, 'I have kept Bush policies'.
If anyone is angry that people are seriously upset over seeing so many of Bush's policies still being implemented, some even strengthened, such as NCLB, that is too bad. If they know something other people don't know, then instead of jumping up and down like two year olds, accusing people of hating the president etc etc, let them present their information. Reasonable people will discuss things rationally with other reasonable people. They will NOT listen to those who come here with a list of talking points, most of which attack good Democrats and DUers.
Nay
(12,051 posts)Monkie
(1,301 posts)If we were honest, we'd acknowledge that calling people shills, apologists, racists, haters, etc, is really about telling people to shut the fuck up.
i see some words there i have used, at the time i used them i felt they were precise/text-book descriptions of behaviour i saw.
i like to think i dont want people to shut up, i want them to think and reflect.
but you make a good point so i will accept your criticism and acknowledge it, its the fair thing to do right?
i do not understand the cult of personality though, you dont see it as much where i live, i think history has something to do with that, it is seen as dangerous as is "flag waving nationalism".
the danger with making it about personalities and not issues is that no human being is perfect, and a perfectly good argument can be destroyed by destroying the person making it. and there are people, and news media, that love nothing more than destroying people, and more cynically, building up a hero only to destroy them later on.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Good thread, thanks.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)I do not know what's so hard about that. I am able to both like Barack Obama as an individual, he's very nice, warm, funny and light hearted, he appears to be a great husband and father, down to earth from what I can tell and I like that a lot. I am also able to disagree, sometimes vehemently with his policy decisions, general direction and any other issue that is concomitant with being the President of The United States.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"If we were honest, we'd acknowledge that calling people shills, apologists, racists, haters, etc, is really about telling people to shut the fuck up. "
...I've never been called a "paid shill" because I'm sure no one wants me to "shut the fuck up" or change my name to "NonSense." Nope, never happens. Oh, we were being "honest"?
cali
(114,904 posts)I pity you.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Hey, at least you're "honest"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=152034&sub=trans
cali
(114,904 posts)and I'm gonna start posting that link in every response I make to you just for you. You have posted it 20 or 30 times in the past couple of days. I'll do it for you. Your attempts to shut me up or discredit me are a simple fail. And pathetic. Now run along and alert on this post because I said that what you're doing with posting that link in just about every thread that I post in, is pathetic.
You even stand a good chance of getting it hidden. It's still nothing short of pathetic.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)I responded in a sarcastic way with my opinion about being called a "paid shill." That's a fact, it happens frequently.
My response had nothing to do with you. It was simply stating a fact.
You responded with an attack: "I pity you."
You often resort to attacks.
H2O Man
(73,622 posts)the exchange between the two of you highlights what is adding to the negativity on DU:GD lately. I say that as a person who considers you both to be valued forum members, and who has recommended things each of you have posted in the past week.
Please consider stopping this.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)the exchange between the two of you highlights what is adding to the negativity on DU:GD lately. I say that as a person who considers you both to be valued forum members, and who has recommended things each of you have posted in the past week.
Please consider stopping this.
...here is what I will not do: allow personal attacks on me to stand. I am not going to allow people to question my credibility or call me vile names (yes, vile) simply because I post an opinion.
H2O Man
(73,622 posts)of knowing both of you for years. And although I've sometimes disagreed with both of you, it's never put a damper on the respect that I have for you each ..... and not just because I tend to agree with you two most of the time .... but because you both represent what's good about this forum. Even when I disagree with cali or you, it is an intellectual exercise, because you are both thoughtful, intelligent people -- and we surely need that side of both of you now.
And I do understand how some insults are, well, fucking insulting. During the 2008 primary season, one person here -- leading an effort to have me booted from the site -- spread the rumor that she had evidence that Patrick Buchanan was DU's very own H2O Man. I refuse to speak to that person to this day (something that "proves" I'm not PB, though I already knew I wasn't).
When each of you concentrates on the important issues -- perhaps especially on the recent issue -- the DU community benefits. Any and every attempts to be snarky towards one another -- regardless of who starts it -- takes away from that benefit. While I promise not to suggest a hug, or even a post stating each other's good qualities, I do hope that each of you will consider a halt to the negative business. In doing so, you two could provide a much needed lesson in civics to our community.
Peace,
Pat
reusrename
(1,716 posts)The tactic of making up lies in order to call someone else a liar is a pretty nasty thing to do. It's the kind of behavior that will always get a response from me.
One of the Ten Commandments speaks directly to this subject, you know, the one about bearing false witness against thy neighbor?
I expect everyone who respects me to hold me to at least the same standard.
H2O Man
(73,622 posts)Ten Commandments, or the Original Instructions, as the same general message has been known in the northeast for 4,000+ years. I also try to keep another of life's lessons in mind in situations where it would be easy for me to be self-righteous, and judge if other people are stupid, liars, etc.
Martin Luther King, Jr., had an amazing cast of characters around him during his national ministry. And the in-fighting among those gentlemen was almost always an issue that presented un-necessary problems for Rev. King. There was a time, when King was advocating for his planned Poor People's Campaign, that the quarrels were uglier than usual. Martin asked James Bevel, who he thought highly of, to stop. And Bevel, of course, began saying, "But he ...." and pointing out other good men's weaknesses.
King said, "James, you aren't with me on this. You need to pray."
This is something I meditate upon frequently. Without trying to brag, there is really no one on this forum who can come close to me when it involves self-righteous finger-pointing. I think I've won more titles in that area, than I ever did in the boxing ring. But it is a fight that I must wage inside myself, not against some other person, even if they are being extremely obnoxious. I try to be with Martin on these things, difficult as that may be.
cali
(114,904 posts)the little emoticon laughing thing? c'mon, be honest. your post absolutely was an attack on me.
"If we were honest, we'd acknowledge that calling people shills, apologists, racists, haters, etc, is really about telling people to shut the fuck up. "
...I've never been called a "paid shill" because I'm sure no one wants me to "shut the fuck up" or change my name to "NonSense." Nope, never happens. Oh, we were being "honest"?
I have never called you a paid shill. You know that.
the little emoticon laughing thing? c'mon, be honest. your post absolutely was an attack on me.
"If we were honest, we'd acknowledge that calling people shills, apologists, racists, haters, etc, is really about telling people to shut the fuck up. "
...I've never been called a "paid shill" because I'm sure no one wants me to "shut the fuck up" or change my name to "NonSense." Nope, never happens. Oh, we were being "honest"?
I have never called you a paid shill. You know that.
Who said you did? There was nothing "nasty" about my post. It was simply stating a fact. You're trying to justify your attack by claiming I said something I didn't.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)thing that needs done on DU is to stop the ignore option. Rather than calling someone names or ignoring them is no way to educate them. Patience is the point. Some need more patience than others. But to ignore them means not hearing their point of view. I wonder how many I have ignoring me now. 16 the last I looked. I think the OP is one of them. And the OP has over 90 ignoring them. I wonder if that is a matter of not having any patience with the people here on DU. And if you can not effect change on DUers, how are you going to effect change on non DUers?
xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)Are you kidding? Congress deserves to be flushed down the toilet.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Excellent post, excellent idea.
MineralMan
(146,331 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)but we see irony where we wish to. I for instance, see a lot of irony in your history. I won't say anything more than that.
peace13
(11,076 posts).......are sitting out entire conversations because of the current atmosphere. I read but in general don't respond anymore.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)I have been a duer since 2007 I think and was once quite active on the board
the last 3 years I have more and more come here to read without logging on
I got tired of the constant assault and piling ons
understand also I was a participant in and a victim of both and didn't like either
so I came around just as much but I didn't log in
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)and they want to approach the issue from what they emotionally think should be the case instead of what the history, legal decisions and facts are.
None of the folks who seem so outraged and concerned about the NSA Surveillance issue had anything to say about the facts I put out in my show of two weeks ago even when I took the time to post the transcript. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022981244
For as much noise as that side makes and as much as they have invested in calling DUers names who don't agree with them, you would think, if they were right and the facts were with them, they would have addressed the points I laid out.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)DU has become toxic with people shouting passed each other.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)both of them are very analytical. Chomsky is mostly indifferent to personalities, he analyzes systems. This includes Obama, where his attitude when he expresses it ranges from grudging admiration to "meh". Certainly not "very personal and ugly animus".
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)He's a "media figure" so you have to assume that what he does is driven by what works for getting attention.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)of hating Bush too, among many other very nasty, ugly accusations from the Right. When someone is attacked by extremists on both sides, you know they are on the right track.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Just ignore it and keep the focus on the issues. I don't care how many talking points they come up with to try to distract from the issues, the issues are not going away.
The latest one is just that, when all the others failed, they moved on to this one, and when this one fails, they will find another one.
But nothing will distract people from violations of their rights.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)"than about the issues of national security surveillance and what that means or doesn't mean."
That's extremely doubtful and probably demonstrably untrue. It is, however, an oft-repeated meme that reveals some animosity toward some here.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Did you know he kept boxes in his garage?
How about how ugly he is?
And did you know that he was once a male model?
We also found a photo of him in BOXER SHORTS, when he was ten or something.
And he's a Commie too. Lots of info on that here too.
He's a Paulite, he's a spy, he's a nerd, he's a coward, he's a traitor.
I learned all these things on DU. So many threads attacking the messenger in order to try to distract from the issues.
And when all else failed, we are on to the next tactic. All liberals, Civil Liberties Organizations, Progressive Democratic Congress members, and all DUers are racists if they do not either fully and blindly support the President and if they simply can't hand over their rights, then they should just STFU and let Dick Cheney do the talking.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)in a response to me. Other than Paulite, to which he has admitted and to which there is relevance, I've never fixated on any of those subtexts.
I would suggest that if you're bothered by the picayune aspersions, you might consider not bringing them up unsolicited.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Your good
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Maybe I'm in the wrong business. Got an example I can add to my resume'?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)personal attacks on Snowden than discussion of the issues. While I haven't actually counted the threads, to say there were only a few personal attacks, is simply wrong. My comment was to point out how wrong you were in your stated opinion. Everything I listed I read HERE on DU, otherwise I would have no idea about all those 'important' issues re Snowden.
I mostly try to talk about the content of a discussion. Your comment was what I responded to, and I don't believe I said anything about YOU personally.
And being a 'Paulite' has zero to do with issue. Al Franken must be a Paulite, Alan Grayson, Bernie Sanders all of whom have praised Paul for his postions on Wall St and on Bush policies and have in fact worked with him on those issues.
And that was a perfect example of raising something that is totally irrelevant to the issues at hand.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)posts down are just ridiculous. Some 100,000 posts between the two of them and not an educational moment between the two of them. Who gives a flying fig about Snowden. I personally don't like him. Some want to call him a hero, not knowing what a hero is. Some want to call him a traitor, not knowing what traitor is. The thing that needs discussing is the SPYING. The education to this is not present and all that is taking place is name calling and seeing who can out do that against the other. I came to DU to learn and discuss with civility as much as is possible the "issues". I have had the good fortune to find some who want to explain and teach and learn and listen. Don't see that with the two that are taking up space and not saying anything. Shameful. I certainly hope the combined 100,000 post were not the same kind of bullshit each and every time. But from what I have seen, it is. Too much putting people on ignore, to little patience and too much ganging up on newbies. Time to get the house if order.
xiamiam
(4,906 posts)The part that gets me is that a small and very vocal percentage of du engages in character assassination. A poster upthread said don't put them on ignore but instead be tolerant and teach. I'm not a teacher. There are lots of really smart folks in this world who know what's going on. I choose to learn from them instead of being sucked into the black hole of gossip.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)"I don't suppose there's any way to convince staunch and uncritical supporters of the President"
This is the problem Cali. You and those who make similar comments are railing against a person or persons that do not exist.
cali
(114,904 posts)as that's verboten here. and people exist here who have personal animosity toward the President. Both exist. It's just silly to claim they don't when they're in plain sight.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)the article cited in the OP imputes a desire to Obama to increase terrorism. It doesnt say his actions have the end result of increasing terrorism, it explicitly says "Obama Is ‘Dedicated To Increasing Terrorism’".
On the other side of things, even his most ardent supporters here have had various criticisms of him from time to time. Every single one.
cali
(114,904 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Can you link to people who never criticize the President? Who never think he might have made a mistake?
how about this guy?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022885180
and I could post plenty more. Not to mention the dozens of duers who call criticism of the President racist or out of hate or envy. There's lots of them and they damned well are saying exactly that.
Sorry, you are completely off base.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)you will find that everyone has a disagreement or two with the administration. That's natural.
ODS, like the kind to which I linked, is not natural
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)I consider that we are in election season and Tuesday is one of the single most important races along with the special senate race in October in NJ
Fracture of maybe one vote can cause a loss
I am a follower of that book "don't sweat the small stuff, because everything is small stuff"
and this issue, excuse me, I mean smear d'jour is one of 100 past fake scandals that one could smell a mile away.
I like nuance. True democratic supporters know nuance
and true democratic supporters know Ron/Rand Paul are on the side of BushPaulfamilyinc and I for one don't stand
with Rand.
Why would anyone on DU stand with Rand???
I figure the OP doth protest too much
Things is what they is and they know what is will be the continuation of Barack Obama's two terms with Hillary's two terms,
and the only way the republicans have to stop it is to fracture the party.
However, it won't work.
95% of Americans who call themselves democratic supporters support President Obama and President to be Hillary.
united we stand divided we fall.
President Obama is roping the dopes again, and people are doing their best to obstruct that from view, but it is happening anyhow.
The only thing I care about is 270.
Number23
(24,544 posts)My favorite part was after posting that bit and then saying that his supporters feel the need to "blanket" him in "uncritical" support, she ends it by saying "I don't know why DU is so divided and I just really don't know what we can do." 
Absolutely ridiculous.
rrneck
(17,671 posts)I think there is a tendency to support or oppose policies based on whether or not we would personally like the individual associated with them. Add to that the tendency to treat public policy as a consumer product and you get people who embrace or reject ideas for the wrong reasons.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,021 posts)not broad brushing various views into a position that implies guilt without proof, with no way to escape.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)If Du is about valuing the diversity of opinion, and mainly having discourse on those opinions so that people can learn and teach, why the hell is there a ignore button. That shows there is no value in diversity. I have 15 people ignoring me. I am not a hard person to get along with, provided there is some civility in the discourse. Patience is a virtue and there seem so be a lack of it. The people you disagree with are the ones whose opinion a person should pay heed to. It may be that it is something to be learned or used to strengthen your own position. But when on ignore who the heck knows what is being thought. There are several here in this thread who are uncivil and argumentative from the git go. No way for leeway, not way to learn or no way to teach. Patience is the quality of a good teacher. And I see someone here who over 100 people ignoring him/her. I an understand why, but then those people do not get the benefit of that posters comments. Sometimes they are right on correct line. Sometimes not. But either way ignorant and demeaning to other posters, as if this is a fight club.
snot
(10,538 posts)stupidicus
(2,570 posts)after waging the chained cpi battle for months prior to the election employing/deploying similar tactics, and ultimately winding up bruised and battered on the issue, I find the escalation (e.g. "you racist you!"
unsurprising.
I noted that link/commonality a week or so ago.
At this point it's all about ego preservation for many, and the more often it finds itself on the wrong side of the issues, the greater the likelihood you're gonna see this kinda stuff.
I'm most curious to see how they'll react should he approve the Keystone pipeline, or continue to stonewall on the abominable trade agreement.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I have recommended a thread. I've always seen how incredibly fair you are to both sides of a story (I mean, any story that actually has two reasonable sides) and you are doing the same here. Extremely well done and heartfelt thanks for it.
cali
(114,904 posts)I try to look past my own biases, though admittedly that can be painful.
redgreenandblue
(2,088 posts)They have always waged a cold war against each other. Now it is going hot.
As for me: I've avoided "pro Obama vs. contra Obama" threads as much as I could. But the recent "everyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist" posts have struck me as particularly vicious.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)"Some of the President's critics are over the top. Greenwald really does seem to have a very personal and ugly animus toward the President, so while I may agree with Greenwald on policy, I really dislike his over the top criticism of the President. Same goes for Chomsky. "
The fact you admit this makes me think you are sincere, and therefor I will listen to you, as opposed to people on both the right (fake centrists, Libertarians) and the far left (people who think FDR delayed the inevitable Revolution) who have been drooling for 8 years.
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)If Greenwald and Snowden are right (as suggested by Loretta Sanchez as well) that we've only seen the tip of the iceberg and further revelations will expose far more wrongdoing by the government, that will marginalize the minority "my president right or wrong" position to an even smaller cohort than it now appears to be. If, OTOH, their further revelations turn out to be duds, the apparent majority who supports them will shrink. So a certain suspension of judgment is in order on all sides until another shoe drops-- but if I had to bet, I'd go with "Greenwald and Snowden end up vindicated, and soon."
felix_numinous
(5,198 posts)This is why I don't have cable TV anymore, because most programming turned into personality opinion pieces--nobody seemed to notice, but that was the idea.
I actually think that as a nation we have lost the ability to have sane debates at all. I enjoy many posters here for their clarity and objectivity and others for their honest humanity, I learn so much here.
Yet the endless posts dissecting personalities just looks like FOX petty type programming, which I find alienating. It was much easier to detect when GWB was in the WH but now--so many posts are full of M$M superficial talking points- again no one seems to notice.
If one thing is clear, it is that this online community has become much more complex than when it first started.
Thank you cali
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)Though the give away of the right of gays to get their partners into the US happened in the Senate, and not at the behest of the administration, he might be holding the President accountable in some way. It's an emotional issue.
“The personal, as everyone’s so fucking fond of saying, is political. So if some idiot politician, some power player, tries to execute policies that harm you or those you care about, take it personally. Get angry. The Machinery of Justice will not serve you here – it is slow and cold, and it is theirs, hardware and soft-. Only the little people suffer at the hands of Justice; the creatures of power slide from under it with a wink and a grin. If you want justice, you will have to claw it from them. Make it personal. Do as much damage as you can. Get your message across. That way, you stand a better chance of being taken seriously next time. Of being considered dangerous. And make no mistake about this: being taken seriously, being considered dangerous marks the difference - the only difference in their eyes - between players and little people. Players they will make deals with. Little people they liquidate. And time and again they cream your liquidation, your displacement, your torture and brutal execution with the ultimate insult that it’s just business, it’s politics, it’s the way of the world, it’s a tough life and that it’s nothing personal. Well, fuck them. Make it personal.”
― Richard K. Morgan, Altered Carbon
http://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/2095852-altered-carbon
Neat quote, huh? I just started reading that book and I loved that quote. I'm pleased to see I was able to find in online so fast.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)And then you had to bring personality into your OP.
I'm not even sure if political discussion can be done without personality entering into it, personality is such a big part of politics and it's also why a lot of us choose the politics we do.
Don't mean to be entirely critical here, overall it was a good OP and I largely agree but I just wish you had managed to get the entire thing out without descending into personality.
