General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI haven't seen any actual Obamabots here.
The spectrum seems to run from Obama is a "good president" or even "great president" to "fuck you Obama you piece of shit". Conspicuously absent is any talk of Obama being "the saviour" or "the One" or any over-the-top rhetoric comparable to calling him a piece of shit.
Could it be more obvious which side is off the deep end?
BTW. My opinion is that Obama is a pretty good president. I don't think he's great, but I can see the argument, after all he did prevent a second great depression, passed the most significant safety net legislation since LBJ, and saved the auto industry, for starters.
Sometimes I wonder how badly Abraham Lincoln would have been savaged by the anti-Obama crowd here:
Wow! Talk about a "third-way"!
Or how about FDR:
Now, therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States, and Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy, I hereby authorize and direct the Secretary of War, and the Military Commanders whom he may from time to time designate, whenever he or any designated Commander deems such action necessary or desirable, to prescribe military areas in such places and of such extent as he or the appropriate Military Commander may determine, from which any or all persons may be excluded, and with respect to which, the right of any person to enter, remain in, or leave shall be subject to whatever restrictions the Secretary of War or the appropriate Military Commander may impose in his discretion. The Secretary of War is hereby authorized to provide for residents of any such area who are excluded therefrom, such transportation, food, shelter, and other accommodations as may be necessary, in the judgment of the Secretary of War or the said Military Commander, and until other arrangements are made, to accomplish the purpose of this order. The designation of military areas in any region or locality shall supersede designations of prohibited and restricted areas by the Attorney General under the Proclamations of December 7 and 8, 1941, and shall supersede the responsibility and authority of the Attorney General under the said Proclamations in respect of such prohibited and restricted areas.
I hereby further authorize and direct the Secretary of War and the said Military Commanders to take such other steps as he or the appropriate Military Commander may deem advisable to enforce compliance with the restrictions applicable to each Military area hereinabove authorized to be designated, including the use of Federal troops and other Federal Agencies, with authority to accept assistance of state and local agencies.
Wow! And here I was worrying about the NSA and Gitmo!
Feral Child
(2,086 posts)Maybe one of you guys should challenge Pitt to a duel.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)The need for Meta threads runs deep.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)pnwmom
(108,915 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)There are anti-right-winger, anti-corporate, pro government accountability, etc, etc here.
When one of our (ie Democratic) elected officials act counter to those sentiments they are typically called out for it. They are typically treated harsher than repukes because they are supposed to act in opposition to right wing agendas. People feel betrayed.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Really, please. No, we just aren't that extreme. You are calling us right wingers, pro-corpoate(whatever that is) and against government accountability, and trying to hide behind idealism, which causes you to sound really judgmental. You reserve the right to judge your alleged allies more harshly than your real opponents? Politics doesn't allow for this. You have to make coalitions with the impure. If you don't you stand on the sidelines judging and feeling holier than others, but getting nowhere.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)No where in my post did I say anything such as you claim.
Also, I am not a politician. I do not "have to make coalitions with the impure." I am here to speak my personal views. I vote Democratic because Democratic politicians typically tack closer to my views than Republicans in this dual party system we have today.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Happens to me all the time, I think it is a lot of projection on their part.
Skittles
(152,918 posts)it very much shows where they are coming from and I have to say, paranoia is a factor
treestar
(82,383 posts)You don't have to make agreements with anybody? You just do whatever you want? No.
And you will never get anyone pure in office. Until you are there yourself, in which case, you may find it doesn't mean you get everything you want. You would have to compromise.
That's the idea of living with other people. You have to compromise and can not get everything you want.
That's why we are not in a state of perpetual close warfare with other people around us.
And you certainly imply people are "pro corporate" or whatever if they don't agree that constant bashing of Democrats is what will bring in the world as you want it to be.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)Real opponents state their objectives which usually are counter to your own, that is what makes them your opponent. Alleged allies state objectives that for the most part are the same as yours, that is what makes them allies.
When alleged allies gain confidence within a community by stating objectives in common with the community and then have actions that are the complete opposite of their stated objectives that makes them a traitor, traitors have always been treated worse than declared enemies, always have and always will be.
You know, like the conservative branch of DU treats the liberal branch of DU worse than the Republicans. Like how the conservative branch of DU blames every election loss on liberals instead of conservatives or the poor quality of the candidate running for office.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)about the need to always recognize betrayal and punish it severely. I think that's why he was so successful in building a movement.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)And usually much more swiftly.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Last edited Wed Mar 26, 2014, 09:48 PM - Edit history (1)
There are few universal principles of human behavior and that is not one of them.
As I said earlier, serious people understand that coalitions and alliances are absolutely necessary for any real progress. That doesn't mean abandoning principles but it does mean that disagreements must be handled respectfully. Tantrums and meltdowns toward prospective allies are an impediment to progress.
People choose not to burn bridges for lots of reasons. People choose to overlook or forgive for lots of reasons.
You might act that way "always" but some people don't.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Just making it too personal. No politician gets elected by one person.
I really don't think every elected official is there to do my bidding. I know they can't, even if I were that egotistical.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Some self reflection is in order.
treestar
(82,383 posts)I have a realistic view. No politician is going to do 100% what I want and I never claimed to be betrayed by any public figure.
You can't claim to be betrayed without admitting you are being emotional about it.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Yet you appear multiple times on all of these threads wailing and gnashing your teeth over what? Insults to Obama? The Pures (TM)? What?
And you have the nerve to lecture others on taking things "too personal"
treestar
(82,383 posts)And who are you to limit how many times I can post?
Can you respond to the point? No, you're the one making it personal. I haven't bothered to count your posts. Am I spoiling the thread for you by bringing in some logic which destroys your house of cards?
People claiming they have been "betrayed" are being overly emotional about a politician. It makes them look childish.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)You take any attack on the President personally. You are over emotional when it comes to President Obama.
You are free to post as much as you want. I would just think twice before accusing others of taking things personally.
treestar
(82,383 posts)if the "conservative" branch blames the liberals, then the "liberals" certainly blame the conservative branch and attack them for everything not being enough for them.
It is the "liberals" who started complaining as their mode of operation. Do they really think the "conservatives" are going to jump and get right on it. Like they are their servants?
You really have missed the terms. Polls show liberals are mostly "conservatives" in your view.
And your second paragraph never really happened. It's the US government, not fiat power. The purist liberals cannot get elected, probably because they are too good for that.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Serious people understand that coalitions and alliances are absolutely necessary for any real progress. That doesn't mean abandoning principles but it does mean that disagreements must be handled respectfully. Tantrums and meltdowns toward prospective allies are an impediment to progress.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Oh wait, you're actually serious.
Sid
DanTex
(20,709 posts)If not anti-Obama sentiment?
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Some were probably trying to support the OP during a difficult time.
Some were probably moles or socks.
Some probably do not approve of the ACA.
Some probably feel betrayed that no effort was put towards single payer and/or Medicare for all.
Honestly, I did not follow that drama much. In my opinion, the OP was very distressed about a situation that they felt they had no or very little control over. This situation could result in severely bad, life altering results. I do not live in the posters head, so I can not understand what they were thinking at the time. It is all a biased guess based on what I/you/others think the OP was thinking.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)denigrate Obama on DU for things he has no control over -- such as actions by the Senate, or even the House.
treestar
(82,383 posts)he'd have gotten a lot more sympathy.
Lashing out at the President was just ridiculous.
The President is not personal servant of me, so far as I am aware. When things go wrong, he's not the first person I think of. That, IMO, is weird.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)We all have problems in our lives. Somehow, those of us that aren't FOX News anchors manage to not blame all of them on Obama.
The fact that people can't control their emotions enough to avoid saying things like "fuck you Obama you piece of shit" in a way proves my point. These are not the words of a rational person objectively examining reality.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)I'd add that to the list.
And rise they did.
treestar
(82,383 posts)whine, whine, whine. Effort would be put into it when congress will have some chance of approving it. Elect that congress rather than whining that it wasn't there at the time.
useless effort is not effort. effort will be put into single payer when you quit holding people's feet to the fire for not doing the impossible. oh you are so betrayed you poor victims and there is nothing you can do about it until wait until effort is put in by others.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)3 replies to me within this one thread overnight? 2 of which were sub-threads that you were not a part of before your interjection.
Imo your ideals in regards to the subjects you are discussing are not worth compromising for.
You can quit spamming me.
3rd way is nothing more than Republican trying to pass itself off as a Democratic.
eom
treestar
(82,383 posts)I am inspired to reply only by the content of the post.
You must be saying a lot of silly things. I am a Democrat, thank you, and will continue to support that party and not wait until things are given.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Now it is about Pitt?
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)not the OP who was under understandable stress.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)whines from folks who feel they should control the actions of others? How does that make it better? McCarthist bullshit.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)But 100+ recs for "fuck you you piece of shit" is pretty enlightening about who has lost their head.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)and craven nature of your rhetoric. I think it is pathetic to abuse a man whose family is in peril. I have literally heard priests curse God in such circumstances. Not sure why you are so willing to abuse a person who was hurting, but I would never associate myself with what you folks are doing on DU. I was raised differently. This is why while I have worked for and voted for Obama in 4 elections primaries and generals, I have never much cared for the culture around those on DU who claim they own the rights to the man. I like Obama but there are many here who co-opt him as a rhetorical device that I do not much care for. Comprehend? Obama would not do what you are doing here, thus what you are doing does not support him, his agenda, his ethics nor his personal style. It's not support. It is a misuse of a good politician to attack a good Democrat for your own pleasure, shits and giggles.
That's what I think.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Obama would be ashamed at the manner in which he is "supported" here.
Not to mention all that is being accomplished by this knee jerk defense of all things Obama is divisiveness and a detraction from the issues that need discussing.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)People who go out of the way to find ways to attack Obama in both stupid and over-the-top ways. Saying "FU Obama" about ACA, especially as a knee-jerk reaction before doing research, this is what I expect from FOX, not DU. Insisting that we'd have a more than an infinitesmal chance at single payer if not for Obama is idiotic.
And on the other hand, people claiming that DU is infested with others who mindlessly defend Obama no matter what, something I've seen no evidence of. And, oddly enough, despite plenty of people responding that it's all over DU, there have been zero links to such posts presented to me. The closest is a thread of pictures of Obama. Wow, on one hand, people proudly looking at pictures of a Democratic president, who, let's be honest, has a pretty photogenic family. And on the other, FU Obama you POS.
Like I said, it's pretty clear which side is off the deep end.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)That's really what you think that OP was about?
First of all that's not what he said. Secondly, that's not what the post was about.
But you have managed to take it personally - as do all the "Obamabots" (your term) that you claim do not exist - and have gotten all emotional about it so that it is clouding your reasoning skills. You are making it all about that one line and completely disregarding the point of the post.
That kind of reaction and the fact that people just can't let this go and are actively trying to get WP banned about it is "pretty enlightening about who has lost their head."
Funny that.
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)mrchips
(97 posts)For those who set fire to their own house to show just how pure they are. When you have one party clearly standing up and declaring itself to be the enemy of the people, I don't have time to put up with nonsense about a president attempting to overcome that enemy. This president is a hell of a lot smarter than the idiot who posted "fuck you Obama". We are at war against a hateful bunch of bigots. If you are not prepared to stand up for the one party that has since the 60's been fighting for social justice, then do your country a favor and just leave the battlefield. And you can take your 100 sycophants with you. Criticizing the the president or his administration is one thing. Calling him a piece of shit is pathetic garbage. To that poster I would say "fuck you!"
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Mr. (angry) Rip Van Winkle
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Yet later, the poster was able to resolve the problem, on advice from DU'ers. But still maintained his excessive destructive words.
Reputations shouldn't precede Democratic unity.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)therefore THAT outrage was FAUX!
Rex
(65,616 posts)2001, wow, so what you been up to all these years?
mrchips
(97 posts)I have posted more recently. And some of those posts were in response to obnoxious self-aggrandizing purists.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Good to see you posting!
I pay close attention to DU. And frequently share items here to spread the word that rethuglicans are all about destroying the country. This is a useful site in the march to establish a more just society.
Rex
(65,616 posts)I'm still waiting for the Tea Party to pay back the 24 billion the wasted from the shutdown of Congress...and they want to do it again!
We have to stop the GOP, every second they are in office is another second of abuse.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Calling him a piece of shit is pathetic garbage. To that poster I would say "fuck you!""
Bemusing when we are guilty of the very thing we indict others for...
However, I do realize a distinction without a difference will most certainly be forthcoming in order to illustrate that you're not in fact, holding others to a higher standard than you hold yourself...
mrchips
(97 posts)I make all kinds of mistakes. However, to hear an alleged progressive insist on saying "fuck you" to the president and calling the president "a piece of shit" entitles the poster to a like response. Unlike some posters on this site, I do not claim to be morally superior. I get pissed. I don't lie back and sigh that that poor misguided soul is using inappropriate language. Tsk tsk. I find people who insist that the president is comparable to excrement obnoxious and despicable. I am not about to turn my cheek. Maybe you are a saint I am not. We are at war with a party that is racist, homophobic, mysogynistic, and bigoted. I am not impressed with fraggers.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)If you didn't see the thread go find it and see what he really said. There is a seemingly concerted effort to not let that statement die and to make sure Pitt pays for it and now people are going so far as to twist what he said to achieve this goal.
Not to mention leaving out the context of it, the point of the entire post and the fact that he was distraught because he thought his wife wasn't going to be able to get meds for her MS.
mrchips
(97 posts)Was to a post on this thread that had in quotations "fuck you Obama you piece of shit". It is a shame about the issue of medications, but Obama did not personally prevent his wife from getting meds. In fact Obama has worked tirelessly to see to it that millions get the health care they need. Just because someone in billing messes up and electricity gets cut off doesn't mean the whole utility company should be condemned. When you go onto a site like this you are asking for trouble when you use public hyperbole to vent. Blowback is a part of that process. I know I am getting grief from you because I take exception to hearing a democrat attacking the president in this way. I will say it again, I have no use for people attacking the president like that. Now go ahead and attack me again. I fully expect that you will.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I don't see an attack at all.
mrchips
(97 posts)I thought you were another poster who accused me of hypocrisy ( my word not his). Your post was actually thoughtful and an attempt to clarify the ordinal post. Please accept my apology.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Not "Fuck you, Obama, you piece of shit."
I guess RWers aren't the only ones to intentionally misinterpret a statement to rile up their easily manipulated followers, i.e. "You didn't build that."
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Yes, the "used car salesman" makes it so much different.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)And Obama was the salesman for this piece-of-shit used car.
Do you know what a metaphor is?
I'm guessing reading comprehension is not your strong suit.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I am actually LOLing. I haven't come across this excuse before. Yes, the "piece of shit" could theoretically have been modifying "used car" and not "salesman".
Here's an exercise. How would you parse the phrase "time flies like an arrow".
Do you think it's an imperative, instructing people to time flies the same way they would time an arrow? Or maybe they speaker is talking about a certain species of fly called a "time fly" and suggesting that "time flies" collectively show an affinity for an arrow, in the same way that they might like an apple. So many choices. Fun with linguistics...
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Nicely put -- and very nice illustration. And I have no dog in your OP. (Full disclosure, I'm more bothered by extreme Obama partisans than extreme critics, but I'm neither and have no interest in calling either group out here). I do remember the post you're talking about, and I thought the title came off as harsh, but make no presumption about the quality of the OP itself, because I did not read it.
Buuuut. I don't think your derision at this particular piece of trivia regarding the headline is on target at all.
How WOULD you phrase a charge of someone being the purveyor of a piece of shit used car?
Do you propose the common sense phrase, were someone theoretically disposed to accuse the President of being the seller of a metaphorical piece of shit used car (and I think we can agree this was metaphorical usage) would be something like,
"Mr. President, you salesman of piece of shit used cars!"
Really?
Doesn't --"Mr. President, you piece of shit used car salesman?" actually work much better there?
Regardless, it's neither obvious and nor undeniable that the only common sense parsing of the second one is calling the President a piece of shit.
I think what's happened here is that you didn't think about this. Whether it's significant to your overall point is another matter, but it's a very hard sell to suggest the interpretation you disapprove of is somehow awkward or unexpected. On the contrary, it's really the only way you'd expect anyone to phrase calling someone a seller of piece of shit used cars. Granted, it's not the clearest phrasing, but in a confined space -- like an OP headline -- there's really no other way you'd say that in the given context.
But please continue with the rest.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Yes, it is obvious that the only common sense parsing is "piece of shit <used car salesman>." "<Piece of shit used car> salesman" would get you a bad grade on a high-school essay (particularly when it starts with "fuck you" . There's probably even some grammatical term for this, but I don't know what it is.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)central to the expression here. The President was being called a used car salesman. If those cars were pieces of shit, "piece of shit used car salesman" is one of the few obvious options, particularly in limited space like an OP hed. If "used car salesman" is necessary, it's the most direct route, awkward though it may be.
I'd go with your phrase, probably, if I had to say it, but likewise, if someone wanted those two thoughts together and definitely wanted to call the President a piece of shit, "Mr. President, you are a piece of shit who sold us a used car" would be clearer. But see -- you still lose "used car salesman" there.
Call it ambiguous, but short of speaking with the author, it's far from a clear case for calling the President a piece of shit.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)You could also write "time flies in a way similar to the way that an arrow flies" if you were truly concerned about alternate parsings, but since nobody besides a linguist on acid would parse "time flies like an arrow" differently, then there's no point. On the other hand, if you want the imperative, you do have to rephrase it somehow (e.g. "time flies the same way you would time an arrow" , even though technically the imperative parsing of the original phrase is grammatically correct.
"Fuck you Mr President you piece of shit used car salesman" has only one natural, common sense parsing. If you want to emphasize piece-of-shitness of the used cars being sold, you simply have to use another phrasing. Especially if you start off with "fuck you." And since Will Pitt is a columnist by profession, he would be aware of this.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)anyway, there was no apology, just the Ted Nugent style steaming dump.
an adult without anger problems would do that - make a genuine apology - or something. Or maybe an excuse. The excuse for that life threatening email he made to a DUer was he didn't know it was a woman, a girl! *gasp!
So I guess that means if it was a guy then it's okay to threaten his life. If it was your son, or mine, or someone's husband, it's okay to threaten his life.
good lord.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)explanation for his rant against blami
lumpy
(13,704 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)In the interest of accuracy and accountability,
you should go back and edit the false quote.
Or, you can keep on just making stuff up.
The ball is in your court.
We will all see what you choose to do,
or choose not do.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)......then please source the remarks you have put inside quotation marks in your OP.
[font size=3]I challenge your assertion that these quotes are something you found on DU and accurately portrayed in your OP.[/font]
A FAILURE to provide the source for these quotes is an open admission that,
YES, you ARE just making stuff up.
You can STILL go back and edit your OP.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)The quote in the OP is accurate, and trying to parse the sentence to insist that "piece of shit" actually modified "used car" and not "salesman" is both desperate and idiotic. But keep yelling if it makes you fell better.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Anyone who can diagram a sentence would see the meaning.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)It's amazing how many here are trying to take it out of context and paint the writer and his recs as anti-Obama.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)But re: Will Pitt, he is a columnist as well as a DUer, and it is pretty clear that he is anti-Obama, maybe even as anti-Obama as say Glenn Greenwald. That OP was not an isolated incident. There's also "hall-of-fame worthy bullshit artist".
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/22126-william-rivers-pitt-the-ocean-is-coming
The thing is, a lot of people have frustrations, but somehow manage to get through them without cursing out Obama. But even if we excuse Pitt, that still leaves 100+ people who recced the OP, along with other OPs blaming Obama for the lack of single payer -- yes, believe it or not, some people are delusional enough to think that Obama is the reason we don't currently have single payer.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)FWIW, I'm not a big fan of WRP and did not at all like the style of that OP but the endless threads recycling it are starting to feel like a vendetta against him for criticizing the administration. Trying to bundle in all those who recced that thread as Obama blamers is just ratcheting up the vitriol.
The sun doesn't rise and set from the POTUS's backside. Obama owns the ACA -- it's a quantum leap forward but not the end in the struggle for affordable healthcare access. Criticizing Obama for limitations of the ACA is important if we ever hope to move forward on this issue. Obama can handle it. The Obama zealots, not so much.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)is responsible for there not being a single payer. And so on.
Like I said in the OP, there aren't any Obama zealots that I've seen at DU. Which is why, for all the whining, nobody has come up with any examples anywhere close to as far off the deep end as 100 recs for "fuck you you piece of shit used car salesman" from the supposed Obamabots that everyone keeps talking about.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)Because agreeing with a criticism of the ACA is equivalent to being anti-Obama?
If you set the bar that low, the place is crawling with anti-Obama people. Similarly, if the bar were set that low for "Obamabots" the whole site should be renamed Obamabot Underground.
There ARE people here who try to shout down or deflect any comment that may be perceived as a criticism of the president or his policies and accomplishments. I was told the other day that insurance formularies weren't affected by the ACA, that insurance companies reworking their costs structures in response to the financial restrictions in the ACA was blaming the ACA (and by extension, Obama.) I'd name the DUer but it would probably get my post hidden. I wouldn't call that DUer an Obamabot but I would label that person an Obama zealot.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I'm not sure how there is even a question about that. I have no problem with criticism of the ACA. Although, not surprisingly, like all the ACA horror stories that the Koch Brothers spent millions of dollars trying to conjure up, this one turned out to be wrong as well.
It's funny, when Fox News trots out people who's lives were supposedly destroyed by Obamacare, along with angry cursing at the president, I roll my eyes at the obvious anti-Obama-ness on display. But when it happens on DU, with just as much vitriol, somehow it's different.
Yeah people keep saying that. I guess it's like bigfoot. We know it's out there but somehow there aren't any actual verified sightings.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)lol Some of these complaints are so freaking thin skinned sometimes.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I recommended it. And I do place part of the blame on Obama for not even trying for single payer.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Frustration. But then again, I don't have an ax to grind or a poster to call out...
(although I do realize the Practically Perfect never allow frustration to enter into their discourse)
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Otherwise you will lose any credibility you might have left after that delusional OP.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Actual quote: "Fuck you, Mr. President, you piece of shit used-car salesman."
What I've learned about the Affordable Care Act
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10024685964
Fabricating quotes of DUers to generate hostility toward critics of Obama's policies is sad, pathetic behavior.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Well, I did replace "Mr President" with "Obama". Maybe he was actually talking about Bush.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)That's not a quote.
That's deceptive.
That's what liars do.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Pathological.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Actually, I think there might be a problem of hero-worship here on DU after all. That would be people so desperate to defend Will Pitt's anti-Obama posts that they will resort to convoluted grammatical reconstructions and accusations of dishonesty at people who quote him verbatim.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)Give it a read.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)what a LOAD.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Whisp
(24,096 posts)I suppose you think I should be ashamed?
Nope.
I suppose you think I should stfu because I'm a 'alien'
Nope.
I have people down there in the U.S, people that I worry about that I KNOW who could use any help they can get with their healthcare costs and access. And I am happy for all the ones I don't personally know but through DU that have stories of what the ACA has done for them to relieve stress and sometimes money pressures.
So, lame away. You look silly with this 'let me see your pepers' thing.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)It would be nice (imo) if there were some form of disclosure as to the citizen status of posters. I know it is not possible with a web site such as this though.
I have no issue with people of other nations giving views on our political system and current events. It is good to get voices from outside.
I just posted to inform that I was aware of your status, and your response would be filtered through that knowledge.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)in fact, I think one of the admins is a 'furiner', maybe you should ask Skinner which one so you can have that 'filtered knowledge' thing on him too.
funny shit.
Amazing detective work, as always, Sid.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)1. Good question
I guess I'll go ban myself now.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=437&topic_id=2545&mesg_id=2572
See, it's all a plot to take over America by the Admins! The uberlibs at the Old Elm Tree were right! AAARGGH!
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)the thread you reference is the same thread Sid referenced...
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Last edited Thu Mar 27, 2014, 05:39 AM - Edit history (1)
sheshe2
(83,138 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Because, if you are claiming I am one based on my posts, that sounds an awful like a personal attack to me...
My point to the question is that it seems as though a decent percentage of the regular posters which appear to back 3rd way ideas on this board are actually non-citizens. This is at least an interesting coincidence imo.
As I said in my post above, I think it is good to get views from people of other nations. I have no issue with that.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Now that's rich. Really, that's all you got? You can find plenty of Americans who agree with Sid or Whisp. That won't get you out of it at any rate.
And you are calling people Third Wayers, and we know that's meant as an attack on the poster and not their opinions.
Number23
(24,544 posts)that DanTX "lied" in this thread. And that when Will Pitt said "piece of shit used car salesman" he was talking about the used car being the POS or when he said "Mr. President" he may not have been talking about Obama.
I mean I am DYING laughing. DanTX is handling them beautifully but it is just surreal.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Fuck you, you piece of shit used car, President salesman! Fuck you.
yeh, that's the ticket - just a misplaced comma I tell ya!
This is better than the Comedy Channel, I swear.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Had to read it through twice out of utter WTF??
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)lumpy
(13,704 posts)Your statement of that sort fit in nicely with right wing posturing. You really must believe that politics is a black and white function and it all comes easy.
It would be much more effective if you didn't compare Dem leadership commensurate with right wing agenda.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Bernie and Warren are left leaning, and many others are Center. But there are a lot of right wingers imo. Note, I consider Corporatists right wingers. Others may not consider that right wing.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)has changed for the better.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)There are people speaking out about the same shit they have always spoken out about. They aren't hypocrites. When a Dem does the same crap a Repuke does, he/she gets called out on it.
Will was venting about a policy that was hurting someone he loves. Deal with it.
I don't agree with what he said, but I at least have the empathy to realize where it was coming from. Why are you taking it so personally?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)If that's not an "anti-Obama movement" then I don't know what is.
I didn't say they are hypocrites. I said they are off the deep end.
Why do I have a problem with people falsely blaming Obama for every little thing that's wrong in the world? Well, I have a problem when FOX News does it. Should I give a pass for the same reflexive anti-Obama stupidity simply because it's posted on DU?
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)Those same people have also been screaming for single payer for years. They are not hypocrites. You are just assuming they are recommending one part of the post that you that you hated.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I'll repeat, I didn't say they are hypocrites. I said they are off the deep end. A lot of people have problems in their lives. But most people who aren't on FOX News manage to not scream at Obama about them.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)We also know he is not Anti-Obama. He was just pissed off.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)It's very clear what your agenda is here. People who can't grasp the point of Pitt's OP and focus on his unfortunate angry outburst are exactly what you think does not exist on DU. Your behavior in this thread alone betrays your claim of being so level-headed in your opinion of Obama.
People are standing up for their principles when they criticize Obama's policies. They stood up for those same principles when Bush was president. They aren't changing their principles just because the POTUS is a Dem.
Those who do not like this criticism have thrown out their principles in order to defend a singular person, a singular politician. Those are the people who are off the deep end.
You don't like what they say about the policies? Counter it. But starting a stupid and disingenuous OP such as this, where you claim there are no "Obamabots" (your term) on DU, present straw men arguments, misquote Pitt and try to pretend it's not about him and that you are so level headed is absurd. Not only are you willing to toss out principles but you are willing to add to the divisiveness.
You and your invisible "Obamabots" (your term) are what's dangerous to our democracy because you want us to put our principles aside just so you don't have to see any criticism of Obama.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)My agenda is exposing the fact that the anti-Obama people are off the deep end, whereas the "Obamabots" hardly exist. And the fact that there are, so far, zero examples of any supposed Obamabot posting anything anywhere as close to as far off the deep end as "fuck you Obama you piece of shit used car salesman", much less getting an army of recs for it, is proving my point very nicely.
Oh, and if you think that "Obamabot" is my term, then you are even more deluded than the people who think we would have single payer if not for Obama.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)"Obamabot" is your term as used in the OP. I don't use that term so that's why when using it here I attribute it to your use of it in the OP. Seriously, you are taking things way too personally.
How about you just stick to talking about policy? You've got to let go of this vendetta against Pitt so many of you seem to be on.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Actual quote: "Fuck you, Mr. President, you piece of shit used-car salesman."
What I've learned about the Affordable Care Act
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10024685964
Fabricating quotes of DUers to generate hostility toward critics of Obama's policies is sad, pathetic behavior.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Or the content of the OP?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Or maybe they were just blindly hitting the rec button...
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Nobody read the OP? Really? You should read some of the comments then...
DanTex
(20,709 posts)What actually happened is that they approved of the FU you POS sentiment. But as long as we're entertaining mindless speculation, let's not stop at your "they really just liked the title" theory...
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Who is 'them'?
And that is not my 'theory'. It is yours, remember?
Don't be so hypersensitive about critique of politicians and the problem is solved, OK?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Your theory that maybe they just recced the title, and not the content.
Ah, the "don't be so sensitive" card, well played!
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Because I agreed with the content of the OP.
Now stop being so hypersensitive. If you guys better handled critique of politicians, threads like this one or that one wouldn't be kicked for days on end and your agonizing dilemma wouldn't be so long and drawn out.
Now stop it!
DanTex
(20,709 posts)You're no first-timer! What next, are you going to call me "cute"?
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Are not mutually inclusive.
Nice try at stealth 'troll' accusation!
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)Just as there are people here who've never stopped being mad at Hillary Clinton, and will no doubt go after her as soon as she's elected, if she is.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)in the White House there are people who are going to be angry about that.
Clinton would just bring us more corporate bs and move us yet even further to the right so we won't wait until she's elected (if she is) to go after her.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
cui bono
(19,926 posts)You said something about people getting upset with him from the get go. That's why. Doesn't make anyone anti-Obama for being mad at him.
I was elated when I voted for him even though he wasn't my first choice in the primaries. I was tearful when the results came in that he had won. I was overjoyed at the gathering at his inauguration. And now I am extremely disappointed with him as a president. So no, I'm not anti-Obama.
Are you saying you are happy about him having put Wall Street in the White House? It's about his actions, not him as a person. Go ahead and defend him having put Wall Street in the White House if you like, but don't make the incorrect assumption that just because someone doesn't like some of a politician's actions mean they don't like the person.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)any other specifics you might know about moving us to the right.
frylock
(34,825 posts)we fucking voted for him. twice.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)It's a lazy way without having to debate folks, but there are those who I think, truly believe there is a "Hater" behind every criticism.
frylock
(34,825 posts)it was bullshit when bush supporters used it just as it's bullshit now.
treestar
(82,383 posts)way past that.
They were betrayed because single payer could not be passed. It doesn't get more hysterical and ridiculous than that.
Skittles
(152,918 posts)you know he can, and does, make mistakes
frylock
(34,825 posts)Skittles
(152,918 posts)there's no use wasting time on them and they're the equivalent of 5-year olds stamping their feet
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)It's an "anti-bullshit-policy" movement.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Everyone wants Obama to succeed at helping the people of this country and keeping our constitution intact.
There are people on here who are anti-corporatist policy, anti-drones, anti-whistle blower prosecutions, anti-spying on American citizens with no reason, anti-ignoring the Fourth Amendment of the constitution, anti-assassination of American citizens without due process, anti-secret back room deals with corporations by Obama, anti-TPP, anti-KXL pipeline, anti-disruptors trying to shut down any and all criticism of Obama.
Those who you think are anti-Obama are the ones on here fighting the hardest for your freedoms, for our democracy.
Those who would disallow all criticism are those you claim to not see. They are a danger to democracy and our constitution for they would allow anything and everything Obama does and defend it wholeheartedly no matter if it is unconstitutional or not.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)We don't want Hillary Clinton!
Warren, Sanders, or Reich
Obama = Clinton = Third Way
I'm sure close to 100% of us voted for Obama in 2012 and, if Hillary wins the nomination, I suspect a shit ton more would vote for Hillary over Republican nominee than those who would not, possibly very close to 100%, as well.
Obama is taking the beating now while Hillary is in hiding, and that's a good thing for me. Criticizing Obama helps me make my case because Hillary is worse than Obama. It's been a very effective tactic for me as my FB friends are starting to see that The Third Way sucks ass. We never got the Hope and Change we all wanted. Hillary will follow the Obama blueprint: campaign left of center then govern right of center.
Our greatest obstacle, IMO, is we're up against the desire for the first woman. Well, I'm all for that, but she's the WRONG woman. Warren is the RIGHT woman.
So, as I see it, tagging Obama as a Third Way politician (which he is) goes a long way in our effort to reseed the Democratic candidates: between Warren, Sanders, Reich, and Clinton, Hillary is the #4 seed.
Others may, or likely have a different slant. But it's working for me. Not all of my FB friends follow as closely as I do, and I'm seeing a lot of people "Liking" Elizabeth Warren and much fewer pro-Hillary posts.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)and yet the anti-Obama crowd are no doubt alerting on it.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
Cha
(295,541 posts)el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)LuvNewcastle
(16,813 posts)You exaggerate things to get some point across, which is what, exactly? To get a fight stirred up? Your post has no value other than to start a flame war. You should delete it, but you probably won't, because the whole idea behind the post is to see the reactions you get from people and then admire your handiwork. I hope the hosts lock it.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)is untrue or even exaggerated?
LuvNewcastle
(16,813 posts)considers Obama to be the messiah or something. That's an exaggeration of what I think the term means. Second, he claims there is an "anti-Obama movement." I haven't seen any evidence of a movement. That's also an exaggeration. But the main point I was making wasn't about the exaggerations, it was about the flame-bait aspect of the post. Do you not agree that the post is flame-bait and will clearly lead to a big fight if a lot of people respond to it?
treestar
(82,383 posts)The problem with putting people on ignore is you can't then have any valid opinion about the site overall.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)But I see why you would want to change it. If you don't think that the 100+ people who recced "fuck you Obama you piece of shit" are evidence of an anti-Obama crowd, then I'm not sure we are going to find common ground.
The term "Obamabot" is obviously a derogatory term for Obama supporters, implying that they are robots. That's not an exaggeration. Most people who use the term Obamabot are right wingers, or members of the aforementioned anti-Obama crowd.
And flame-bait? I think you missed the part of the post where I give examples of other great presidents whose sins were at least as severe as Obama. People will flame anything. My point is that the reflexive anti-Obama sentiment here is not warranted, and no president would stand the kind of purity test that people are putting Obama through.
help us out here. Is there a difference between feeling that Obama has not done a reasonable job of representing traditional democratic values, and being "anti-Obama"? Doesn't being anti-something imply you are just flat out against that something?
Cha
(295,541 posts)pnwmom
(108,915 posts)I remember years ago when I posted about the innocence of the Duke lacrosse students, and people would accuse me of posting flame bait. That's when I came to understand that the term is basically an indirect way of saying, "shut up" or "go away."
Also, the term Obamabot is a slur, because it implies that the person is robotically -- i.e., brainlessly and automatically -- following Obama. And yet many so-called Democrats and progressives feel free to use the term here against other DUers, instead of merely stating the areas in which they disagree.
Why is it okay for some DUers to call others a slur like that and then to insist that an open discussion of the issue is flame bait?
cui bono
(19,926 posts)And as was said above he uses an exaggerated meaning of "Obamabot" to make it more difficult to say there are any on here, which there clearly are.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)And the actual quote chosen could have been much worse.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)Not according to this blogger, cheered by some BOGers.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4711643
karend62
(29 posts)Instead of being spoon-fed from Fox News every night?
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)Faux news is aimed at tea baggers, not Dems who support Obama.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)that you would likely oppose if they were being proposed by the Republican Party, or, more accurately, that you oppose regardless of who proposes it. Pretty easy to understand really.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)"Fuck you Obama you piece of shit" gets 100+ recs. And now there's a supposedly conciliatory OP calling people "Obamabots".
Odd that you don't object to calling people "Obamabots". Implying that Obama supporters are "robots" is not an exaggeration in your mind. But a direct quote from an OP with over 100 recs is an exaggeration. Interesting...
lumpy
(13,704 posts)At least, the quotes presented should make you do a little bit of reflecting how history and thought have evolved.
LuvNewcastle
(16,813 posts)be someone else's bullshit? I don't think you could really call something this subjective "the truth." Anyway, I'm not going to get sucked into this goddamn thread. Y'all have fun.
flamingdem
(39,300 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)good post.
Sid
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)beyond any reason.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)But I am above all a believer in evidence and reason. So:
If you have anything comparable to 100+ recs for "fuck you Obama you piece of shit", I would love to see it.
If you have any argument as to how Obama's sins are greater than claiming that the white race should hold the superior position in society, or approving the use of the armed forces on domestic territory to forcibly remove innocent citizens from their homes without any right to due process whatsoever, I would love to hear it.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)Try my Ignore List.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Like I said, if there's anything comparable to 100 recs for "fuck you Obama you piece of shit", I'd love to see it. To be honest, I haven't been looking for either pro-Obama or anti-Obama extremism. But the anti-Obama hysteria is hard to miss.
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)Your OP thesis is effectively false.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Now I know you are not a truthful person.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1102
Seriously. Please.
This is in response to everything except your last paragraph. I have no idea what that gibberish means.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Y'all get funnier by the post.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)since that's just going to make it more "'googleable".
Talk about funny.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)more than once, and yet you still feign innocence.
Talk about disingenuous. Oh sure, you are the level headed one who hasn't gone off the deep end.
If you're going to continue to misquote when it's been pointed out to be incorrect then you are just plain lying. So I'm done with you.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)against anyone who says the most mild thing that isn't completely positive about Obama by banning them without warning. There shall be only praise there. There are even pic threads that are the equivalent of some teen heartthrob zines. That is proof. If you really need more than that then you're being purposefully obtuse.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)What I've learned about the Affordable Care Act
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10024685964
Actual quote: "Fuck you, Mr. President, you piece of shit used-car salesman."
Your fabricated quotes:
"The difference being that 'Obama is a piece of shit' was actually posted and highly recced"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4728916
"How would you describe 'fuck you Obama you piece of shit' with 100+ recs?"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4728556
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I fabricated the "Obama" part of the quote. And in the second one, he didn't actually say "is a", but instead implied it.
Now, I think that most people without some kind of desperate agenda would agree that there isn't much difference, but obviously that's not who I'm dealing with at the moment.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Smell the flop sweat.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)But trying to play grammatic twister in order to misrepresent the words of your hero, that's something different.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)LOL!
Take the rest of the day off.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Unlike you.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Irrelevant, but true. But, hey, that's a start. Crawl before walking and all.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)You should have stopped a long time ago.
sheshe2
(83,138 posts)The one with the 100+ recs?! I am having trouble finding it. And you say the OP got a quote wrong, yet here you are making a false point, IMHO. I think you just wanted to trash the BOG.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)You guys ban people who barely make a criticism of Obama at all. With no warning at all. Surely you can understand how that is a prime example. You ought to read my sig.
The OP was absolutely wrong. It has been shown all over this thread that the quote was incorrect and incomplete as well as most likely misinterpreted. Not to mention that the quote was incidental to the point of the OP.
As to trashing the BOG... I trashed it a long time ago. Literally. Linking to it and describing it accurately is hardly trashing it. If you don't like what it is then you can change it.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)Want to divide the Democratic party or what?
cui bono
(19,926 posts)What is your reason for continuing this smut?
Want to divide the Democratic party or what?
lumpy
(13,704 posts)lumpy
(13,704 posts)worship and adore this President 'beyond any reason'. Insults are not appreciated and will be answered. If you think this is conducive to furthering our Democratic goals you are way off base.
Iggo
(47,470 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I've had them on ignore for years
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)I think he's a good president -his personality seems really suited to the office. I voted for him both times and support his decisions, because he's smart and knows the whole scene down there in DC. I get tired of that being called Tiger Beat Fan-ism.
When calling him a failure over one medical issue not even related to the ACA is over the top ridiculous.
Most of the posters (we are not allowed a group name for them) who never find him to be doing even the competent thing also rant on OTT ways about the end of the world, the end of Democracy and the rule of "corporations" and from there, will never find anything mainstream elected by their fellow Americans to be adequate to their needs.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)He's been out-maneuvered. He's admitted he not a schmoozer. He's unwilling to use the bully pulpit. He just recently found his magic pen (and phone). To me he comes across as too much of a lone wolf, and that's not the way DC operates.
FSogol
(45,312 posts)SleeplessinSoCal
(8,950 posts)Obama is in a league of his own though. FDR had nowhere near the hypocrisy as the MIC hadn't been built yet. Or the anti-abortion zealots.
progressoid
(49,758 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)For the record, I have, and it is just as ugly as FR with shrub.
It is not good for democracies. Alas this is not a mature democracy as much as we like to pretend otherwise.
Oh and my friend FDR was savaged over the weakness of his signature legislation. Lincoln was savaged as well. To use your words of course. There are these things with paper in them, and letters, forming words. Crack them open and read them.
albino65
(484 posts)justgamma
(3,660 posts)Do I agree with everything he does? Heck no! The thing is, I can go on the Rightie's sites and see all the same shit trying to beat him down. He can do no right according to some on here.
He could bring on world peace and someone will jump in and yell about not getting single payer. It gets old and tiresome.
It's as tiresome as the righties, yelling Benghazi all the time.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Too many Liberaltarians infesting this site. Just reading their posts, Obama is The Great Satan. They can't post a single positive thing about him. Their hatred for the man is as visceral as that of Teabaggers. I simply can't tell them apart anymore.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)I don't go to rightwing sites, but I'm pretty sure their criticisms of Obama would be very different from criticisms of Obama from the left.
I haven't seen many people on the left buy into the Benghazi faux scandal, to use the example you used.
Mostly, on the left, we're concerned with corporate control of our government, with favoring the 1% over the rest of us, with the lack of environmental priorities, with militarism, lack of needed regulation of corporations, corporate money in our elections, as well as the various social issues that people on the right have no tolerance for.
If we criticize the ACA, it isn't because it's some socialist program, it's because it's not.
So I think your statement that you can go on the RW sites and see all the same shit is way off base. You equate it as the same shit, but it is actually the opposite.
I'm ok with more centrist Dems disagreeing with the left on policy. I'm not ok with Dems who try to implicate Obama's critics on the left as being stealth Republicans, or being called rat-fuckers, or being compared to RW'ers in any way. The truth is the opposite, yet I see this fallacy all the time on D.U.
justgamma
(3,660 posts)I didn't mean to equate the posts here with the righties. No matter the topic, they throw in "but Benghazi".
I just meant that no matter what the topic is someone will come in and throw a bucket of water on it with a completely unrelated topic. Someone will say "he's funny" and someone will come in and say, but he's pushing the pipeline.
Someone will say "beautiful family" and someone butts in and says "but he's a corporate shill".
I hope you get where, I'm coming from.
I sure didn't mean to offend anyone.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)On my side, I have seen many many posts, some directed at me personally, trying to implicate people to the left of Obama that post their objections on D.U. as being RW'ers. It's a terrible thing to do to a leftist, and I would think that it would not happen on D.U., unfortunately it is S.O.P. for some here. When you said you can go to RW sites and see the same shit, that's where that remark took me. Glad to see that isn't where you are coming from.
Re the ACA and this OP, I do blame Obama for aligning with the health insurance industry, Baucus did the damage but Baucus basically IS Obama, dig into the prior Baucus staffers who were with Obama early on in his campaign, such as Messina. People let Obama off too easily on this issue IMHO. Many here believe otherwise, I am ok with that, agree to disagree.
Will Pitt's OP this OP referenced (inaccurately, since it omitted the used-car salesman part) was one I read, and thought about rec'ing, but the sentiment looked to me to be a little over the top.
I am not a great fan of Pitt, he wrote many posts earlier in Obama's presidency that were too far in the apologist camp for me. Now that he has come around in his thinking, I agree with him more often, but writers try to get noticed, and use overly dramatic language. He also had a personal stake in this since it was his wife. I think, for those wanting to understand his post and not simply slander a lot of good Democrats here, those were factors in him using that extreme phrasing. And many people rec'ing that thread probably did so with this context in mind.
This OP here (not Will's) seems like nothing more than divisive hippie punching, a device to limit criticism and dissent among Democrats who genuinely disagree with many of the RW (more accurately corporate and M.I.C.) policies Obama has supported. We should be able to do so here on D.U., we want real Democrats pushing real Democratic policies, and we're willing to fight for them when we find one.
justgamma
(3,660 posts)I guess, with me, I see so much right wing BS being flung about on other sites, that maybe, I get hypersensitive to any criticism by anybody. Even though, I've been furious at Obama for many things, there's a lot of blaming him for things he has no control of. Or maybe, I have outrage fatigue and have to save it for the tighty rightys.
Anyway, carry on with the good fight.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)presidents who are usually ranked near the top or, in Lincoln's case, at the top, of all time greatest presidents. Alrighty then.
Maybe comparing Obama to Lincoln, which I have seen quite a bit here by a certain crowd, is a sign of an "Obamabot"?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Or maybe you didn't actually read the quotes.
The examples were to illustrate that even presidents ranked near the very top say and do some pretty objectionable things. Sure, Obama has his flaws, but he never used the US military to forcibly remove large numbers of people from their homes without even the pretense of due process. And he also never stated that he thought that white people are a superior race and deserve to occupy a privileged role in society.
Yeah, I think he's just pretty good. I can understand people who have differing opinions. There is an argument to be made that he's great. There is an argument to be made that he's mediocre or disappointing. There's no argument to be made, however, for "fuck you Obama you piece of shit". And there's also no argument to be made that he's anywhere near as bad as a Republican.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)silly, IMHO. Yep, Lincoln believed what just about everyone else thought at the time. And about FDR, World War 2 was beyond huge and was a historic event, and he did what he thought was best at the time, which was basically saving the world from fascism and the Third Reich. It is easy to look back in 2014 and say they made mistakes.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)I agree it's silly to judge these people as bad presidents because of these things. Almost as silly as blaming Obama for the lack of single payer. Well, no, not that silly.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)being able to pass single payer, all by himself. And I would never dream of comparing him to any of our great presidents, like FDR and Lincoln, or Washington, or Kennedy.
idendoit
(505 posts)The current President made promises in his stump speeches that weren't kept, too. I think Teddy put it best:
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
BklnDem75
(2,918 posts)wyldwolf
(43,864 posts)He rose to the occasion on many issues - the economy, health care, LGBT rights, etc.
Despite what the right says, his foreign policy has been above average and he's shown a ruthlessness when dealing with enemies.
If times had been more dire, he would have risen to the occasion.
Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)lumpy
(13,704 posts)Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)Cha
(295,541 posts)Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)How dreamy he is and what a cool guy and how he's always playing gazillion-dimensional chess.
It's absurd - like middle schoolers gushing over the latest pop star.
That said, I don't care and I don't put people on ignore. Message boards serve a lot of different purposes, so whatever.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)I think Robert Redford is a cool guy. Does that make me a "Redfordbot"?
This whole idea that praising the president makes you a "bot" is very much part of the anti-Obama sentiment here. He is a cool guy!
polichick
(37,152 posts)"Obamabot" virus, which has swept through DU, like it or not.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Like I said, come up with anything remotely comparable to 100+ recs for "fuck you you piece of shit" and then we can have a conversation. People who think Obama is a cool guy is nothing like that.
You act as though somehow liking the president is equivalent to hating him.
polichick
(37,152 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)For a while I was thinking that you were going to present some evidence to support your claims. Now I'm thinking that you're not.
You see, as a rational person, as you posted more and more, I abandoned my initial assumption that you shared my interest in reason, and have replaced it with the evidence-based conclusion that your beliefs are not based in fact.
polichick
(37,152 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)It feels good being right. You should try it sometime. It will be a new experience for you.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)BklnDem75
(2,918 posts)Whisp
(24,096 posts)is what that poster is saying how you outted yourself.
Therefore you will never be allowed in their club and get the free coupons for pointy little back stabbing daggers and stuff.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)Can we someday get back to being Democrats and hating all things Republican? I liked that DU better.
There are all kinds of Democrats. And being Democrats we squabble and don't walk in lockstep like Republicans. I like that about us.
Basically we all vote the same.
This Obamabot argle bargle is getting really old fast.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)But some vote better than others.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)Guess who it's working on? And comparing Obama to Lincoln and FDR? Seriously?! WOW.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)The point of the FDR and Lincoln quotes was to show that even universally acclaimed presidents said and did some pretty awful things. Much worse than not trying to force single payer through a congress that was never going to pass it.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)And I don't really think you are trying to make the comparison.
But I do understand why the label, obamabot exists. There are folks here mindlessly accusing others on DU of hating a president just for criticizing his policies, that's why the label is used. What I do is place those folks on ignore, because they really aren't debating the subject matter... they are accusing people of being "right wingers", "libertarians", "putinistas", "Snowden-Greenwald Worshipers", etc and by extension making it all about "hating" the President to avoid the subject matter. It's a mindless reaction to try to avoid the meat of the argument. Sometimes, there is criticism that has nothing to do with Obama himself, but then all of the sudden those people making the criticism are accused of attacking the President, which to me seems a bit crazy to tell you the truth. It's a hyper-reaction. So there is a reason why the term is used. Is it right? No... is it fair? Yes, sometimes it really is!
If people can be accused of being a "hater" or any of the other terms I mentioned above, then yes, it's all fair. And yes, there are folks on DU who mindlessly and relentlessly make all criticism of Obama's policies personal, and NEVER debate the points being made.
I read much more than I post, and just log in so I won't have to see the mindless knee-jerk reaction by those who defend the indefensible, and then rec threads I think worthy of discussion or at least attention. I think the accusations being made by those who think they are defending Obama are a way to dismiss and demean legitimate concerns. If those folks can't debate the meat of one's argument, I recommend they use the ignore feature more. That goes for both parties. There will be less aggravation. To each his own...
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)It's made my DU experience that much better.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,631 posts)You weren't supposed to tell anyone. Now come back over here and hide . . . I have thin mints, berry detox tea, and popcorn. It's much more fun watching from the sidelines!
sheshe2
(83,138 posts)Am I invited too, JAG? I referenced the BOG here.... now I'm
JustAnotherGen
(31,631 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Apparently your competence spectrum ranges from doodoo to deity, and that's just odd.
If you are unaware as to the specifics of why people are unhappy with the Dems and Obama, then you are either willfully ignorant, an Obamabot, a or one who just likes to stir shit.
I'm betting you are holding a spoon.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)I think people (including me) judge extremes by their own position, so I'll acknowledge I may not see "Obama is a piece of shit" as often as you since I generally think he's a middling-grade president with plenty of good and plenty of bad, and should be praised for the good and criticized for the bad. He's probably the best president in my lifetime, but since that starts at Reagan, it isn't saying very much.
The spectrum actually runs from "Obama is a piece of shit" to "Obama is the greatest president ever, and anyone that thinks he isn't or has ever disagreed with him about anything is a mentally ill racist troll."
When people respond to criticism of a politician with "Never loved him anyway" or by claiming people that disagree with him just "hate" him, you're not dealing with a political arguments, you're dealing with a personality cult. Personality cults aren't necessarily bad...There have been personality cults that had a positive social outcome. But it is what it is.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Whereas "Obama is the greatest president ever, and anyone that thinks he isn't or has ever disagreed with him about anything is a mentally ill racist troll" is just a fabrication of yours to try and pretend that this is a "both sides do it" situation. Krugman calls this kind of argument "views differ on shape of planet".
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Will Pitt's essay used a metaphor of Obama as a salesman of piece-of-shit used cars in reference to his selling of the ACA. He did not call Obama a piece of shit.
I pointed that out to you upthread, yet you continue to claim that WP wrote that Obama is a piece of shit.
Your insistence on promoting an easily-debunked false claim of a disparagement of President Obama to support your faux outrage is representative of the behavior which clearly falls within the parameters of what could be considered an Obamabot.
Carry on.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)I see you can use them in a sentence. Here's how they work in a quote:
"Fuck you, Obama, you piece of shit..." It means that you are not quoting the entire sentence, which may affect the meaning of the sentence.
Without them, the meaning could be completely different than what was intended.
For example, "You see, that means it's actually me saying it..."
DanTex
(20,709 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)You need the practice.
Response to DanTex (Reply #136)
bobduca This message was self-deleted by its author.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)And you've done it quite a bit on this thread.
You are not quoting anyone. A quote is restating exactly what another said, and the object of your attack never said what is in your quote.
Therefore, it is you making something up. Over and over, again and again. You have embarrassed yourself, this website, and Obama, and you should delete this thread and all your "quoted" fabrications meant only to divide us.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)You are making it up. It is a fabrication meant only to be rude, divisive and mean. Again, you should go back and delete each post you used those words in, self-delete those posts, then self-delete this thread and go lick your wounds.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)Speaking of making things up!!! and then you claim someone else of making things up, being rude, divisive and mean. That's less than being hypocritical.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)What I've learned about the Affordable Care Act
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10024685964
Your fabricated quote: "Obama is a piece of shit"
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Yet Dan seems to proudly repeat the made up term time and again.
It really is pissing me off. Thank you, OnyxCollie, for pointing this out.
Were I a believer in the jury system, I would alert on the slanderous use of the quotes. As it is, all I can do is nicely try and have Dan act like a real man, see what his words are doing, and delete them all. In short, get those words of his off DU.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)....for all the world to see.
Marr
(20,317 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)Guess the jury disagrees with this grammatical revisionism nonsense. But it's funny how far people will go to try and defend Will Pitt.
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)You don't remember the "Gays are racists!" campaign over Rick Warren? Do you deny people screech "ODS!" at anything vaguely critical of Obama?
Your delusions don't concern me, other than they shouldn't go unchallenged.
Y'all nail yourselves to crosses on a fairly regular basis when people give you back half what you dish out.
I was actually trying to be neutral giving you "Obama is a piece of shit" is actually a regularly championed belief on here, instead of something spoken one time that y'all will cling to to the end of time to prove how persecuted you are, which is the unfortunate reality.
Cha
(295,541 posts)fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)IMHO, perfect examples of bipartisan maintenance of expansion and war, and the market system.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)stand shoulder-to-shoulder with FDR, who cranked through multiple major social reforms.
As it is, Obama is a very good president, but only a GREAT president in the shadow contrast of the former administration.
I do think he's a great PERSON, but as a president, he's got some major issues dogging him, that need to be resolved. (Drones, spying, willingness to deal on social safety net budgets, etc)
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts).....over at freerepublic. Adoration. Transference. Projection.
There was a group of women freepers who had a daily thread dedicated to photos of Bush. They would gush and coo, and talk about him as if he were their husband, and project all their ideal traits for a husband onto George.
It was gagging.
I hate to see the same kind of thing going on here.
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)OMG a political forum on the internet where members of the political party of the president are supportive! The shame, THE SHAME!
That's what anyone would expect. And btw, I see no one here doing anything close to what you are suggesting (members talking as if Obama was their husband).
What is expected is to have political discourse and debate on the POLICIES of said president, which I think is successfully accomplished here but not at the site you mentioned.
What isn't expected is to have members of a political party refer to their own president in the often disrespectful way that is done here and to have that disrespect tolerated and even championed.
Oh, and I should add... what is downright shameful is that you (and others like you here) compare members of this forum to members of the forum you mentioned.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)....of some DU-ers who voted for Obama but disagree with his policies to "Taliban and Teabaggers"?
Hmm?
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)By asking that, you are acting like a child who is in trouble but saying your sister also did something wrong. The problem is, even if what you say is true, it doesn't excuse the comparison made by you (and others).
That being said, I think that comparison would be in appropriate as well.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)What do you dispute?
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)just gibberish
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)DesMoinesDem
(1,569 posts)or here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110218021
or here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110213185
Nope, that looks like perfectly normal behavior from someone that has in noway emotionally attached themselves to the personality of Obama. They just happen to agree with his position on everything and that's why they like him. He just needs to let them know what his position is first.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)No Cult of Personality He Can Do No Wrong stuff there. No, sir.
sheshe2
(83,138 posts)So very kind of you! I know, I know it's just sickening that some people on DU support this President.
Oh you forgot this one~
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110218640
and this comment~
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110218640#post15
Shhhh! Don't tell Skinner that he belongs to a cult~
Or, Oh My!~
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)Between the fawning photo tributes to the "la-la-la-la I can't hear you" attitude towards very real , very serious issues directly related to actions and/or policies by O -- it was clear this was about supporting him personally, 100%, regardless.
That type of attitude is dangerous. Countries get into trouble with a populace that thinks that way.
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)I think that ones being publicly horse-whipped were the ones with the greatest "hope for change" that fell hardest and the "la-la-la-la I can't hear you" can't see that.
I don't use ignore, I can't be a collaborator.
peace13
(11,076 posts)You guys can continue on this trail. I have decided to subtract from my donation to DU each time one of these irritating call outs pops up. If enough folks do this maybe we can get a decision from the admins about why Democratic supporters should be continually defending themselves on a Democratic board!
corkhead
(6,119 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Like it is normal to cut up one's own side and the people one voted for constantly.
peace13
(11,076 posts)the new normal. The funny thing is that much of the back and forth here rings out like a discussion with my rethug family members. There is a tone, timber and rhythm that sounds pretty familiar to me. I used to join in discussion frequently but now find myself reading headlines, stories and moving on. Have a good one, Kim
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)There are certain DUers who try to shout down or deflect any criticisms of the administration. I don't use the term Obamabot but I recognize zealotry.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)I would add that if you can't see the attempts to smear his critics, you aren't looking.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Moderates vs Progressives, Party Loyalists vs Freethinkers, Capitalists vs Socialists, etc, etc, etc.
"Differences of opinion are what make horse races." Mark Twain
Gore1FL
(20,993 posts)At least that is where it originated. I've never seen anyone here use it.
SaveOurDemocracy
(4,395 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
1000words
(7,051 posts)Instead, I'm trashing it.
djean111
(14,255 posts)that it happened while Obama is president, and happened ONLY because Obama is president, then you are an Obamabot.
Viewing every single thing through that lens - that is what I think of when I think Obamabot.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)They can't see the big picture, or even two-three years from now when Obama will be a fading memory as a new president takes office. To the very devoted, it is always about Obama.
Solomon
(12,300 posts)"That is one way to tell, if everything is personalized to Obama"
Isn't this exactly what Pitt did when he jumped the shark?! And make no mistake about it, he definitely jumped the shark. The fact that you guys are trying to parse words, "he didn't really call him a piece of shit" is proof that he went to far.
The op is spot on. There's no equivalency between the few people that fawn over the president, and the " you piece of shit used car salesman, fuck you"! that was recommended by so many.
Pitt fucked up. Get over it.
Logical
(22,457 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)or you are just purposely being obtuse and divisive.
Yeah, let's see, those who are critics of Obama because they are defending the constitution and democracy vs. those who defend Obama even when he thwarts democracy and ignores the constitution, who attempt to stifle any and all criticism of Obama - they even have a group to do just that where they also post teen fan zine type threads (oh sure, there's no "Obamabots" (your term) on here ) - and who think he has done absolutely nothing wrong or even poorly in the least.
No it could not be more obvious which side has gone off the deep end. Sadly you still got it wrong.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Maybe the part of the internet with the Obamabot posts somehow got deleted from the internet.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)revmclaren
(2,487 posts)that I will never again read, respond to or REC an op by the 'Piece of shit used car salesman' poster or anyone who Reced the op. I have absolutely no respect for them or any ideas or spew that comes from them. I am not alone on this. As a lurker who reads much more here than he posts, I guess I see things a bit more non-partisan than most high number members. Very sad too because maybe one or more of them could have informed me on real issues or good political ideas, but I don't listen to RWers that spew hatred, why should I listen to the 'good' liberals here that do the same. I also think that the 'I have higher recs than you' crowd need to remember that 100 recs is an infinitesimal percentage of the actual members on DU. Just saying....
Oh, and if you are on the rec list from the offensive post, don't bother trying to respond to me....remember the 'no respect, no response thingy'.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)1000words
(7,051 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)Just a friendly FYI.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)revmclaren
(2,487 posts)but also makes us even more determined to get out and vote and keep the senate and take back the house. The negativity here is having a backfire effect. There will be a lot more like me if it continues. That's the good thing to come out of it.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)It has been over a week since a man whose wife is facing life threatening medical issues posted some words out of frustration.
Would I use the words Will Pitt used? No.
Just because I would not use those words does not mean I can not show some empathy for a man who is trying to help his wife and is clearly frustrated by the roadblocks he has had to face.
Quite frankly I think all these threads attacking a long time DUer in the midst of a family crisis are disturbing. People need to have some empathy and realize that sometimes people get extremely frustrated in the midst of a family crisis, it is time for DU to show Will Pitt and his family some support right now rather than continue posting threads attacking him.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Poor guy, but he probably deserves it.
Logical
(22,457 posts)bobduca
(1,763 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)bobduca
(1,763 posts)Don't worry Bobbie Jo, you are most definitely on plenty of folks ignore list.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)btw....worker bees need frequent breaks, hope yours was relaxing and all that.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)you mean endless whining and call-outs from a few handfuls of angry posters that made GD unreadable for days that spread into MIRT and undermined their stated mission all because some people couldn't let it the fuck go...then yeah I guess you could say that.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)and actually tried to help him resolve the issue.
The people agreeing and reccing offered little useful advice, they were happy to make it all about the President and the ACA rather than doing their best to resolve the actual situation at hand.
Will would have been better off asking for advice and exhausting all possibilities first rather than making a political point in the middle of an ongoing situation and saying it wasn't worth trying any other options.
Cha
(295,541 posts)his calling the President "pos shit used car salesman" and "fuck him with all my heart and soul".. but, of course that's all swept under the rug.. and they're the ones with "holes in their hearts".
And, you know what.. it doesn't matter how long a poster has been on here.. if we're wrong we're wrong.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Skittles
(152,918 posts)I have no use for people who treat Obama as if he is incapable of making mistakes
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)their absurdity is some sort of performance art. To me, anyways.
mvd
(65,143 posts)How have you been?
I am in the middle of the two Obama positions and sometimes that is hard on the Democratic/progressive message boards. I think he gave away way too much leverage to the Repukes (especially to start), but I still am united against the Reoukes and the damage they want to do. And I do think Obama has done some good things.
Skittles
(152,918 posts)yes indeed
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)They later post their comments and deeds on conservative websites.
Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)It's unfortunate, because I consider DU awesome. I suppose they've hit on this little trick, pretending to be libs and dissuading Dems. I suppose some will fall for this shit.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)There are alot of us that criticize both the Dems in Congress and the Prez when they are to the right on positions we have been continually fighting for.
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)when Repukes use propaganda and lies, and I see that same Repuke propaganda and those same Repuke lies used (and I know they are propaganda and lies), and the person using them then follows them up by saying he/she is a libs, sorry, but I MUST question it.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)get legislation passed? Especially with the hide bound Congress Obama is saddled with.
Give me an example of how Obama is 'to the right on positions'. What positions?
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)But I think you know that.
DU has always tended to be to on the left side of the Democratic party as a whole.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)There is no way of telling, but opinions are not formed the week before elections. The sour taste in the mouth from seeing all the contempt and memes used to discourage voters throughout the year is very, very effective.
I'd hate to think that so many claim to be Democrats are really so gullible and as badly informed as Teabaggers. Yet that's how much of it looks.
Here is a thread about that technique if you have not seen it and the history of its success. There is big money behind in many venues. I hope you will give it a read:
The term 'Ratfucking' and how it applies to Obama and Democrats
Don Segretti 4.0, A Teabagger Nation
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110215862
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)idendoit
(505 posts)The first one is from the Lincoln-Douglas debate. Abe's trying to get elected by the whole country. The second is after Congress has declared war. Until Churchill convinced him that the British were serious about standing up to the Nazis, by sinking/disabling a good chunk of the French fleet at Mers-el-Kebir, Roosevelt had to appease an isolationist Congress and public. He made stump speeches in the 1940 campaign, promising to keep the US out of the war in Europe.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Abe was just trying to get elected in Illinois.
idendoit
(505 posts)The popularity of that book and the widespread coverage of the debates eventually led to his nomination.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)cost Gore the 2000 election and hence is was the enabler of GW Bush and the horrors that Bush/Cheney brought us. You didn't commit the ultimate sin, so the purists may be satisfied with you only slathering yourself with pork-chop grease and hopping a pen of lions.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)are the same peeps yammering about how they ignore all the Obamabots.
So I guess that clears up both claims, doesn't it?
p.s. K'n'R
Whisp
(24,096 posts)bobduca
(1,763 posts)"Wow! And here I was worrying about the NSA and Gitmo!"
Skip Intro
(19,768 posts)joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Dude was a real piece of work on that one.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Been called one since 2008 online. It was better than the other names I earned, like godless, pinko, commie, tree hugger, lie-beral, demon-rat, man hater, pervert, baby killer, and one closest to Obamabot, an n-lover.
Really, it's the same thing no matter where you go, at least I thought it'd be better here on DU2. Now I'm an cheerleader, worshipper, mindless sheeple, authoritarian swooner, fascist, fanboy and a few other things by now. For I am legion, and I contain multitudes. Und now, I vill punish you with pictures:
And last, but not least :
Cha
(295,541 posts)for you.. Be afraid.. be very afraid..
Thanks for the Obama Pics.. Rofl
Pres Obama looks like he had a big Easter Eve celebration.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)P. S. It was either Barack or Michelle who said going through the many traditional ceremonies they are asked to do at the White House was a bit surreal. Like living in Disneyland, I think was the term used.
Obama looks like he's thinking in the first photo with the Easter Bunny I posed, 'Why as the President of the United States, am I required to pose with a Harvey the Pookah size Bunny Rabbit at Easter?'
Well, it turns out that Bunny has a lot more power than anyone would have ever thought:
http://cherokeetribune.com/view/full_story/6935548/article-A-history-of-the-White-House-Easter-Egg-Roll?instance=secondary_story_left_column
One more of Barack and the Bunny:
US President Singing the National Anthem with the Easter Bunny of the Day
http://www.dailyedge.ie/us-president-singing-the-national-anthem-with-the-easter-bunny-of-the-day-412377-Apr2012/
Warning! Bush pics follow:
Bush standing next to Boss Bunny.
And again:
Okay, was he really in charge?
This guy at the Daily Mail said:
By George, how we'll miss him
Perhaps Umbrellaigate was the GOP and their media's way to get revenge for this event?
Windblown in 2004: I should've got me a nuckular umbrella
Unbelievable gallery here:
Mission accomplished: I've won the war on terriers
Is that him giving America the kiss off as he left the White House? The captions are hilarious I don't think anyone but media is missing the Shrub, but these are good pics:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1082805/By-George-miss-him.html
Cha
(295,541 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)It is a good one, ain't it?
Cha
(295,541 posts)put my thoughts to words like this.
area51
(11,851 posts)then you aren't looking. There are posters here with the same mindless cheerleading as republicans toward GWBush.
pecwae
(8,021 posts)sheshe2
(83,138 posts)Thank you!