For years we on DU have complained about Repubs being financed by fossil fuels but when Hillary...

[Bread and Circus]

...does it... it's somehow magically ok?

Let's have some consistency here people.

[Ned_Devine]

1. That's been my beef too. If she had an (R) next to her name, we'd ALL be against her...

...but for some reason that (D) gets her off the hook with a lot of people on this site despite so many of her (R) tendencies. It's curious indeed.

[TDale313]

2. Consistency is not a strong suit for them. n/t

[amborin]

3. all their many unethical behaviors are magically ok

[questionseverything]

4. we used to think torturers should be prosecuted too

values should be the same no matter which party does it

[Hydra]

7. I always thought so, but I used to have posts hidden during DU2 by the admins for saying as much

Scary, isn't it?

[rhett o rick]

5. They are not interested in issues or what Clinton has done, is doing or will do. It's authoritarian

adulation.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/127710250

[Hydra]

6. I've watched a magical transformation here on DU

Everything the Bush Admin did that we had serious problems with...is perfectly OK when done by Establishment Dems.

I remember some people here started to ask that deadly question near the end of the Bush Admin, and I naively thought "Well, duh! We all have policy gripes with the Bush Admin, not branding"

How wrong I was...

[Armstead]

8. I remember the good ol days...When Bush was excoriated on DU for his ties to Big Oil

Sigh...Nostalgia


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x31345

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1256051

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/01/07/06_nixxon.html

[tymorial]

9. Honestly

I don't think this is a party thing it's a human nature thing. When people are passionate about something/someone.. politicians in particular, there is tendency to excuse the negative as being somehow different from all other similar issues that they would normally rail against. It is a means to resolve cognitive dissonance.

[Bread and Circus]

11. Agree. That's why we gotta be cognizant of it.

[EndElectoral]

10. There has been a transition the last decade on DU. Now some are ready to defend person over policy.

[Dr. Strange]

12. Jon Stewart:

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/jon-stewart-on-the-corrupting-force-of-money-in-politics

[kristopher]

13. Hillary and her supporters are New Democrats and they aren't like the Old Democrats

Since 1992, the plan seems to be that in the political process national economic policy affecting distribution of wealth is simply not on the table. We can argue all we want about insoluble problems like abortion, guns, and identity issues, but under no circumstances are we allowed to look behind the curtain at the power structure the corporations have built.

[mindwalker_i]

14. There seem to be two groups here

One group pays attention to issues, debates them, thinks about them. The other group cheers democrats. They don't seem to care a lot about issues unless those can be used to support a democrat or rail against a republican. Hence, there are periodic posts about how this should be a space to support democrats, or bemoaning how they can't support democrats.

It goes further. The second camp gets angry when democrats are caught doing bad things and they get mad at the person exposing it. Snowden is an excellent example. This approach is actually bad for democrats because it comes across almost as a matter of faith. Many people don't share that faith and don't respond to it. They respond to arguments and issues. Saying one should vote for democrats just because does more harm than good. Being willing to hold one's leaders accountable does a lot more good for the party.

[Bread and Circus]

15. Agree.

[hobbit709]

16. IOKIYAHRC.

[NWCorona]

17. ...