HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Dustlawyer » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Member since: Wed Jan 9, 2008, 11:31 AM
Number of posts: 10,194

Journal Archives

Just got axed from the $HRC$ group for posting a sarcastic comment.

I admit it was sarcastic, but I was making a point. I did not make a personal attack on anyone there, but I felt I had to do it. You see, they were all trying to justify all of the money she has raised with all of the expected arguements. "It's UNFORTUNATE that it takes a lot of money from campaign donations and Super Pacs, but..." or "it's naive to think of running for POTUS without taking corporate money because, you know, the clown car Republicans all have their own billionaires..."

"Unfortunate" "the others are doing it," please! I had to point out that Hillary with her name recognition would do fine on what Bernie is raising. She could still pick and choose her interviews that she gives, getting free publicity anytime she wanted. She didn't need corporate money to win, but she wanted it! They act like our campaign system is dirty, but what can we do?

Positive change doesn't just happen, you have to take some risk. Do they think the Founding Fathers said, "Hey, this thing with England sucks, but what can we do?" Hillary is a creature of our corrupt political system. She knows all of the wealthiest people in the world. She knows that she has to give a Quid Pro Quo for the money she is collecting, and it will be at OUR EXPENSE! That right there should be enough to tell you that she doesn't really give a shit about us!

I also have a problem with these groups, the HRC group, Bernie group... Do we really want an area where like minded people only can discuss what they already agree on? I am a Bernie supporter 100%, and I do like to hear from other like minded people, however, I am not adverse to someone else making an arguement about something I may not agree on. Example, some have a problem with Bernie's stance towards guns. I would not get upset at some HRC supporter making this arguement if that's what they did. I may learn something I didn't know before. I do mind snark and personal attacks, just not arguments on the merits. To be honest, sarcasm may have crossed the line anyway, but it was the best way that I could point out what they were doing, which was making a lot of excuses for Hillary taking more bribe money than anyone else in this election. They were clearly defensive about it, but we're trying to act like everyone does it and there is nothing that can be done to stop it. It's galling when they act like we are powerless to oppose the corruption of campaign bribes when we have someone who IS DOING IT! Bernie would be a lock for POTUS if all Democrats decided that this was the election where we could return to Representative Democracy instead of going deeper into fascism.

Despite being here at DU for several years, the Bernie Group is the first group I have joined. Is it an official rule that you cannot argue against the candidate of a group if done respectfully and limited to an issue? I want to know if my being banned from commenting in the HRC group for violation of the rules, or was it because I struck a nerve?
Go to Page: 1