General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I haven't seen any actual Obamabots here. [View all]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...