If you think Obama isn't getting support at DU...

[Enrique]

think about how DU relates to Nancy Pelosi for example.

For the past few years you literally could not post an article about Pelosi without getting a million "Fuck Pelosi" responses.

So yeah, it's true we should support Obama to a point. But it has also been true with Pelosi, but who has been supporting her here?

And if Hillary had won, she would need our support. I wonder would she get it?

[patrice]

1. What can you expect from a board on which few use their real names? MANY different kinds of actors

here, with every rhetorical objective imaginable, not just a small fraction of which is to factionalize Obama's support and the Democratic Party. Not that all criticism is about that, but CERTAINLY a significant portion of it COULD be and also quite easily claim the opposite "constructive criticism" and, thus, achieve geometric semantic resonance with more honest actors. Think of at least triple-agents. Look where the extreme postings, such as hate speech and single issue posters, ally themselves issue-wise to see the tip of the iceberg. And WHO is ACTUALLY doing WHAT WORK for WHOM/WHAT ISSUE (or in rare cases, ISSUES) away from this board.

[LWolf]

2. I don't support any of those three.

"We" should not be supporting "democrats" who work against our best interests.

[NaturalHigh]

3. I'm not a Pelosi fan myself.

Just because we're Democrats doesn't mean that we have to support every politician who tacks a "D" after their names.

[masuki bance]

4. F%$# Pelosi- She attempted to throw the Obama administration under the bus this week

"This is Senate-White House language. ... This was never brought to conference," Pelosi said, even though the final language on bonuses was in fact in the conference report on which House conferees (including Pelosi) signed off and that the House approved.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2009/03/pelosi_dont_blame_us_for_aig_m.html?hpid=topnews

[question everything]

5. DU, like FreeRep, Daily Kos and other blogs are places for people to vent

anonymously, of course, and to provide fodder for the "Cable Chatter" which then is being reposted and so on. Places that need to justify their existence by recirculating and regurgitating the most flaming "opinion."

No one can be everything for everyone. If any DUers does not like what Obama does, s/he should have run for this office himself. And, yes, this is true for Pelosi and now Dodd, I suppose. People on DU would like to get rid of both Lieberman and Dodd leaving the citizens of CT with potentially two freshmen who would have no knowledge, no experience and now power to help their constituents for what they really will need.

Plus, a fact that people on these board refuse to accept is that politics is the art of compromise. So, let people vent and just ignore them.

I came to the board several hours after Obama's appearance on Leno and could not figure out what was the uproar. I guess his comment about the Special Olympics went right over my head. Never have bowled, I had no idea what that "score" meant, either. But what was interesting were the many comments from DUers that "we would have been outraged had Bush said this." Yes, and this, more than anything else, shows the idiocy of trying to be PC.

[NorthernSpy]

6. Obama is President.

He is America's head of state as well as our head of government, and as such symbolizes our country in a way that no one else does. He's out there in front, and just as our enemies will focus their attacks on him, our unity must be focused on him as well.

Pelosi is one of ours, but when all's said and done, she really is just another politician. It's hardly the same thing, and you know it.