A reminder

[Hutzpa]

of what this Forum/website/community is all about, now I'm not trying to play the role
of the Mod, not by a long short, but from a concern member to other members, there has
been few threads advocating an outrage over the none participation of criticizing a
Democratic President, it is on those notes that I hereby post this as a reminder to
myself and other members what DU is all about.

We welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives who will work with us to achieve our shared goals. While the vast majority of our visitors are Democrats, this web site is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, nor do we claim to speak for the party as a whole.

Democratic Underground would not be possible without the participation of like-minded individuals from across the country and, indeed, from around the world. The content for the site is provided by people who feel that their views are not represented by the conservative "mainstream" media in the U.S. We accept article submissions from those on the left who wish to write, so that DU represents a variety of progressive viewpoints. We have a particular appreciation for satire and humor.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/about.html

I have taken some excerpt from the main admin page just to get my point across, now this
is not to start a flame war but to REMIND fellow members about the rules we all chose to
adhere to when we sign up.

My view is not to SABOTAGE, UNDERMINE and DISRUPT the work and efforts of a Democratic
President, but to SUPPORT him in his endeavors and challenges, in the process help
provide CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM when it matters with like minded folks in building a
better Democratic Party for the future.

Thank you for taking your time to read this....


Peace!!!

[AtomicKitten]

1. The mission statement of the founders of this community seems to be beside the point to some.

Your OP is a timely reminder. Thanks.

K&R

[Hutzpa]

6. Thanks AtomicKitten

sometimes we need to remind ourselves whats at stake.


:thumbsup:

[Two Americas]

2. two groups

People are roughly divided into two groups here, and they are talking past each other.

One group sees the party as the best hope for change. That over-rides everything else for them. They will argue that support for the party is the only practical way to ever advance the principles and ideals we support. They think that people criticizing the party or the party politicians puts the party at risk. They see the party as the only hope, so that puts everything at risk.

The logic is that we have a two party system, that electoral choices are what matters most, that one choice is better than the other, so therefore everything we can do to ensure electoral success of the Democrats - the better choice - is good, and anything that may interfere with that is bad.

Another group sees support for the party as secondary to support for principles and ideals. They will argue that speaking out for the principles and ideals is the only way there will ever be a party worth supporting. They think that people promoting party first puts the principles and ideals at risk. Since the principles and ideals are all that matters, putting them at risk makes whether or not the party prevails irrelevant.

The logic is that electoral choices reflect rather than drive public opinion, and are an effect not a cause. By speaking out for what we believe we generate public pressure, without regard to how that may effect short term partisan gains, and that will then be reflected in election results. Without that public pressure, electoral wins are of not necessarily of any value.

I am biased and strongly advocate one of these approaches over the other, but I hope that I have been fair and accurate here in my description of the divide.


...

[Hutzpa]

3. In that case I would add

that people should not separate the two or create them as groups, we all want the same thing
but sometimes we go about in achieving these things differently, as in with anything we do in
life, there are rules and regulation to govern our indecisions and strayed thinking, these rules
are put in place as guidelines to help protect us from peer pressure and other unaccounted for
influences.

I think folks here tend to go over the top with their arguments and I sometimes have been guilty
of that and I found out that, that is due mainly to my frame of mind at the time of reading the
thread/post in question, I've learned to chill out when I see something I don't agree with I use
the tools made available to me, also, I don't have an ego problem.

But thats me, your input is well appreciated.

[Two Americas]

4. that isn't clear

I like your ideas, however it is not clear to me that we all want the same thing. No way to tell, as the feuding about loyalty and support masks and disguises that.


...

[Hutzpa]

14. Unfortunately

it is IMHO that some folks here work as a group which would sometimes create that aura of
disunity and yes it may seem that way that we don't want the same thing when that happens
but like the President, I have faith in majority of DU'ers and the majority will always
carry the vote.

[Clio the Leo]

5. And SOME of us ....

... thoroughly enjoy the great tennis match that is DU.

I hope I'm not at work on the day that one side finally wins. :popcorn:

[Hutzpa]

10. It does seems like being at

a tennis match, the only difference is we should all be striving to win instead of
urging one side, we are all on the same side.

[Clio the Leo]

13. We have no common enemy.....

..... so being good Democrats, we turn on one another.

What goes on here isn't even a blip on the larger political radar.

Wait until 2012 when the Great Whore comes riding down from the North on her slain wolf carcass ringing her cacophonous bell and we'll be in lock step again.

(It's Sunday and I just got out of church, I'm full of Biblical imagery.)

In the mean time, want some popcorn?



... or perphaps a "warm knit hat"?

[Two Americas]

17. sure we do

Nothing has changed.

The debate now is - and it has always been and always will be - between those defending the haves in various ways and those advocating for the have-nots.


...

[Life Long Dem]

7. I don't think this is the argument in discussion. It is, but it doesn't go far enough.

I think there is a 3rd group. A group out to smear the President with any lie or spin they can get.

[Two Americas]

9. that re-opens the feud

If you insist on pressing that, there is no hope of reconciliation.

[Life Long Dem]

12. So now I should just shut-up and forget about getting to the bottom of this.

[Two Americas]

16. not at all

I don't know how you got that from what I posted.

You said there is a "group out to smear the President with any lie or spin they can get."

I am one of the people accused of that - as much or more than anyone. But I know that it is not true. I can't prove that it is not true - that is impossible, of course.

So, I am supposedly out to smear the president with what I post, some would have it. And they are extremely upset about that - I think that is fair to say. The question then becomes, how could I accommodate them? What would satisfy them? They do not like what I am saying. No explanations or attempts at finding common ground have worked. That leaves one thing and one thing only that I could do to satisfy them: stop saying what I am saying. That I cannot do. So then what?


...

[Cha]

8. This would be nice to be inserted into

rules since DU has never existed when a Democratic President was elected before President Obama.

"My view is not to SABOTAGE, UNDERMINE and DISRUPT the work and efforts of a Democratic
President, but to SUPPORT him in his endeavors and challenges, in the process help
provide CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM when it matters with like minded folks in building a
better Democratic Party for the future."

There's no way this board should be so infiltrated with hate.

[Life Long Dem]

11. Your right. This board was all about preparing for future elections.

Now I'm feeling it's defeating this effort.

[Hutzpa]

15. Some of us have

actually forgotten our agenda as a community, instead our focus has become

tearing the image of a Democratic President and throwing fits when we don't

get our way.

[Two Americas]

18. throwing gasoline on the fire

I am one of the people who have been accused of these things.

I know with absolute certainty that I am not "tearing the image of a Democratic President" and that I am not "throwing fits," nor is any of this about "getting my way." All of that makes me sound pretty horrible, though.

What would satisfy you? You are unhappy with the people you are attacking with your post here. You must want them to do something differently. What? How?

If you are seeking to get me to agree that I am doing those things, and then to stop posting the things I am posting, that is not going to happen. Would you agree to terms like that were the shoe on the other foot?

There is nothing I could possibly do to make you happy other than to stop speaking out. Yet when I say that some here want us to stop speaking out, that is vehemently denied. So we are at an impasse.

What would satisfy you? What would resolve the problem you have with this?


...

[Two Americas]

19. that's it?

No more discussion about this, until the next time it erupts on another thread and the feud starts again?


...

[Hutzpa]

20. What are you looking for????

a fight?

[Two Americas]

21. a response

Ultimately, I am asking how we can reconcile the two factions here and gain better understanding.

"A fight" is what we already have.


...

[Hutzpa]

22. I did not want to revive

this thread, but since you asked why not start from here, how about we continually
knock down all posting with republican links, thats how it used to be on GD back then.

IMHO thats the course for all this division we have among ourselves because traffic
is generated to those links by folks visiting and then feeling that they have to report
the BS story to us and then folks gets all work up over the BS story.