You know what I don't like about DU? For some

[cboy4]

DUers, unless they completely agree/approve of someone's position on something a majority of the time, etc., that someone is seemingly garbage.

I've been thinking about this.

Maureen Down wrote what I think is a very good OP-Ed today about Clarence Thomas (and it's getting some good feedback here at DU). http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1991996

Yet not long ago, I read a post in which quite a few people complained about how much they really just can't stand the woman.

I happen to like Maureen. I think she's funny and entertaining when I see her on TV.

Even though I don't agree with everything she writes, I don't hate her.

Also, some people (Duers) seem to go on and on about how much they dislike Randi Rhodes because they say she's rude and abrasive. There was a recent post about this.

I happen to like Randi. I don't agree with everything she says or approve of the way she always handles callers, but I know she's on my side.

I don't want to make this too long by mentioning a bunch of other examples, but it's an observation that jumps out and baffles me.

I know this is a discussion board where people disagree, and that's cool. However, I wonder why some DUers simply can't simply disagree, without pretty much disowning that person?

After all, being open minded seens like the Progressive thing to do.

[Lautremont]

1. This whole Maureen Down thing has got me down.

I've noticed what you're talking about. I call it "Down's Syndrome."

[SoCalDem]

2. Um.. It's Maureen Dowd :)

:rofl:..

she is a pip, though.. she does throw us a bone every now and then, but she's just a columnist, folks.. she has to write a specified number of words every week, and she picks on everyone :)

[IDemo]

4. I like "MoDo"

[Colorado Progressive]

3. Quit being all logical and such.

:D

[jgraz]

5. After what she did to Gore in 2000, she's on my permanent shit list

[Donnachaidh]

6. feel better now? n/t

[RandomKoolzip]

7. As much as we say we appreciate nuanced thinking and despise binaries,

DU is a prime example of that kind of thinking: either an appointed public figure is a saint or a goat, and there's no inbetween. When a public figure (say, a musician), says something anti-Bush, it's "Oh, I alwys liked _____'s music!" or "Now THERE'S a talented musician! Go ______!", but if that same musician, the next day, said something not-completely complementary about a famous liberal person or idea, the reaction FROM THE SAME PEOPLE would be, "FUCK ______! I NEVER LIKED HIM/HER!" or "______'s Music SUCKS!"

Notice that they will also attribute aesthetic quality to a musician or artist's work if the musician or artist agrees with them ideologically, and vice versa if he/she's a conservative. Political leanings ought not to be confused with aesthetic worth.

[U4ikLefty]

8. Does that go for Cindy Sheehan? n/t

[DaveJ]

9. I like Randi Rhodes too

I agree in that if someone doesn't like her, why create a post about it, when that same post could be about one of thousands of Repukes in government who are all a million times worse???

Sometimes it seems DU'ers think that Democrats are in the clear and that they are now free to bash people with ideals that are at least somewhat close to theirs. Talk about short term memory.

[Evergreen Emerald]

10. It is the dehumanization of the other

America has become a country of us-versus-them. And They are bad, wrong, and downright stupid while We are smart, and enlightened.

We are so black and white that we refuse to see any good in them.

[EST]

11. Unfortunately, you've fallen into the trap of expecting people to

behave logically.
People don't think the way we think we think when we think we are thinking.
Humans are powerful pattern matchers. We map patterns onto patterns so automatically we don't even see it, most of the time.
We file away our observations and experiences using a system of "every thing is like everything else except where it isn't."

Keeping that in mind, it starts to become fairly usual to humans to be able to embrace dichotomy without flinching.
Consider:
"Slow and steady wins the race" and, "The race goes to the fleetest" can actually be held at the same time by the same person and they don't explode...every time.

Add the folks who can perform reasonably well with a split personality to the sheer number of liberal, progressive people who post on DU, leaven in the fact that we like people a lot better when they agree with us and there you have it--the answers to your questions.

[kimmerspixelated]

12. Well, I must kick this!

You have really hit the nail on the head. I, too, am baffled by what you have described to a tee!
Whatever happened to respectfully disagreeing? There seems to be a lot Na-nanny-boo boos as well, and it makes me think those folks are very immature, but mostly I think they really just have a lot of hate in their hearts.

[Raine]

13. Agree

I've noticed this kind of thing over a variety of people and issues, it's very depressing. :-(

[undeterred]

14. Some DUers can't disagree without personally insulting

the person they disagree with. When that happens to me and I click on the profile, its usually a male.

[spoony]

15. Why don't you address that point TO Randi, instead of

scolding, apparently without even a hint of irony, that people who disapprove of the way she handles people (in the very manner you describe in your opening paragraph) are big meanies who have judged her to be inhuman (which, if I recall that thread, is a strawman argument anyway).

[hfojvt]

16. a good point, but a little bit over-stated

It's not about "not completely agreeing" (unless you are Randi talking to a caller). In the case of MoDo, it is about "completely disagreeing". I'd probably be happy with 70%, but 3% is not 99.3%. MoDo can be interesting and thought provoking, but, in too many cases, she can also be dishonest, snarky, and in other ways a total a$$hat.