Time for me to say goodbye to DU. Wish you all well It isn't for me anymore /nt

[still_one]

[ForgoTheConsequence]

1. You'll be back.

Probably in this thread too.

[Kurovski]

66. LOL

Sans baggage.

[Th1onein]

2. Wish you would not go, still_one.

Would you at least explain why you are leaving?

[stevenleser]

3. He or she explained the other day. They think DU has become an Obama hate site

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023155982

[BeyondGeography]

5. Obama hate and doom, doom, doom

Lots of that. It can feel like a relationship that's going from bad to worse and not worth sustaining sometimes. I understand the decision.

[stevenleser]

9. I don't care about being disagreed with, it's the lack of fact based discussion on the topic that is

frankly disappointing.

Every fact I post on the NSA issue is responded to with dozens of logical fallacies, emotional garbage and all kinds of other B.S. that have nothing to do with getting down to the truth of what happened.

There was one OP I posted where four or five folks actually attempted to engage on the facts, and what came from that is that there is a possibility for consensus by the two major groups who disagree, we just almost never get there because some folks are enamored with running around with their hair on fire purely emoting.

[BeyondGeography]

25. I forget how many times I've been called an authoritarian

for saying it's folly to go all-in with Ed. The typecasting and broad brush strokes are reminiscent of the very totalitarianism they are supposedly afraid of. I'm surprised more people haven't bailed.

And yet, to your point, there does emerge consensus at times, particularly on the questions of cost/mission creep and overall effectiveness. The sooner the Snowden saga wanes, the better.

[zappaman]

31. +100

[truedelphi]

33. Do you think that people on the othe side of the argument

Don't face the same resistance, refusal to face facts and even bullying? It comes with the territory. That is why these internet sites are called discussion forums.
\
If we all agreed on everything, why would anyone even come here?

[stevenleser]

93. No, on this issue, the differences between the sides and how they operate are stark.

There is very little in the way of thinking, searching for facts and reasoning happening on the "pro-Snowden", "anger at the NSA" side.

It's rather like a mob on their way to perform mob justice. How did Shakespeare describe it? After the speech by Mark Antony: "His name is Cassius! Kill him for his name!!!!!!!"

There is absolutely no reasoning with that crowd. No fact that ought to make them pause slows them down for an instant. In fact, they are openly contemptuous of any cited fact, with backup mind you, that casts doubt on their beliefs.

[G_j]

116. I get it

you are intelligent, informed, completey reasonable and "they" are an unruly mob of fools. That's the ticket!

[stevenleser]

123. Glad you finally are starting to see the light. nt

[G_j]

134. Oh, I've seen it

alright

[Rex]

153. +1

Yep, no reason to fall for the bullshit. Since so many here believe that we are all fools and that the facts they make up are real and factual.

[truedelphi]

169. Me too! n/t

[scarletwoman]

256. T'is a wonderous light!

Shining as does from out the backside of a strutting martinet.

[sabrina 1]

314. Reasonable, you mean like your suggestion that the US could use 'gangs'

in Venezuela to murder Snowden if he is granted asylum there? I did point out to do that China could then and probably would, use OUR Gangs to murder and/or kidnap some of their citizens who have been granted asylum here,

I hope you've studied up a little on Diplomatic rules and relations around the world since then.

And there are no 'snowden lovers' here. I don't know the man from adam, and care only about what has been released and will continue to do so no matter how hard you all try to make it about Snowden. It isn't, keep hoping this will shut down the converstion, but it won't.

[whatchamacallit]

383. The new This Modern World

calls out the idiotic Snowden misdirection. From the day the story broke, DU has been flooded with Snowden hit pieces and bogus accusations of pervasive "Snowden love". The marching orders sure go out fast.

[Union Scribe]

343. Yes, your side is so genteel and rational

and never has moments of these "emotion" things you hate so much.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023186643

Your perception is a cartoonish version of reality where you and your righteous cohorts are good and rational and thoughtful and those who disagree with you are unthinking mobs of brutish uncouth savages. Even as you carpet bomb your opponents with accusations of "ad hominem!" you refuse to see the same behavior in yourself and many of those on your side.

And spare me the explanation of how the "haters" have forced people to respond to them with insults or whatever inane defense you are about to offer to keep the illusion alive.

[stevenleser]

345. Yes we are. Glad you recognize it! nt

[Union Scribe]

390. This issue has truly laid you bare.

And it has not been pretty. All that talk of logic and reason, all of it hollow.

[Thinkingabout]

37. steven i read one of your fact based posts which explained in detail the processed,

Bookmarked it because of the good information. I too have seem an over run of information which sounds to me like libertarian trolls and does not come close to the truth. Why some would take their information from some of the blog sites linked I don't know. Many thanks for your post, keep it up.

[KittyWampus]

56. Not just libertarians… there used to be a website where extreme, hate-filled posters would

congregate… I'd forgotten all about it until someone reminded me of it. That site is gone now. I suspect a few have come back to spill their bile.

[Thinkingabout]

63. Same old story, if you dine with buzzards you can not soar with eagles, eagles will remain here

When the buzzard diners see the graceful soaring of the eagles they might be able to catch up. I enjoy your post also, sanity.

[pnwmom]

295. Was that the site filled with people who'd been tombstoned here, along with their acolytes,

that was full of Obama haters? I hadn't thought of that, but it makes sense that some of them might have found their way back here.

[KittyWampus]

301. Yes, somewhere under an old tree…..

[pnwmom]

302. Now I remember . . . .

[Kolesar]

375. I googled up that diseased place

Years ago, somebody had posted the type of tree. The sad crowd on that forum used the same screen names that they had been using at DU.

[Logical]

51. Some topics bring out emotion. Like the DOMA did a year ago. Much disagreement. This....

is a discussion board. If I hate NSA spying and am glad Snowden did what he did it does not mean I will not vote for a dem in 2014.

You can think Obama is a disappointment and still support the party.

[stevenleser]

69. You equate what Snowden did with LGBT equality?

Sorry, that is an analogy that is way off. There should be no discussion or debate about whether equality for anyone is right.

[Logical]

71. And once again, another DUer who thinks this is about Snowden and not the whole paranoia about...

the NSA needing to spy on America. Keep thinking it is about Snowden if it makes you feel better defending it.

[stevenleser]

73. That isn't any better. You equate that with equality for LGBT?

There is a discussion to be had about the need for security and surveillance and where that ends.

There is no discussion to be had on LGBT equality or the equality of anyone else.

That is a really bad and borderline offensive analogy

[Logical]

77. I was trying to make a point that you whining about the DU not getting along happens all the damn...

time. So get over it.

Just because people think your sacred postings are not correct does not mean the DU is broken. Maybe you are wrong. Or maybe they are wrong. But it is not time to leave the DU.

[stevenleser]

82. LOL, the folks whining about the NSA accuse other people of whining!!!!

Sorry, doesnt work, and it also doesnt work because I am simply explaining what I believe is the OP's reasoning, and I am able to do that because I actually read their previous posts.

Nice try. Not!

[Logical]

94. Let me make this simpler for you.......

You said "dozens of logical fallacies, emotional garbage and all kinds of other B.S. that have nothing to do with getting down to the truth of what happened"

I could say the same thing about the Gun discussions on the DU, The Chained CPI discussions on the DU, the Obamacare discussions on the DU, taxing the rich discussions on the DU, etc. Do I need to keep listing issues where "emotional garbage and all kinds of other B.S." were involved or do you get it now? Hint.....it happens all the damn time.

I think this one is bugging you maybe because you are in the minority here on this topic.

[stevenleser]

98. Oh please, do you honestly think I am bothered by the numbers around me who disagree?

[Logical]

105. Well, I do not have a video of myself on national TV to post so I guess.....

you are right and I am wrong. I apologize!

[stevenleser]

109. Did you not accuse me of not liking being outnumbered? Was I not outnumbered 3-1 there?

Tell me if my response wasnt on point.

[Logical]

115. I will say I appreciate you standing up against them in a tough environment. I do not have....

the skill set to do it.

[BlueStreak]

106. It isn't a comparison I would bring up, but since you asked ...

There is indeed a parallel. In both cases, it is the use of the full power of authoritarian government to deny freedoms to Americans. In the case of DOMA, this was targeted at LGBTs, whereas the NSA thing is much more universal, so the comparison only goes so far. But at their core, they are similar.

Or let me put it to you a different way. Does the state have any legitimate interest in deciding which loving couples shall be recognized as married? Surely the answer is obviously not. And the same question is at the hard of the NSA thing. Does the state have any legitimate interest in conducting the extra-Constitutional and extreme surveillance and dossier-building measures revealed of the NSA? I believe not, and many here evidently believe the state does have such an interest. But I note that over a month has passed and I have yet to see a single post that convincingly makes that case. Instead, all those supporting a more authoritarian state want to talk about is what a bad person Snowden is.

That is a level of dialog that one would expect at Free Republic. Sad that this is where the DU seems to be now.

[SammyWinstonJack]

333. +1

[JimDandy]

370. +2

[Marr]

381. +1

[MNBrewer]

359. I accuse you of deliberately misconstruing that post.

The poster did NOT equate Snowden with GLBT equality. They made a comparison to the level of emotion surrounding the issues.

and your side is "reasoned"?

[treestar]

140. There has been zero discussion on

How much spying is allowable, desirable or effective. Zero. It is all Eddie is right all leakers are right and there should be no classified documents or you are an authoritarian.

[Logical]

144. I agree. But without Snowden, no one would even be saying we need a discussion. n-t

[stevenleser]

151. Leslie Cauley brought this to our attention in her USA Today article in 2006

http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm

[TheKentuckian]

364. I suggest that the issue was effectively buried under the BushCo. shitstorm

with the aid of a complicit media (this article from the politics section of USA Today) and still was vigorously opposed.

I further submit that stopping this exact sort of thing was a great hope from many in their calculation of supporting Obama over Clinton in the primaries, there was no reason to simply assume that the beat would just go on here, it isn't like you can claim that Congress has specifically dictated to the Executive that these programs must be carried out rather than the truth that the programs are being allowed under Executive discretion.

Folks had reason to at least hope that what was learned about in 2006 was no longer happening as a consequence of the election in 2008. Only Congress can reign in all Executives but as is they each can control how far they reach here. Autonomous enough to be individually accountable for their actions in this regard. Congress gets huge blame for dereliction of duty and abandoning their sworn duties but abandoning your post and punting your constitutional authority still isn't quite the same thing as being the one taking that punt and running with it unless you believe "the devil made me do it" is a valid excuse.

The only credit that can really be granted Obama is caring enough to smear a little lipstick on the old pig here.
You know get a piece of paper that says warrant on it from your friendly neighborhood, right wing star chamber and keep on keeping on.

Everyone should read the article though if for no other reason than to see in one place removed from today EVERY ARGUMENT, RATIONALIZATION, EXCUSE, AND JUSTIFICATION used today by folks defending this shit pulled straight from BushCo. down to it being court supervised.

It is all the same except some have hopped the fence and joined with Cheney and Yoo.

The excuses and bullshit are the same and so is this essential truth that I also borrowed from that same 2006 write up...


-Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the panel, sounded incredulous about the latest report and railed against what he called a lack of congressional oversight. He argued that the media was doing the job of Congress.
   ''Are you telling me that tens of millions of Americans are involved with al Qaeda?'' Leahy asked. ''These are tens of millions of Americans who are not suspected of anything ... Where does it stop?''
   The Democrat, who at one point held up a copy of the newspaper, added: ''Shame on us for being so far behind and being so willing to rubber stamp anything this administration does. We ought to fold our tents.'' 

Leahy's simple but burning bush/neon sign/100 foot tall letters of fire obvious argument still stands. Nothing has changed but who is President, if your argument is that we shouldn't expect that to matter then consider it refocusing and a lesson learned that unless something is specifically stated to be discontinued then assume it is going on but time has not diluted the importance and only increases the dangers.


The argument is pointless unless it is about making sure Cauley gets credit due because the problem remains.

[treestar]

385. good find, the DU archives may show the outrage

or not.

The bit about Qwest is interesting. The private companies volunteered the information. They can fight it if they want to.

[riqster]

198. Bunk. The info has been out there for over a decade.

The conversation has been ongoing, but not too many people have participated.

[davidpdx]

222. Not true

I have voiced concern about the collecting of information as well as how limitations would affect the ability to catch those who are trying to harm the US. I believe in the same thread, someone mentioned the Boston bombing and the fact that intelligence didn't work.
One thing I mentioned is that we don't know how many terrorist plots have been stopped.

I also pointed out the other multiple issues that need to be dealt with including contractors, security clearances, etc. At the same time the issue of Snowden and the data he has should be resolved as well. In my post I said I assumed that Snowden would get asylum, but at the same time it leaves us with not knowing how much more information he has, what it is or what he'll do with it.

[Marr]

382. If that's really how you've seen it, that's amazing.

To me, it's been a fight between one side that's upset about domestic spying and government violations of civil liberties, and another that's upset about what a jerk Edward Snowden is.

I've seen several threads that were explicitly dedicated to domestic spying left completely ignored by the Snowden crowd. One side simply does not want to engage on that issue.

[dionysus]

292. one can disagree with the potential scope of NSA spying and still think snowden is a douche.

whistleblowing about what the NSA does to americans is one thing...

to go to other countries like china and Russia and spills beans, that's a huge no no.

for better or worse, every country that can afford an intelligence agency spies on whoever they can, even allies. I can guarantee MI6 and Mossad and keeping tabs as us, even though we're friends. And we're keeping tabs on them. And then there's people who are rivals we spy back and forth with, like china and russia, and batshit crazy ppl like the NK dictators. It's not how the perfect world would be, but it is how it is...

[pnwmom]

296. Snowden made it about Snowden when he moved on from talking about US surveillance

to sharing documents on foreign spying with the Chinese newspaper and threatening to release more documents on foreign spying to media around the world.

[bluestate10]

201. Well, you are one of the exceptions. Most of the emoters that I have seen are advocating

what amounts to sitting on their thumbs and letting republicans take charge, as they did in the 2010 midterms. In their minds, that will teach democratic office holders a lesson and somehow usher in a progressive utopia. This poster wonders whether women in some states who are losing their reproductive rights would agree. Or whether jobseekers who can't find a job because republicans in Congress and some states are hell-bent on defeating or stalling any proposal President Obama presents on improving the economy would agree. Or whether deserving college students who will see interest rates on their student loans because of republican intransigence would agree.

None of us get everything we want from life or politicians, there are times when we get none of what we want. But rational people recognize that fights for an optimal state of affairs isn't arrived at after one or two elections. The forces of negativity and hatred are determined, only a determined struggle will defeat them - this is one critical fact that fence-sitters and quitters never seem to grasp.

[Marr]

384. For the millionth time, it was self-described "moderates" who failed to turn out in 2010.

I really wish you'd stop pushing that falsehood that's been disproved repeatedly. Just because you want it to be so, does not make it so.

[Agschmid]

240. Good point.

[dionysus]

291. well that's logical thinking (no pun intended), but others here are not so logical. nt

[MNBrewer]

200. How do you feel about being governed using classified interpretations of laws?

[bluestate10]

204. Most governments in history have done that and are still doing that. There is some information,

that due to it's nature IS NOT suitable for general release. That reality is what fucking ticks me off every time I see a poster talking about "transparency" like every damned piece of information collected should immediately be brought before the eyes of Joe and Jane Sixpack.

[MNBrewer]

212. Classified "interpretations of laws"

INTERPRETATION OF LAWS!!!!!

[stevenleser]

205. I don't believe that is what is happening. I think the article I read that claimed that abused

the truth.

[MNBrewer]

214. Which article is that?

That showed that there aren't classified interpretations of public laws that are being used to run the Surveillance Apparatus...

[DCBob]

252. And they often they just respond with with that "brilliant" retort.. "LOL".

Simply because we aren't ready to throw this administration under the bus. I think many here have gone off the deep end with their pristine and naïve view of what a liberal/progressive is supposed to be. Its starting to remind me of French Revolution where no one was good enough and "off with their heads" until there weren't many heads left to off.

[Whisp]

6. it has. And there is an open invitation for more to come.

and they will because we are now in charge of ourselves. yah, right, like that has shown to work out.

whatever.

[Buzz Clik]

14. It is a point well taken.

Right wing moles are equally protected at DU now -- even those who declare themselves as such. Why would anyone want to be subjected to that.

I'm cleaning up some business with a particular nest of parasites, and I will be gone, too. No one will care, and neither will I. I quit learning new things here some time ago, and I'm looking for something better. I finally found it -- I've registered (not as Buzz Clik , and I am sewing things up.

(This is by no means directed at you.)

[stevenleser]

23. Please pm me with the new spot you have in mind. nt

[Gregorian]

24. please pm me with you new site, as well.

[zappaman]

34. Please pm me with you new site too!

This place is infested with libertarians.
Sad, really.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

42. PM me, please. I am interested in checking out something better. Thanks. n/t

[SidDithers]

44. Post the site when you're ready...

you might have company in your travels.

Sid

[Brother Buzz]

49. Might?

Buzz Clik MIGHT just be leading a parade

[haikugal]

380. Parade or not, I'd like the information as well...

preferably in a pm please as I might miss it otherwise.

[Itchinjim]

59. PM me too!

Thanks.

[MH1]

75. Another looking for a pm.

I think I'd be happier at a site not infested by libertarians.

Although I do know of another site, unfortunately I've gotten comfortable with the way DU works and most discussion board software is fairly sucky out of the box, so I find it hard to get used to other sites.

[Kolesar]

379. Daily Kos just is not organized so well.

In that forum, there actually are discussion forums for topics like energy, but it is not apparent at first glance.

PM me if you hear the new forum.

[redstatebluegirl]

81. Please PM me as well, growing weary of the babble.....

[rufus dog]

136. add me to the list to PM

This place is getting out of control, had my first two alerts this week. I don't post much, put it is damn hard to even read some of the stuff.

[Number23]

150. "I quit learning new things here some time ago" And THAT is the real problem with this place now

No discussion. Just a veritable TSUNAMI of ignorance, hyperbole and just plain flat out stupidity that is enough to make you want to scream.

I don't blame anyone for leaving. I am alternately sad and furious about the many good actual damn DEMOCRATS that have left this board and who were immediately replaced by shrieking lunatics. This place stopped being relevant a long time ago, obvious placations that "it's always been this way" and "it's NOT really an echo chamber" from certain individuals aside.

[Summer Hathaway]

154. It's the "DU is NOT an echo chamber" claim

that amuses me no end.

Posters brag about how many people they have on Ignore, which basically comes down to saying, "I only want to read posts by people who agree with me."

Does that mean these people are operating within their own little echo chambers?

Not at all ... all ... all ... all ... all .... all .... all ..... all ........ all ..................... all.

[Number23]

190. "DU is not an echo chamber" is only slightly less hilarious than the "DUers are so super informed"

posts to me. Just slightly because they are both laugh riots and indicative of a serious lack of self awareness.

[Summer Hathaway]

208. Haha!

I had a reply yesterday from a "super-informed DUer" who had INDISPUTABLE PROOF that the NSA is spying on all Americans.

They provided two links: One to a statement from an actress who told Jay Leno this was indeed the case, and another to a blogger who was convinced this was happening, but had no facts to explain how and why.

Such is the burden of proof now required by super-informed DUers ...

[bluestate10]

210. When one of every fifth OP seems to be written by one of three DU members who seem

to specialize in running around with their hair on fire, while incessantly attacking President Obama and democrats, AND, those posts generate wave after wave of amen chorus addicts who attack anyone that dare disagree with the OP's bullshit, denying that an echo chamber exists is tantamount to shoving one's head into the sand.

[SidDithers]

258. You noticed that too, eh?...

Sometimes, it's informative to sort Page 1 of GD by Start Time, instead of Time of Last Reply.

Often you'll see a poster who has started threads at times like:

9:24
9:27
9:29
9:33
9:39

Now, how likely is it that they've read what they've just posted. Hell, it takes at least 2 minutes to cut and paste, and format a post.



Sid

[Cha]

315. People who claim it isn't an echo chamber are just pretending..plays well to the

crowd.

They want to shut anyone down who doesn't agree with them and then claim there's no echol chamber. rofl

[Union Scribe]

391. The only people I see wanting an echo chamber

are those whining about DU being a "hate site" that's just too too mean to poor Obama. I mean you host a group with nearly 70 blocked members that is the very definition of an echo chamber, so maybe your criticizing others for that is a little lacking in credibility.

[Hekate]

164. Let me know, as well

[Gravitycollapse]

193. PM me as well.

[graham4anything]

206. pm me too

[WestStar]

239. You have just taken a silly thread and made it LUDICROUS!

eom

[Bobbie Jo]

265. And you....

Who are you, anyway?

Welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay!

[WestStar]

276. And just who might you be?

eom

[Bonobo]

231. How incredibly unclassy

Using DU to promote another competing site.

Jeers to you and all your "PM me please!" playmates.

Still, I sincerely hope you find a site that allows you all to stay free and clear of any form of criticism based on Progressive ideology.

[Summer Hathaway]

285. If DU is still, as it claims to be, a "Democratic-supporting site"

why would another "Democratic-supporting site" be considered competition?

Perhaps there are Democrats who would prefer to post on a site that isn't infested with RW trolls who are deemed acceptable, based solely on the fact that they're as anti-Obama as a certain contingent here.

Or perhaps there are Democrats who are tired of being harassed due to their refusal to bow down before the Greenwald/Snowden/Assange holy trinity.

Yet again, it might simply be that the "Should Obama be Impeached?" ads displayed on this site lead some Democrats to believe they might be in the wrong place.

[Bonobo]

287. Bye bye!

Find a nice site that is flexible enough to allow complete reversal of ethics based on which party is in power.

[Summer Hathaway]

288. Actually, there are many Democratic-supporting sites

that aren't flexible enough to allow a complete reversal of their stated ethics by allowing their discussion board to be highjacked by Republicans when convenient.

[Bonobo]

289. Zzzzzzzzzz....

So your "thesis" is that someone like me (and there are MANY like me) have been lyin gin wait for 11 years for the opportunity to hijack this place.

As opposed to the much more elegant theory of mine that there are scores of people that simply like to be on the winning side and whose ethics are merely matters of convenience to be disposed of when partisanship demands.

You make me laugh, Tom.

[Summer Hathaway]

293. I don't know where you conjured up the theory

that my "thesis" about RWers having highjacked this site includes you. But then, I do understand it - the paranoia being what it is around here of late.

As for calling me "Tom" - again I don't know where that came from. Although I readily admit that my real name is not Summer, I can assure you that I am of the female persuasion - and I have one of those vaginas the GOP is so interested in controlling to prove it. But then, controlling a woman's vagina is no longer a relevant topic here - along with everything else those on other Democratic-supporting websites are concerned about.

[Bonobo]

297. Just a line from my favorite movie.

Don't lose sleep over it.

As to your thesis, you said it yourself.

[KittyWampus]

347. I can't believe you are a host. Proof DU's system is flawed in the extreme.

[Bonobo]

348. Whatever, map-chick. You'll go down in history. nt

[msanthrope]

368. "Chick" is a gender-based insult. Kindly delete it, please. nt

[Bonobo]

397. No, because I disagree.

Is "dude" a gender-based insult?

[SwampG8r]

294. i gotta say

I agree I always see super offensive ads when I first come to Du
as soon as I log in they go away
paul ads, Obama must go ads, jeb bush ads
the advertisers who use DU are I believe targeting newcomers with that spammy shite and possibly using it to scare them off
I come to DU most days and don't even log in so I see them all and I really do think we are targeted by the advertising group running our background ads
not to mention the subliminal action for every one of us before we even start posting

[Summer Hathaway]

298. I realize that most DUers

use available software to block ads on websites. I don't - because I think it relevant to see what different websites are allowing to be advertised.

What's curious is that when the "Find your perfect Asian lady" ads were up, many of which were clearly advertising "available" young women who looked like underaged girls, there was a great outcry from DUers.

But the "Should Obama be Impeached" click-through ads don't seem to bother anyone on a Democratic website.

[SwampG8r]

304. i have seen it addressed in ATA

but i don't remember the outcome

[SwampG8r]

403. i agree (someone mark the calender!)

and when I said the subliminal effect before posting I am not kidding
think of it
all of us
from every stripe of the spectrum of the democratic party
from way over there to the left to way over yonder on the (I will be nice)center/right
we all come here ready to defend our positions and before we even get the chance to engage we have seen
2 Asian ladies a paul support ad and 1 impeach Obama ad
that is swirling like an anger stew in the head of every DUer on some level whether we acknowledge it or not
I swear I believe the inspiration for a lot of the vehement statements made on any given subject is whats flying by while we sign in
but I sometimes wonder if the admins have any input into the ads other than "thanks for the check"

[Buzz Clik]

299. Excuse me? What site is being promoted?

I won't miss you one fucking bit.

[Bonobo]

300. I would feel the same way

if you even registered in my consciousness.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

366. I love this subthread. It gives me great hope.

You raise a good point though.

[Bobbie Jo]

398. For what?

That the rabid bullying is working?

Pathetic and childish.

[mn9driver]

232. I'll take one of those pm's too.....nt.

[Agschmid]

238. This list is mostly star members...

Skinner what's going on here lately? I am not leaving but I'm getting sick of just getting called names... There seems to be no decorum anymore.

What can we do as a community to fix this?

[DevonRex]

250. Skinner doesn't give a shit.

Every rule change has accommodated the people who have forced Democrats off "Democratic" Underground. None have addressed the concerns of Democrats who've been stalked right out of here.

[Agschmid]

251. I'd like to believe he does care...

I think as our party gets bigger... and more popular there will be voices of dissent/disagreement but we will use these voices to make positive changes.

That being said... there are some who are truly not liberals and are just disrupters but that is true of any website.

[DevonRex]

253. There is nothing that can be done now. No rules anymore

at all. Just just juries overrun by libertarians and worse. All those rules protecting Democrats and making this a site for Democrats? Gone. Go look. It doesn't even say it's a site for democrats anymore. They even took that away.

[CakeGrrl]

322. Bigger party, yet plenty of "purity" posts here.

There is an obsession among some to continually try to weed out "true" progressives or liberals versus "Third Way", "Centrists", "Neo-Liberals", or those who some blindly and ignorantly label "Authoritarian".



Anyone who seeks to do that is giving the finger to the concept of a big tent here in favor of whittling it down to the echo chamber some so desperately try to reassure themselves that DU is not.

[Skidmore]

325. Heartily agree.

[patrice]

402. We are being exploited. nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

338. When was the last time Skinner posted anything outside of logistics in AtA?

Do you think he even reads this stuff anymore?

[madmom]

369. Another one here who would

like a pm for the site. I get headaches from this one any more, all the attacking each other.

[LadyHawkAZ]

374. I'll take a PM if you're still handing them out

The right-winginess is growing thick and difficult to wade through.

[haikugal]

377. Me too...Thanks

[patrice]

400. I'll miss!! you, but I keep thinking I need to decide too. I would like to find something better.

Please consider letting me know in a PM where you go.

If this place hadn't become what it is due, in a small part, to 10+ years of my membership here, I'd just give it up to these Libertarian hijackers.

[Logical]

47. That is BS. The NSA spying has divided this place but.....

very few are attacking the IRS or Benghazi scandal? If we are all right wing wouldn't those two topics get the same attention.

Just because people disagree does not mean 1/2 are right wing.

This shit is unbelievable.

[Rex]

156. Looks like the real shit stirrers are bored with this place and moving on.

GOOD. We can get back to honest discussion then. Let them leave, nobody will miss them since all they do is disrupt.

[bluestate10]

213. The IRS and Benghazi scandals are scandals that ensnare republicans.

The big time, "pure progressive" posters aren't interested in that, they would rather beat democratic office holders bloody over a ginned up issue about Chained CPI, or Drones killing fucking people who wouldn't lose a minute of sleep if they successfully killed 10,000 innocent people in a single attack. Real scandals or republican obstructionism, that is boring to the "pure" progressives, unless President Obama may have a role, like with the NSA scandal(?).

[Zorra]

108. That's a big problem here. Everything is always about Obama.

I imagine that some will view this post as a criticism of Obama.

If people stop perceiving that everything is about Obama, they will understand that this is not an Obama hate site.

It is a liberal pro-democracy site, where politically liberal people can come together to help effect political and social change.

Mission Statement

Democratic Underground is an online community where politically liberal people can do their part to effect political and social change by:

Interacting with friendly, like-minded people;
Sharing news and information, free from the corporate media filter;
Participating in lively, thought-provoking discussions;
Helping elect more Democrats to political office at all levels of American government; and
Having fun!

After more than a decade online, Democratic Underground still hosts the most active liberal discussion board on the Internet. We are an independent website funded by member subscriptions and advertising, and we have no affiliation with the Democratic Party. Democratic Underground is a truly grassroots community where regular members drive the discussion and set the standards. There is no other website quite like it anywhere on the Internet.

I'm a liberal yellowdog democrat Democrat. I've voted for no one but Democrats in every partisan election since I was 18 yrs old. I despise conservatives and conservatism, and fight them tooth and nail to try to prevent fascism from fully taking hold in our country. Very little of what I post is directly about Obama. It is difficult to impossible to effectively communicate and debate with people who believe that everything that the government does is justifiable and beyond criticism simply because Obama is President.

If people choose to believe that everything is about Obama, and get their feelings hurt when I criticize the NSA, the MIC, the Banksters, the pro-corporate, anti-democratic Third Way, pit bulls, conservatives, authoritarians, republicans, Congress, etc. and yes, *gasp* even the President, that's their right, but i'm sorry, that's just flat dumb.

We try to have discussions about our concerns regarding mass and NSA spying. Every one of these discussions inevitably gets disrupted by posters making it all about Obama, either directly or indirectly.

Maybe DU is simply too progressive/liberal than some would like. Too bad for you. If your intention here is to move the Democratic Party, and our country, further to the right, then, with all due respect, maybe you really don't belong here because you are playing for the RW team.

There's so much more in life than Obama. There's so much more here at DU than just Obama.

I suggest many here consider this possibility.

[stevenleser]

125. Liberalism and Progressivism are ideologies that need to be grounded in fact and reason

We're not like the freepers where an emotion-based knee-jerk response about "teh gays" or "communists" is enough for the community to start moving off in a certain direction with pitchforks and lighted torches in hand. At least we shouldn't be in my opinion. It's fine to be emotional about something, but the facts inform our emotions, not the other way around.

And yet that is how it has been with the NSA Surveillance issue for many here.

As I noted, when one presents an inconvenient fact that seems to contradict some of the prevailing thought, it doesnt slow folks down one iota.

There is very little in the way of thinking, searching for facts and reasoning happening on the "pro-Snowden", "anger at the NSA" side.

It's rather like a mob on their way to perform mob justice. How did Shakespeare describe it? After the speech by Mark Antony: "His name is Cassius! Kill him for his name!!!!!!!"

There is absolutely no reasoning with that crowd. No fact that ought to make them pause slows them down for an instant. In fact, they are openly contemptuous of any cited fact, with backup mind you, that casts doubt on their beliefs.

[Zorra]

159. Maybe if the government put forth a clear, sincere, comprehensive, and acceptable explanation

for its actions, this what you appear to consider wild unsourced speculation by mobs of unreasonable progressives might stop.

Most liberals are intelligent, perceptive, and many are educated, and have knowledge of history, and are aware that highly invasive spying is the hallmark of authoritarian, totalitarian regimes. Often very nasty, aggressive fascist regimes.

Liberals may have a tendency to get over emotional when they are told by those purporting to be Democrats

"You won't have anything to worry about if you have nothing to hide".

Who are the irrational ones in this scenario? I lost my innocence and naivete regarding the nobility and trustworthiness of governement from many hard lessons learned beginning in the Vietnam War era and through to the present. As did many of the other liberals here, who are as concerned as I am about the very real danger of unfettered information gathering by this government.

We are alarmed at the apparent cluelessness of the DU contingent who support unlimited spying on us in our public lives and our daily lives. It has caused many of us to consider that we are dealing with a group of conservative personalities who do not have the intellectual and perceptual abilities to understand, or care about, unrestricted spying on our population. They are letting the wolves in our door. I personally consider them as much threat to my freedom to pursue of life, liberty and happiness as I do the GOP.

After suffering through 8 horrifying, repressive years of the quasi-fascist Bush/PNAC regime, liberals may have a tendency to get over emotional when their privacy is seriously invaded by their government, especially after no effort at a serious, credible explanation for this and other related occurrences has been attempted by representatives of the government.

Well, except for this one:

Transcript Here

I don’t understand why anyone would think that it’s somehow okay for the Department of Defense to get every single one of our call records regardless of who we are, regardless of whether we are innocent or guilty of anything. I venture to say that there are Americans who have never even had a parking ticket; yet the Defense Department is pulling their call records as well. Eventually, we will find out whether the NSA’s own document is misleading and whether the NSA is not pulling email accounts and emails and photos and VoIP calls on people who are Americans, because, if you read this document, it sure looks like they are.

This is not the first time that we have had this problem. This is not the first time that the government has entered into surveillance on people without probable cause. Many of us remember that there was FBI surveillance of Martin Luther King, including the wiretapping and bugging of his personal conversations. I thought, perhaps naively, that we had moved beyond that. In some sense, we have moved beyond that because now they’re doing it to everyone. In fact, one could well say that we are reaching the point at which Uncle Sam is Big Brother.

I submit to you that this program, although the proponents picked it as American as ‘‘apple spy,’’ is an anti-American program. We are not North Koreans. We don’t live in Nazi Germany. We are Americans and we are human beings, and we deserve to have our privacy respected. I have no way to call my mother except to employ the services of Verizon or AT&T or some other telephone company. I’m not going to string two cups between my house and her house 70 miles away. That doesn’t mean that it’s okay with me for the government—and specifically the Department of Defense—to be getting information about every telephone call I make to her. It’s not okay with me.

I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, it’s probably not okay with you, and I know that, for most of the people who are listening to me.

It wasn't OK when the Bush fascists were doing it, and it's not OK now.

[stevenleser]

167. I've explained it and posted the transcript.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022981244

[Zorra]

194. Sorry, bro, your explanation is unsourced; it does not project, or go deep enough

Here's one example:

You:

There is another point that I think we should note. The FISA warrant in question discussed in Greenwald’s article allows the NSA to collect phone records for three months, from April 25th until July 19th. I’m surprised no one has made the obvious correlation to how close the start date is to the Boston Marathon bombings which occurred in April 15th just ten days before. I’m making an educated guess here so you all can determine how much you think this makes sense to you, but it seems likely to me that in the wake of the Boston bombing, someone in the justice department asked the NSA to gather this information with the intent of finding patterns of telephone chatter between as yet undiscovered terrorist cells here in the US who might be discussing the bombing. The timing seems too close to be coincidence.

Congressman Grayson:

Another question is: How far back
does this order go? The order itself is
dated on its face April 25, 2013. One of
the more interesting things about this
order, posted on the Guardian’s Web
site, is that it has no starting date.
Under this order—under the plain
terms of this order—Verizon has to go
and give the Federal Government—specifically
the Department of Defense,
the NSA—all of its call records of all of
its calls going back to the beginning of
time. And this obligation continues
until July 19, 2013, presumably because
the order will be renewed at that point
upon request of the NSA and the FBI.

peace

[stevenleser]

203. It's sourced with multiple Appeals court rulings on the subject and the history. And...

if you check the appeals court rulings I cited, they in turn cite multiple more appeals court rulings that reinforce the point.

Zorra, let's be honest. You can't criticize my reporting and support Greenwald's. The guy did a terrible job. He covered so little of what matters to give context to the discussion.

You cite the one thing in my show that I clearly outlined was an educated guess and you ignored all the other factual information. Does that seem like honest debate to you?

[bluestate10]

215. You're wasting your time. The poster's mind is made up. No fact will change that. nt

[Zorra]

229. It's not about Obama. It's about the seizure of information that can be used as a weapon

to gain enormous social, political, and economic control.

[Zorra]

224. Sorry, but that's a major oversight, making the seizure of the records

seem like a minor temporary inconvenience rather than as a major coup to obtain a dangerous information weapon that can indisputably be used for social, political, and economic control.

This is not about Obama for me.

So, if you're asking for honest debate, you got it.

As for Greenwald's reporting, I'm glad that he passed along this information. I could care less if it was Donald Duck or Edward R. Murrow doing it.

My only interest here is in helping keep my country and planet free from totalitarian control by inhumane wealthy private interests.

[stevenleser]

246. I have no idea what point you are making here. I pointed out the facts in my article

I haven't seen you attempt to dispute any of the points I raised.

[Zorra]

255. In 30 words or less, can you specifically sum up the critical point you were trying to make?

Thanks.

[MNBrewer]

324. Senators Wyden and Udall beg to differ

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/jun/06/context-wyden-udall-letters-government-secrecy/

"We have discussed the dangers of relying on secret interpretations of public laws with
you on multiple occasions, both through correspondence and in person. While we know
that you are generally aware of our views on this subject, we feel obliged to comment
specifically on the Justice Department's recent attempt to seek dismissal of two lawsuits
that have been filed under the Freedom of Information Act and that specifically pertain to
this problem of secret law.

The two lawsuits (filed by the New York Times and the American Civil Liberties Union) seek to obtain about how the United States government has interpreted the text of the USA Patriot Act. specifically section 215 of that Act, the controversial "business records" provision.

It is a matter of public record that section 215, which is a public statute, has been the subject of secret legal interpretations. The existence of these interpretations, which are contained in classified opinions issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (or "FISA Court&quot has been acknowledged on multiple occasions by the Justice Department and other executive branch officials.

We believe most Americans would be stunned to learn the details of how these secret court opinions have interpreted section 215 of the Patriot Act. As we see it, there is now a significant gap between what most Americans think the law allows and what the government secretly claims the law allows. This is a problem, because it is impossible to have an informed public debate about what the law should say when the public doesn't know what its government thinks the law says."

[stevenleser]

329. And they are contradicted by appellate decisions going back to before they were born.

Who universally say the same thing as US v Duggan points out http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/nat-sec/duggan.htm :

Prior to the enactment of FISA, virtually every court that had addressed the issue had concluded that the President had the inherent power to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information, and that such surveillances constituted an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. See United States v. Truong Dinh Hung, 629 F.2d 908, 912-14 (4th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1144, 71 L. Ed. 2d 296, 102 S. Ct. 1004 (1982); United States v. Buck, 548 F.2d 871, 875 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 890, 54 L. Ed. 2d 175, 98 S. Ct. 263 (1977); United States v. Butenko, 494 F.2d 593, 605 (3d Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 881, 42 L. Ed. 2d 121, 95 S. Ct. 147 (1974); United States v. Brown, 484 F.2d 418, 426 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 960, 39 L. Ed. 2d 575, 94 S. Ct. 1490 (1974); but see Zweibon v. Mitchell, 170 U.S. App. D.C. 1, 516 F.2d 594, 633-651 (D.C. Cir. 1975), (dictum), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 944, 48 L. Ed. 2d 187, 96 S. Ct. 1685 (1976). The Supreme Court specifically declined to address this issue in United States v. United States District Court [Keith, J.], 407 U.S. 297, 308, 321-22, 32 L. Ed. 2d 752, 92 S. Ct. 2125 (1972) (hereinafter referred to as " Keith &quot , but it had made clear that the requirements of the Fourth Amendment may change when differing governmental interests are at stake, see Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523, 87 S. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed. 2d 930 (1967), and it observed in Keith that the governmental interests presented in national security investigations differ substantially from those presented in traditional criminal investigations. 407 U.S. at 321-324.

[MNBrewer]

330. You have no idea whether they're contradicted by any of those citations

as you don't know that the content of the classified interpretations is.

And, it appears you're OK with the government running business based on classified, secret interpretations of public laws. I'm NOT.

[stevenleser]

346. Yes, I do, because I read them. nt

[MNBrewer]

357. You read the classified interpretations

[MNBrewer]

399. so when was it that you read the classified interpretations, Steven?

[sabrina 1]

170. No, it hasn't and that is a false, and disgusting claim. DU is what it always was,

a Democratic site that went after Bush for his policies and most DUers have remained consistent on those policies. Democrats, unlike Republicans during the Bush era and not going to ignore the same policies they opposed when Bush was president, simply because Democrats are continuing those policies.

It's disturbing to US to see the flip flopping on issues that during the Bush years, they so opposed. But it's enlightening and it's necessary for us to no longer assume what we once did, that we don't have our extreme partisans also. Now we know. And it is those partisans on both sides I blame for the fact that the situation has not only not improved, but gets worse with each new revelation. This is OUR party and we do not intend to remain blind as Bush's supporters did to what is happening to it.

[stevenleser]

173. Nope, the details and subtleties of this issue are being missed completely.

I explain that all here http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022981244

[Notafraidtoo]

306. Excellent.

You knocked it out of the park for me with this. I never liked Greenwald or Snowden but i was still concerned about the NSA and thought it was a over reach that needed to be fixed, I didn't blame Obama I assumed the role was expanded under the patriot act.

You make a terrific point about the lining up with the Boston bombing,I am still concerned about the power a future president can have with the NSA and i think its sad we cant have that discussion here with out it turning into a anti Obama discussion..Maybe in the future. Also i love the info you provided about the FISA court and for showing that this is yet another fake scandal to attack Obama with. Not as easy to debunk as the IRS or Benghazi ones.

[bluestate10]

189. I don't care. I rather stay and fight it out with the assholes that rip Obama for every

imaginable issue. Some of the people ripping Obama over the economy, SS, the NSA were so joyous when Hollande won in France because he was a Socialist who would change the world. Well, the French economy hasn't improved noticeably, Hollande has his own problem with French intelligence collecting meta data from French citizen's phone calls and emails. AND, France went to war in Mali under Hollande. The situation in France highlights the problem that I have with the Obama bashers, they are childlike in their fucking inability to recognize that the world is a complicated place and even good leaders sometimes find themselves in a position where every choice they have confronts one or more of their strongly held values. President Obama IS NOT President Bush, President Obama has shown a far more developed ability to protect human rights, women's rights, gay rights, all the while improving an economy that was in absolute shambles when he took office. The OP is running from those people with his or her fingers in his or her ears. I don't need a person like that around for a fight, especially if that person is nominally on my side of certain issues.

[MjolnirTime]

354. It hasn't become an Obama hate site. But it is flush with Obama Haters.

They seem to have no other purpose in life.

[medeak]

50. TOTALLY AGREE WITH HIM!

We both came on board in 2004. Have left for years and last few weeks checked in first time in years. Know how this person feels. It was kismet seeing only this post today. DU was an amazing place of progressive journalists who have became well known and others using aliases posting things before anyone in the media knew of such. For news junkies DU was amazing. And if anything was negative there were repercussions. Good luck and there are so many wonderful alternatives now.

[Deep13]

4. Me neither, just habit at this point.

Mentally and emotionally I checked out ages ago.

[flamingdem]

7. Understood. It's a bummer to be attacked for supporting Obama

Then yesterday someone had their post hidden for using the term Snowdenbot.

After all the Obamabot accusations that was revolting. But that's the crowd on DU now.

[Th1onein]

10. We should not use either of those terms.

It does not lend itself to civil discourse.

If the spying is old news, we should do something about it.
If the spying is new news, we should do something about it.
We can't do anything about it if we are busy calling each other names.

[CakeGrrl]

20. There are FAR more that people use with impunity.

Accusing people of protecting, defending, or supporting the "Surveillance State" is an insult designed to shut down discussion.

Snickering that people who haven't joined a thread are off getting their "marching orders" is NOT a sign of inviting discussion. It's a sign that a juvenile clique mentality has taken hold.

There is no real middle ground anymore. "Centrist" is a dirty word. The extremes are taking over, the way they are doing in the GOP.

The tolerance level is low, and this just is an increasingly unpleasant place.

I stay mainly to support people who are routinely attacked for bringing information that goes against the tide of opinion.

[flamingdem]

30. True. That is a nasty accusation and lately it's the marching orders statement

Over and over that is being repeated. It's insulting to Democrats.

If this board is not for Democrats anymore, but for purist leftists who gang up on long term posters, then I'll need to get distance. I keep thinking it will turn around.

I need to feel upbeat enough to get out and participate in the process, that's the great aspect of DU when we're around election time. I love that part of DU.

[justiceischeap]

48. When it all becomes too much for me

I find one of the sub-forums to hang out in for a while. I get to "chat" with like-minded folks about things other than politics. It helps.

[Th1onein]

278. What exactly is a "purist leftist" and what is the problem with them?

In your opinion?

[flamingdem]

280. Intolerance disguised as idealism nt

[Th1onein]

282. That sounds like intolerance, itself, on your part.

This is what I like about purists--they pull the rest of the crowd with them. They are extremists, really, but if they are left wing, the middle moves to the left because of them. Same with the right wingers.

We need more purists, if you ask me. More leftwing purists.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

311. While a 'purist' might draw some people with them, they also repel people away from them

so the question is if they gain more people then they lose.

As of late on DU I'd say that the effect is negative rather then positive due to the inflexibility most of them seem to show.

[Th1onein]

341. Nope. Historically.....

Extremists have always pulled the party from the center to the left or to the right.

I am, personally, a left wing radical and proud of it. You might even call me a purist. I think that the further we get away from our ideals, the more ground we give up, and the further the right we go as a whole.

[okaawhatever]

61. We have to remember that one of the rules/reasons for banning posts is that they

do not vote for Democrats. We should be banning these people. If the administrator won't back that up, we need to ask to change the system.

[flamingdem]

286. I agree but the administration here seems to be ignoring

the aspect of this site that favors democrats. I think the Jurys
should be tilted in this direction and the alerting.

They probably feel that they cannot exclude unless its extreme.
Also, they want the site to be lively, so they encourage controversy.

Not that this is much of a problem here!

[Cha]

317. Yeah, it will be interesting in 2014 to see how well that plays out.. Voting

against Dems.. or not fucking voting at all. that's always a favorite. Expect shiny unicorns by not voting.

If I'm still around.

[CakeGrrl]

8. Can't much blame you

The level of "discourse" is down to middle/high school lately, and it seems to be taking hold.

[Behind the Aegis]

11. That would be sad, but it seems to be trending.

Sadly, it's the wrong people leaving,

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Safe travels

[SidDithers]

13. Can't blame you one bit...

hope you find greener pastures.



Sid

[malaise]

15. Please have a rethink

We need DUers like you

[ZombieHorde]

16. Take care, and know you're always welcomed here. nt

[stevenleser]

17. I wish you wouldn't, but I understand. Part of DU has become hostile to factual and rational

discussion. As I noted above, they have become enamored with the discussion forum equivalent of running around screaming their heads off.

They rarely if ever stop to examine the actual facts involved and if you start pointing out facts, you get logical fallacies (most typically straw men arguments/responses and ad-hominem attacks which often include labeling) and emotional crap thrown at you.

The message is, "How dare you attempt to stop the crazy scream-fest with facts! Bad, spying bad! Obama Bad! Surveillance! Fourth Amendment! Aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhahaha!!!!!!!!"

I can understand how that is tiresome, I really do.

[zappaman]

36. As far as this Snowden thing goes, you are one of the saner voices here.

And I've yet to see anyone dispute your facts, so I just see a lot of screaming about the "end of the American empire" and blah blah blah.
Keep it up!

[stevenleser]

128. Thank you! I posted the other day, those of us on my side are ready to have a reasonable discussion

as soon as the rest of them are ready.

[ucrdem]

19. Don't go still_one...

This summer bedbug infestation seems worse than it is but sooner or later they'll all be escorted back to wherever they came from. Just give 'em time.

[Apophis]

21. Attention-seeking thread.

Yawn. If you're going to go, you go. You don't need to make a big freaking announcement.

These types of threads are hilarious. You do realize some of us are pissed off about the government spying on us, right? Some of us are pissed off because a Democrat president keeps nominating business leaders to high-ranking positions in the government. You either stay and fight or walk away with your tail tucked firmly between your legs.

[CakeGrrl]

22. I could make the same argument for

people who feel a compulsive need to announce they are ignoring others.

PLONNNNNNK!

Oh, the maturity.

To your point, this goes beyond a REASONABLE amount of expression of being pissed off.

What "fight" is there when it comes to a point when minds are CLEARLY not open to being changed to the point of shutting down discussion pre-emptively with name-calling, putting people on ignore, and following people around to insinuate they have mental issues for continuing to post dissenting opinions?

Be honest. That's not an honest 'fight' in any way, shape or form.

[flamingdem]

26. The plonk thing is inane

Like a tantrum. Maybe we should institute an age limit at DU!

[Agschmid]

241. What is this plonk thing I keep seeing?

[flamingdem]

242. A DUer, think it's Backscatter puts people on ignore by responding with "PLONK"

Very lame.

[Agschmid]

244. When I ignore I do it in silence.

... Yup.

[Brother Buzz]

248. It means "Have a good life in my iggy list" according to East County Magazine stylebook

[zappaman]

38. +100!

How horrible to be put on ignore by those that can't even compose a simple coherent sentence.
PLONK!

[sad-cafe]

40. +1000

and more

[Apophis]

53. Nowhere in my post did I mention ignoring the OP.

[RedCappedBandit]

233. +1000

Love the ones who go on to rub it in well after the fact.

Always these same folks who go on about how they can't have a mature debate with anyone. Well, duh.

[flamingdem]

243. + 23830302#1

[BeyondGeography]

27. You're here since January and the OP has been here nine years

I'd ask you to try and have some perspective, but that would be a waste of time, wouldn't it?

[Buzz Clik]

55. +1

[Bobbie Jo]

95. +1

[Hekate]

176. +1

[Cali_Democrat]

188. +1

[Skidmore]

326. +1

[patrice]

401. +1 and that's NOT "ageism". It's about value added to what DU is, or WAS, i.e. we helped build

this board into the economic attraction that it has become, which now feeds itself, the DU, and all of the links being deliberately economically promoted here, Common Dreams, Firedog Lake, and Huff Ho, to name a few.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

60. ^^^ THIS ^^^

Can't take the heat of hardball politics, then hit the bricks.

The less totalitarian supporting freaks the better.

[SidDithers]

65. Amazing how much you've figured out about DU and DUers...

since April.

Sid

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

67. I've been reading DU since 2001

Just ask your totalitarian pals at the NSA.

[SidDithers]

68. Sure you have...

"reading"

Sid

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

70. Don't like it?

Tough

[SidDithers]

72. Zombies don't get banned anymore, you know...

just sayin'.

Sid

[stevenleser]

74. Wonder if its a Zombie or long time lurker from that website

I finally realize what's going in here. All the poison from that other site made its way here. The hair on fire to the infinite power crew is here trying to take over.

[stevenleser]

84. Certain opinions are banned here. If you don't like that, take it up with Skinner and EarlG

Wingnuts and extremists on both sides are banned from DU per the Terms of Service http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

So that argument about "different opinions" doesn't work.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

87. Well then

It seems as my opinions are just fine then, so get used to them.

[stevenleser]

88. Nope, I'll keep pointing out how ridiculous and unsupported they are. The difference is, now I know

why. The opinions have made their way here from that decrepit poisoned tree.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

92. Alert is your friend

Have no clue what site you are talking about.

[zappaman]

227. Whoopsie.

Guess they weren't so "fine" after all!

[Cha]

309. Yeah,

Big Talker.

[treestar]

145. You like to throw the T word around

Your posts are clear examples of the hair on fire brigade. Anyone who has any issue gets the T word thrown at them. You think that means you made an argument ? No. It shied you can't handle disagreement.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

147. What, you got some kinda pseudo ban on the 'T word'?

If you don't like it alert.

Which I know you have been, but apparently my outrage at totalitarian policies are still inbounds on DU, fortunately.

If that bother's you, ignore is your friend.

cya

[treestar]

218. Your use of it is ridiculous

and makes you look hair on fire.

We are not Ts because we don't agree 100% with your (uninformed) take on things. Yet you throw it around as if mere questioning of your opinions puts us in that category.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

155. George Zimmerman wants ‘inflammatory terms’ banned from trial

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014502013

Is that what the word totalitarian is now to some of you, 'inflammatory'?

What others are on your list?

Authoritarian?

neoLiberal?

capitalist?

lackey?

Paul Revere?

???

[Rex]

162. No he doesn't.

Sound familiar?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

165. Yep, I think there is a swarm around me

[stevenleser]

235. LOL, how's that working out for you?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

76. Got over a thousand posts here

Now who you calling a zombie doll face?

[Bobbie Jo]

97. Wow

Quite the accomplishment. Looks like you're in like a flint.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

100. zzzZzzz

[Bobbie Jo]

103. .

[billh58]

121. They always seem to

believe that they're operating under the radar when they resurrect themselves, don't they?

[pintobean]

122. And, making friends

just like the other times. It's always fun when they think they've become bullet-proof.

[zappaman]

132. Heh.

As my good friend Robert says...
"BeFree to be a sock!"

[Bobbie Jo]

141. Hey!

You understand that this post begs for the response....

Better Believe It.

[pintobean]

211. It goes back to the old saying

"the sock is on the other hand".

No, wait...
that's not right,
it was "the shoe is on the other foot". That doesn't seem to apply. Never mind.

[Hekate]

180. I'm so impressed

Not.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

183. wasn't meant to

just demonstrating a valid DU opinion.

[Bobbie Jo]

226. You're demonstrating something, alright.

[stevenleser]

236. Yep, that he is posting beyond community standards. nt

[Buzz Clik]

152. LOL!

zing

[Hekate]

179. Hi Sid. Alerted on Post 60. How much you want to bet it gets let to stand?

Your fellow totalitarian freak,

Hekate

Edited IMMEDIATELY to add:

Is this really what DU has become? posts 60, 69, etc.

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this post at Sat Jul 6, 2013, 04:03 PM, and voted 2-4 to keep it.

Thank you.

YES! THIS IS WHAT DU HAS BECOME!

[SidDithers]

262. Well, I'm totally not shocked that was Left...

Sid

[Hekate]

177. Nasty little buggah

[Corruption Inc]

263. +1

That's true for our entire country as well.

[Hekate]

172. "A Democrat president"??? And where does that term come from?

hmmmm?

[treestar]

220. good catch

funny how that little thing can out them.

[Bobbie Jo]

228. Holy crap.

Geeeeze folks.

[sheshe2]

332. Bingo!

[stevenleser]

174. I almost missed your talk of a "Democrat President" your slip is showing. nt

[MjolnirTime]

355. Bitchy post.

[Apophis]

376. I applaud your witty retort.

[tularetom]

28. Maybe you'll be happier here

http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/barack-obama

[hrmjustin]

29. Wish you the best and I hope you come back after som time off.

[intheflow]

32. Pointless drama queen thread.

If you're going to go, just leave. You don't have to sweep out of the room like Scarlett O'Hara.

[Sherman A1]

45. Precisely

I find these fascinating and while I could very well be wrong, me thinks that the OP is watching every post on this thread.

Like the...... "You don't have to sweep out of the room like Scarlett O'Hara." Well Said!

[pintobean]

133. Sometimes it's drama, sometimes a courtesy.

I think this one is the latter. If you ever decide to leave, I hope you let us know, so we won't wonder and can say goodbye.

[Sherman A1]

178. Courtesy,

can be easily accomplished via PM's, leading one to view this as nothing more than a dramatic exit stage right.

And should I choose to leave it will be quietly with no need to inflate my ego, I will simply be gone.

[Cha]

319. No, still_one has been here 9 years and that's a lot of "friends"

over the years.

many on here do appreciate being told that someone we've posted with in our community through these years is leaving DU.

[Sherman A1]

371. Your opinion,

with which I disagree.

[Cha]

389. It's a fact.. I care and obviously so do many other on DU.

[HappyMe]

52. Kind of like the same

way you dramatically swept in, Scarlett?

[ctsnowman]

62. lol NT

[Apophis]

161. Yep.

[fascisthunter]

217. lol

[NYC_SKP]

35. Hope you stay, or come back.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

39. Don't forget your passport and exit visa and avoid Venazuela Airlines.

[darkangel218]

277. Lmao!!!

[Just Saying]

41. I understand your reasons.

I tend to agree with you but there's another way. Just trash the threads. I tried reading and discussing on what I think are important issues but seeing the nastiness and name-calling directed at anyone who doesn't totally agree, I gave up. I sometimes read the OP but most often I can tell from the title that its just more of the same.

[Logical]

43. For fucks sake. Why do people announce they are leaving? Just leave. n-t

[Skittles]

316. "don't go away mad; just go away"

[pecwae]

323. If someone did that

they might miss all the begging them to stay posts that ensue. Most come back in a couple of days anyway. I always wonder what's going on in their lives that they crave such attention.

[tridim]

352. He's leaving because of people like you who post shit like that.

Get it?

YOU destroyed the best progressive website on the Internet.

Happy?

[Logical]

365. LOL, no whining about the DU. n-t

[tridim]

367. I can't whine about a DU that doesn't exist any more.

You destroyed DU.

Happy?

[Logical]

394. Wow, the whine is strong in you today. n-t

[Sherman A1]

46. Oh,

It's National Fried Chicken Day.....BTW.

[justiceischeap]

54. What do vegetarians do to celebrate that day? nt

[Buzz Clik]

57. midnight...

[Chan790]

91. I like mine with corn flakes. n/t

[madinmaryland]

168. They serve that at the Olive Garden in Manhattan.

[leeroysphitz]

58. You we're always one of the good ones. Never forget that. n/t

[Dragonfli]

64. Sad, but I understand

There are third way sites that applaud all the Republicans in the cabinet and free trade and even double tap strategies to optimize first responder kills. They believe in secret programs and secret interpretations and the post 911 mindset of less freedom for more security against all the terrorists here that need to be stopped at libertarian hotspots like occupy.

It is perhaps where you can be happy and not be so upset by people that have hated those things for 12 years or so....

Best for all of us.

[JoePhilly]

79. How do you know where the OP will be spending their fre time?

Its sad to see DU turn into a site on which "I'm more liberal than you" becomes the dominant style of engagement.

That might be why there is so much complaining about not having enough "true liberals" in office.

Its easy to be pure from the safety of one's keyboard.

Far more difficult to be pure and also get elected, and then get anything done once in office. Once the purity tests kick in, no one measure up.

[Dragonfli]

85. I don't know, I only suggested that there are sites that like the neo-liberal policies

that come under fire here. Many would prefer a neo-liberal site to one that has opposed Bush policies in the past and criticize their adoption by our current President and his largely Republican staff still.

I am far from pure, I am the same moderate Democrat I was in '72. I have changed very little, the right wing infiltration of our party since Reagan however makes me appear less corrupted by the Heritage Foundation and MIC influences is all. Don't worry about my purity, I have been a Democrat a very long time, I just never bought into the Reagan worship thing.

[JoePhilly]

89. How do you know what "many would prefer .. "?

And to be clear, I was not questioning your purity.

I was mainly noticing that you clearly see some democrats, like the OP, as lesser (less pure) of a Democrat than you.

[Dragonfli]

107. Stop putting words in my mouth, by the posters own posts I merely suggested there were more

like minded sites out there. I never said anything about superior or inferior, only differences of opinion. The rest is your own subjective inferences. You appear to wish to turn this into conflict.

I think it's stupid to do so, but if you need to fight so badly, then I'm your huckleberry.

[JoePhilly]

112. Na, you just recommeded the OP go spend

time at a neo-liberal site ... and apparently, you meant that in a good way.

My apologies.

[stevenleser]

90. Neoliberalism refers to economic policies. That has nothing to do with this.

From wikipedia: Neoliberalism is a political philosophy whose advocates support economic liberalization, free trade and open markets, privatization, deregulation, and decreasing the size of the public sector while increasing the role of the private sector in modern society.

From the NY Times:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/neoliberalism-and-higher-education/

Neoliberalism and Higher Education
By STANLEY FISH
I’ve been asking colleagues in several departments and disciplines whether they’ve ever come across the term “neoliberalism” and whether they know what it means. A small number acknowledged having heard the word; a very much smaller number ventured a tentative definition.

I was asking because I had been reading essays in which the adjective neoliberal was routinely invoked as an accusation, and I had only a sketchy notion of what was intended by it. When one of these essays cited my recent writings on higher education as a prime example of “neoliberal ideology” (Sophia McClennen, “Neoliberalism and the Crisis of Intellectual Engagement,” in Works and Days, volumes 26-27, 2008-2009), I thought I’d better learn more.

What I’ve learned (and what some readers of this column no doubt already knew) is that neoliberalism is a pejorative way of referring to a set of economic/political policies based on a strong faith in the beneficent effects of free markets. Here is an often cited definition by Paul Treanor: “Neoliberalism is a philosophy in which the existence and operation of a market are valued in themselves, separately from any previous relationship with the production of goods and services . . . and where the operation of a market or market-like structure is seen as an ethic in itself, capable of acting as a guide for all human action, and substituting for all previously existing ethical beliefs.” (“Neoliberalism: Origins, Theory, Definition.”)
----------------------------------------------------------

That has nothing to do with the NSA. It has nothing to do with a lot of issues of ideology.

[Dragonfli]

99. Surveillance has become big business or are you unaware that Snowden worked for a private firm ?

Also you appear to assume the only thing the poster is leaving over is the NSA controversy, unlike you, I understand the poster is more than a one issue person and I have noted in past posts a great deal of agreement with the center right neo-liberal policies that I oppose.

Neoliberalism is a political philosophy whose advocates support economic liberalization, free trade and open markets, privatization, deregulation, and decreasing the size of the public sector while increasing the role of the private sector in modern society.

That would describe most third way policies, including privatization of schools and Military contractors as well as the privatization of intelligence. Even the Heritage Foundation health insurance bill places insurance companies in a position to receive public money while deciding if they will pay for specific care. Mandated privatization of all things.

I don't know what you are trying to prove, but I think the banks and their appointed lackeys are happy with the neo-liberal policies. Judging by your defense of what you have stated is a "centrist party in a conservative rather than liberal" nation, I just assumed you were a happy old neo-liberal centrist yourself.

[stevenleser]

111. I note that poster just accused you of putting words in their mouth. I'm guessing you dont actually

know a whole lot about them. I think that is probably a pattern regarding the people and things you talk about.

[Dragonfli]

114. where?

[Kolesar]

386. You probably don't know what the Chicago School is

BTW, it is not about the time when President Obama used to be an activist.

[Dragonfli]

388. Milton Friedman school of economics, I know all about his influence on those that felate the 1%

A hero of yours I take it? Third way stealth conservatives like Obama think of him as a god. I am an actual Democrat and believe in economic theories that work, you probably don't know what Keynesian is, BTW it is not a word used by dirty poor people to describe an object that opens a lock, that would be keys.

[Kolesar]

395. You flubbed the definition of neoliberal

sad

[Dragonfli]

396. No

Neoliberalism is a political philosophy whose advocates support economic liberalization, free trade and open markets, privatization, deregulation, and decreasing the size of the public sector while increasing the role of the private sector in modern society.


Lately they have been pimping mandated Insurance corporation control of health insurance (not health care) with subsidies paid to the vultures who then "decide" what to pay for. They have also been pushing real hard for school vouchers and privatization of schools on the government dime, The TPP (secretly being negotiated by mostly corporate advisors), continued deregulation and the concept of paying bankers for crimes while stepping up austerity on the public the banks screwed over. All good stuff if you are into that sort of thing, Bill Clinton was a good neoliberal and Obama is giving him a run for his money.

The latest big neoliberal cash cow is the now doubled NSA funds that are spent largely on multinational corporations that "contract" for the right to administer and develop the spy systems being used. A natural offshoot I suppose of the corporate cash cow that is the MIC.

They are the money corporate faux Dem part of our big tent party where money is everything, they have several websites but this one is my favorite as it always let me know months ahead of time what crap Obama will be supporting. http://www.thirdway.org/subjects/3/publications/709

[cyberswede]

80. Maybe just take a break?

The cuckoo stuff always winds down eventually...till the next time.

[ucrdem]

86. Great idea. To all who are thinking of leaving. . .

please reconsider. Even if you just stick around to rec a few threads and do jury duty now and then, right now there are roughly ten "Libertarian" recs to every non-troll rec so every poster counts!




p.s. hey don't light my flag on fire

[RavensChick]

104. I agree.

We need to get back to what this site is about--Democratic! Whether you're black, white, gay, straight, old, young, progressive, liberal, it does not matter. I come here to read a few posts every now and then and I've noticed the changes too.

Okay. We can all agree that President Obama has not done everything on our wish lists and he's deep in his 2nd term right now, but think on this: We could have had Mittens elected and we would have been fucked up for sure! Think about that.

I'm just as sick and tired of the rethugs keeping a major stranglehold on our country in Congress as everyone else. Hell, I work in DC and every time I pass by the Capitol I want to yell "Get your act together and grow the fuck up!!!!!" at them. But, I keep my mouth shut, I walk to the Metro station, get on the train and head home.

So, we can counter the trolls and "Libertarian" recs that you're talking about and in time, hopefully and prayerfully, DU can get back on some positive footing as opposed to the direction we're going in right now.

[ucrdem]

149. thanks RavensChick. . .

I know this is a bit off topic but if you haven't seen White House Down and have any patience with big noisy blockbusters I'll bet you might like it... I saw it yesterday and it was better than I was expecting. The politics and plot are pure late night DU, but the characters all live and work in DC. And for a summer action flick it has a lot of



Of course, it's ultimately all pretty silly, but still a lot of fun, in case you or someone you know likes that kind of thing!

[RavensChick]

202. You're welcome!

I heard the reviews aren't all that great but I'll wait until the DVD comes out and then I'll see it.

[99Forever]

83. Leave or don't.

That's a personal decision. That you think you must announce your departure, says more about you than you might believe.

[Bobbie Jo]

102. ...and what might that be?

[Summer Hathaway]

113. The OP has been here for almost a decade

and has made many friends here during that time.

It is not the least bit unusual for someone leaving a website (political or otherwise) to say their farewells, which gives those who want to stay in touch with them an opportunity to send a PM saying so. Email addresses or phone numbers can then be exchanged, so that friends stay connected.

The fact that you don't understand that speaks volumes about you - along with the fact that you found it necessary to post a snot-nosed reply in a thread you obviously think is irrelevant.

[99Forever]

139. Whatever you say.

[CakeGrrl]

261. Graduates of the Greenwald School of Civility?

Check out some of his tweets. He's been a real snark jackass of late.

The tell that he has readers around here is the overuse of the "Surveillance State" label.

[Cha]

320. Actually, it verifies just two things for me.

that it thrives on nastiness and doesn't have a fucking clue.

[sheshe2]

337. I wish more people would get a

clue...

It's one a the reasons I stopped watching CNN more than a decade ago. They were like a dog with a bone between its teeth. Bite down and hold on!!!!! They had a story and damned if they would let it go....

The news was 24/7 of breaking news, remember Natalee Holloway?

Natalee Holloway
Natalee Ann Holloway was an American student who vanished on a high school graduation trip to Aruba, a Caribbean country within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Wikipedia

I am sorry that the woman died, however

It was...CNN Breaking news headline~

Natalee Holloway said.....
was......
should have....
could......
found dead....
still dead..
update, correction, presumed dead....
to close to call......

Over and over 24/7 on and on ad nauseam! No other news from them. It was wash, rise, spin...recycle.

Sound familiar, Cha~

Yup. One only has to go to DU's front page. Then to the greatest on GD.

[BlueJazz]

96. I want you to change your mind. We like you...and care.

[99th_Monkey]

101. I don't blame you

I doubt if there are very many websites that are being more closely
scrutinized about now.

Let me know if you happen to find an alternative that is more suitable
for conversing without pretending to genuflect to our corrupt government

[RavensChick]

110. Please read my previous post.

I understand how you feel, but don't abandon DU altogether. Check back when you can.

[ucrdem]

118. Wait, you just got here. This is your very first post.

Well, namaste, then!

[hrmjustin]

119. You joined Du today to knock it?

[ucrdem]

124. ave atque vale

hail and farewell

[hrmjustin]

126. Well at last that one departed our presence.

[ucrdem]

127. Fast, too.

Guess s/he wasn't kidding.

[hrmjustin]

129. I have a feeling that one will be back.

[stevenleser]

138. See #130. That didnt take long!

[hrmjustin]

143. I guess that didn't take long. Must have been a cave member.

[RavensChick]

207. Thank goodness!

[L0oniX]

219. I really miss grave dancing.

[freshwest]

312. Some wait until they get a few more posts. In fact, lots of posts...

[HockeyMom]

120. Join Free Republic

If that is more in line with your thinking.

[Summer Hathaway]

137. That seems pointless.

If the OP wanted to converse with Freepers, he would just stay where so many of them are posting these days - which would be right here.

[Art_from_Ark]

327. We even have at least one resident "former" freeper

who has attracted an admiring crowd.

[otohara]

260. Uncalled For And Untrue

This is what happens when you hang out in the gungeon too much.
Battle Royal mentality.

[Cha]

321. that's just gratuitiously nasty.

[quinnox]

131. anyone who finds a discussion forum unpleasant and not to their liking can (and probably should)

move on. I have always thought that. If someone is hating DU or finding it disturbing, why would they hang out here? So I respect that choice.

What I don't respect is attempts to make duers feel guilty about having strongly held opinions that they happen to vehemently disagree with, or make out like it is their fault someone leaves DU, by a certain contingent of hard core devotees. Everyone on DU is free to have passionate opinions, and if you can't stand the heat, maybe it is wise to leave the kitchen. But changing the "kitchen staff" (excuse the clumsy analogy) to only allow those who agree with you is a terrible idea and no solution at all.

[think]

135. Best wishes on any decision. But hopefully you'll stay. There is no other site like DU

and though it get's heated here in the end most are united in keeping the Republicans from gaining power and further fucking up this country.

It is sad to see anyone decide to leave due to inner party strife but it is not hard to understand either. Emotions run high on some important issues and that makes it difficult for all to enjoy discussions ina civil manor sometimes.

Take care and please reconsider!

[stevenleser]

142. I would encourage you to stay instead and put the hair on fire crew on ignore for now.

If the factless emoting continues I will do it myself. THere are about 30-40 worst offenders to put on ignore and then hide the topics NSA and Snowden and Surveillance

Then DU will look as before

[Agschmid]

257. I'm so close to keyword hiding Snowden...

But also afraid to be uninformed on some level.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

146. Hmm. Just read through all this, and am hoping it doesn't become a stampede.

The problem with the Internet is the same as in politics in real life: the extremists can always point at the saner folks and accuse them of not being truly, well, whatever. Over on the right that results in the Tea Party; over here it's the Chavez and now the Snowden cult, populated by mostly the same people. It's the left wing version of waving the flag and demanding loyalty, hence the lack of facts and the use of ridiculous hyperbole and appeals to emotion and authority, all of which are meant to get around having to argue the actual facts. Eventually the extremists take over. It happens over and over again on forums I've been to. Other forums I go to aren't related to politics, so the extremism of the politics winds up being confined mostly to the politics section of those forums, where over time that section will wind up dominated by one or the other side of the debate, and then after that drift towards ever more extreme versions of that.
This is a politics forum, so here the extremists are everywhere. It's a tough dynamic to get control of once it gets going, and liberals are always at a disadvantage no matter which version of extremism is being advanced since by its nature liberalism is based on advancing facts rather than ideology, and advancing justice in the face of ideology when necessary.
One excellent example from the Latin America group: I have taken careful note that, for instance, using Human Rights Watch as a source is just jim-dandy if you're talking about Guatemala, but makes you a neocon dupe if you're talking about Venezuela. Ideology, for an extremist, trumps facts, always.

[pintobean]

148. Goodbye still_one

Best wishes.

[brush]

157. What's the reason?

[Rex]

160. Extreme poutrage that other people have an opinion.

nt.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

163. The worst of all time was when they started calling DUers racist that didn't agree with them

it was the lowest i've ever seen in all my years reading DU, at least right up there.

[Rex]

166. Yep, hopefully they will leave and go find another site to call them racists.

The RAH RAH crowd can all jump off a cliff for all I care. They don't actually want to debate the topics. You are either a 100% Obama supporter or you are an enemy of the state. I am sure their is a site for their binary thinking.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

171. I'm with you

They are bad for DU, and imho, bad for our country... DU has a stellar tradition of standing against these totalitarian policies and they somehow think that will change just because we have a dem in office who promised us one thing, then did another.

please, they need to grow the hell up, and stop interrupting the adults who are talking.

[Rex]

182. What person with common sense would trust anyone else 100% of the time?

That is a recipe for failure 100% of the time.

[Number23]

191. Quite the crowd you're running with now.

[Rex]

192. You haven't left yet?

Please I run with no crowd, unlike you.

[Number23]

195. What a bizarre response. But considering that in one thread you are the main one cheering the Pres

(if that's what the rest of the thread is doing) and then in another, you're one of the main ones tearing him down (if that's what the rest of the thread is doing), there's nothing at all surprising about seeing your posts lack coherence, reason or even consistency.

[Rex]

196. Yawn, once again you have nothing to say.

Go hang out with your Usual Suspects, you are always a waste of time.

[Number23]

197. Coming from you, that is the highest compliments. See you at the next thread

Going along with the crowd. As usual.

[MjolnirTime]

358. Why don't you clowns just reopen the Old Elm Tree? That's where you belong.

A pond of the most bitterly acidic Obama hate.

Oh wait, I forgot. There's are so few of you in reality, that you cannot even financially support a home for yourselves.

You have to come stink DU up.

[Cali_Democrat]

186. Hmmmm

What about the folks that say:

- Welcome to my ignore list, you quisling. PLONK.
- Stop worshipping The Dear Leader.
- You are paid to post.
- You are an authoritarian
- You love the surveillance state
- Obama could strangle a puppy and you would still support him.

I could literally go on and on.

That's not stirring shit?

[Rex]

187. Well I guess you can alert on those posters instead of creating a GBCW

thread. Plus I know the OP will be back.

[stevenleser]

237. Looks like they did! ROFLMAO! See you in the next thread!

[Cali_Democrat]

175. I wish you would reconsider

Take a little break and come back later.

A little rest and relaxation never hurts.

[MineralMan]

181. I get it.

Be well.

[bluestate10]

184. Don't let the door hit you in the ass my friend. If you give up because other people contest

your beliefs, DU is better off without you.

[SMC22307]

264. I'm not familiar with still_one, but maybe he or she is leaving...

because of rude comments like yours. Maybe it's not so much disagreement in beliefs, but how those disagreements are presented.

[Honeycombe8]

274. True. nt

[Hekate]

185. So damn many pointlessly nasty replies. Says SO much about what DU has become.

What a come-down for a once-significant site.

[Kurovski]

273. Hekate, you've been here long enough to know this is how a farewell thread goes.

I agree that we fight more over issues because we now have a Dem Pres, but farewell threads have always had "fond goodbyes/please stay" as well as "Door/ass/don't let hit/on way out"

It's like a template.

[applegrove]

199. Just take a break. The DU morphs into something over time. So do we.

[zeeland]

209. You leave, the increasingly obvious divide and conquer gamers chalk one up. n/t

[bluestate10]

216. I agree. nt

[stevenleser]

234. Yep, as I said, best thing to do is place that crew on ignore and hide terms like NSA, Surveillance

and Snowden. Do that for 3 months or so. They will get tired talking about it, then take those folks and the terms off ignore.

[Agschmid]

266. Ignore check... just wondering...

[stevenleser]

305. You are not on ignore. nt

[Agschmid]

342. Phew!

[flamingdem]

267. I agree

Oldest tactic in the book.

[fascisthunter]

221. get over it

[LWolf]

223. It's been a long time

since I've seen an authentic "Goodbye DU" thread in GD.



I gotta tell you though, you're no Walt Starr.

I bear you no ill will, but I miss Walt.

[senseandsensibility]

254. Tombstone me Skinner right ##@@%% now!!!!

Okay. Those were the days, my friend.

[Art_from_Ark]

328. That was a priceless OP to be sure

[flamingdem]

225. ** This by Hekate says it all

Post # 185. So damn many pointlessly nasty replies. Says SO much about what DU has become.

If there is a way to reign that in we'll be taking the lifes blood away from those who would use this site or wreck it by making it unbearable.

[siligut]

275. We have moles

And they make DU suck.

[flamingdem]

279. I've been on so much lately I see the pattern better

50-900 posts
1000-200 posts

and nasty

They try to draw one in at first with short quips and then turn nasty
I think part of it is to waste people's time
The upside is that they bump posts!

Anything else to be aware of?

[siligut]

283. "COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum"

"There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'

Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.

Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com ) is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'

Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.

Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favourite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.

Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.

Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes."

[flamingdem]

284. great! what the doctor ordered

for DU's current configuration, thanks

[freshwest]

313. There it is. Bookmarking because of this post.

[Bobbie Jo]

349. Technique #2 in action

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3187118

[zappaman]

387. Indeed!

[Trajan]

230. Whenever I consider leaving ...

I just leave, and stay away, for as long as I need, then I come back, if I want to ...

Then I get disgusted again, and consider leaving again ...

Wash, rinse, repeat ... What's the big deal ? ...

[sagat]

245. That's understandable.

This place is on the level of Natural News, nothing but hyper-emotional shrilling against imaginary tyrants.

[stevenleser]

247. What you actually did with this is show that the DU community has started to recognize that

the way some folks are engaging in discourse is beyond community standards. Several folks on one particular side of this issue have gotten their posts hidden. I find it not at all surprising that those posts are from that one side.

[blue neen]

259. Yes.

IMHO, that discourse is not being done randomly or by accident. Those who are pushing the envelope seem to want to drive any dissenting or even undecided DU'ers away, whatever the topic du jour. Maybe they should be careful what they wish for...they will soon only have each other to "PLONK".

[Bobbie Jo]

269. There's already been a failed experiment

related to the concept of heaping a group of serial disruptors in the same space:

http://www.oldelmtree.com/

[flamingdem]

270. I feel like I'm visiting Pompeii over there!

[Bobbie Jo]

271. Right?

[flamingdem]

272. The survivors had to migrate somewhere..

wonder where!

[dawg]

249. I would encourage you to take a week or two off and then come back.

Despite you being on the "other" side from me in the latest round of DU feuding, I think we all *belong* here and each voice contributes to better understanding.

Over the years, I have noticed that some of the DU'ers I argued with the most have ended up being my staunchest allies twelve months down the road. People change, issues change, and sometimes our own perspectives even change.

[struggle4progress]

268. .

[stevenleser]

281. I'm discussing with OP (in regular email not DU mail) and trying to convince them not to go.

I'm recommending to him that he put the terms NSA, Surveillance, Prism, Snowden and National Security Agency in his thread trashcan, and I gave him the name of a couple of dozen DUers to put on ignore.

Then I did as I recommended that he do. There is no point in discoursing with people who have no intention of looking at the facts.

[Summer Hathaway]

290. With all due respect, Steven ...

... and I do indeed have a lot of respect for you, BTW - you are recommending that a band-aid be applied to a festering wound, with a well-meaning admonition that just ignoring the infection that has already set in will magically result in a cure.

[stevenleser]

303. It's more of a temporary amputation that is then put in deep freeze with the hopes that one day

the infection can be cryogenically cured and the limb reattached.

I have no idea if that's possible, and to your point it might not be, but I have hope!

[Summer Hathaway]

307. I admire your optimism for this site

but mine ran out a long time ago.

[spanone]

308. thinking the same........

[Cha]

310. Nooooooooo! I think DU needs your

voice, still_one. But, I absolutely understand your wanting to say "goodbye". And, I'm glad you're telling us.. but, I do hope you come back when the pendulum swings out of the 7th circle of hell.. you know it will.

Mahalo for all your posts over the years, still_one~

[LeftishBrit]

318. Sorry to hear that.

I have always liked and respected your posts.

Perhaps you could just take a break for a while and not leave altogether? I do think that right at the moment, DU is more combative and quarrelsome than usual.

[liberal N proud]

331. Completely understandable since this site has been overrun with hate and vitriol.

I have found myself turning from DU more and more.

If I leave, it will be quietly and unannounced.

[DCBob]

335. Its really weird how so many have turned on the President and on Democrats on this Democratic site..

and while they are busy focusing their anger on Obama and various issues of questionable importance, the GOP is feverously working to take away womens rights, voters rights, minority rights, gay rights, worker rights, etc, etc, etc.

I don't post much anymore since I just get bashed for anything other than the accepted group think.

[liberal N proud]

344. DU has been invaded IMO

Once, one could trust information here, if posts were not factual or pro Democratic, it was shut down. We used to concentrate on issues to further the Democratic values while preventing tactics of the right.

Some blame the fact that we have a Democratic President that we have changed our focus, I think the change started with the jury system, it allowed a group to control the message and attack those they do not agree with. That would be OK had there not been an invasion of users who want to literally force their agenda on the rest. Seems almost like trying to talk to republicans.

[Bobbie Jo]

350. "Seems almost like trying to talk to republicans."

You hit the nail on the head.

Because they don't need facts, they KNOW what they know.

[DCBob]

362. I think its a combination of invaders with ulterior motives and...

DUers who cant deal with the political complexities and necessities and compromising that is required to govern this nation.

[liberal N proud]

378. Inability to deal with complexities and compromise is a right wing trait

At least that has been my experience.

[tridim]

363. Totally agreed, the jury system sucks and we need unrec to balance out the organized recs.

I also wish the pizza-worthy rules were enforced as they were before the jury system.

[BumRushDaShow]

334. Understand your predicament

DU has been infested with an insidious crew of malcontents. Essentially, Skinner has lost control of his site with the change from DU2 to DU3, by deferring to a jury system that can and has been gamed. I have seen overt ad hominem attacks allowed to stand. The jury system looks good on paper and has sortof worked for the most part, but lately, it has been weakened as more extreme members run others off and take over the juries. IMHO, there probably should be a stronger moderation or at least an appeals system.

On DU2, I must have had 4 pages worth of ignored posters and over time, probably 3/4 were eventually tomb-stoned. Now I have no ignores but I expect that will need to change.

I recall a few years ago when a number of loyal DUers made an exit (e.g., NanceGreggs) because of similar extremism. The discourse has gone from amazing and thought-provoking essays to swarming anti-Obama subject-line heckling, nonsensical name-calling, overt flame baiting, and a full-on assault against the "Democratic" (with a big "D&quot Party in the name of supposed "democratic" (with a little "d&quot discussion, although the so-called "discussion" is littered with hate-filled rants vs comparing/contrasting opinions.

[flamingdem]

373. +1

thanks for your compliment on the Pro Shout out thread!

Maybe these shout out threads and threads like this one will help? Hope so!

[MrMickeysMom]

339. This really is where we separate the grown ups from the children, still...

So, because Obama is called to task for something of this high magnitude, you no longer think DU represents "Democratic (persons) Underground" ??? Good God, I sure do. I think we're likely to evolve because of what we are willing to point out with a little "d"!

I'm sure you'll take a vacation. I would never want you to, "leave", but I certainly would think that TO leave, indicates that you thought this here little thing we call DU has no room to see any emperor without his/her clothes.

Think of what the Democratic platform should stand for while you're on vacation, will you? Best of luck... MMM

[City Lights]

351. Adios.

Hope you enjoy your time away from DU.

[tridim]

360. Bringing "unrec" back now would be a very good idea, management.

Good Democrats are leaving this once great progressive forum.

Hello, Skinner?

[polichick]

361. Haven't been around for awhile - what did I miss?

Take care still_one!

[great white snark]

372. Well shit.

I don't blame you...I hate what DU has become. No more real issue discussion and the amount of vitriol has turned me into a pissed off Democrat who now responds in kind. Unions, women's rights, gay rights, voter fraud, immigration-nada nothing no discussion.

What would Andy or Kephra (I'm older than I look) think of DU now?

I'll end by asking you to stay. Please.

[Union Scribe]

392. Take a break.

Everyone needs a break now and then, but few can ever really leave DU. It's like quitting smoking...crack.

[AtomicKitten]

393. You will be missed.

I hope you take a break and reconsider. Cheers.