African American
In reply to the discussion: Bernie Sanders and the Peter Principle [View all]Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)The context here is that I made an assertion, you belligerently demanded details, and I provided you with a link. That means that the link was responsive to your question. It doesnt mean that I was propounding every conceivable argument that might have been supported by that link. Your post is full of attacks on things I never said.
For starters, I wasnt claiming to be a victim. To bolster my assertion that there has been supporter misconduct on DU, I pointed to one example (as per your request). To clarify, I didnt feel personally victimized by that exchange. To the contrary, I thought it reflected very badly on the DUer who so openly tried to suppress all criticism of his or her preferred candidate. Having pointed out that foolish attitude, I felt free to go on criticizing. Im obviously not alone, as Clinton and Sanders have both come in for frequent criticism here, with a little left over for Chafee and OMalley (and even at least one potshot at Lessig).
The reason I mentioned the first link is that I was giving you the context the sub-thread in which you could find the answer to your question. Context is sometimes important. I linked to the post where the sub-thread began.
You assert that much of the criticism of Clinton is not actual criticism, its debunked bull.... Ive seen criticisms of Clinton here that I thought had no merit. So what? That wasnt the point. The point of my post wasnt that all criticisms of Clinton are valid; it was that Clinton supporters all too often state or imply that no one on DU should be criticizing Clinton about anything, as in the final link I gave you (post 67 in the other thread).
You write:
Well, more precisely, it would smack of petulance if I had actually said that. Which I didnt. See, when you use quotation marks around "mean to you" in a context like this one, some readers will think you were quoting me verbatim. Which you werent. I didnt whine about meanness; I merely provided the answer to a DUer who asked 'You've been told' that .... here? Or in the HRC group? By whom?
You write: Most of the accusations about Clinton are from bullshit sources and they do carry GOP water. I disagree. Most of the accusations on DU about Clinton are that shes too conservative. Do you expect the GOP nominee to attack her over her vote in favor of the Iraq War, or her opposition to reinstating Glass-Steagall, or etc. etc. etc.? No, those criticisms here are not going to show up in Republican ads. (Compare, BTW, Clintons famous 3 a.m. phone call attack ad against Obama, which McCain was happy to pick up and run with in the fall. That was an example of carrying GOP water.)
Theres also been some (although less) nonideological criticism here, such as people pointing out respects in which Clintons much-discussed email handling violated best IT practices. (Im not sure of the details because I dont see this as very important and I havent paid much attention to it.) Its true that Republicans are likely to make that charge if Clinton is the nominee. But theyll do that regardless of whether theres a code of omerta on DU that says we mustnt mention it. The Democrats general-election prospects are enhanced if every prospective nominee goes through a vetting of this sort now. Let Clinton and her supporters develop their best answers, sound bites, etc., now, and if they cant handle the attacks (about emails or anything else), let us find that out now.
You complain a lot about treatment of Clinton supporters. Ive looked at a handful of the hidden posts on the transparency pages of PPRd Clinton supporters, and I saw some hides I agreed with and some I disagreed with. Ive also seen bogus hides of pro-Sanders posts. You apparently see no vice whatsoever in your allies. Well, youre entitled to your opinion, but I adhere to my opinion that none of the top four Democrats has supporters who are all good or all evil. I admit my bias here, arising from my preconceived notion that the real world usually doesnt shake out into nice neat categories.