Reply #819: One recent example I do not understand is the Jon Stewart thread.

[Jamastiene]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x350144

Yes, Jon Stewart did say "What happened to Barry on the block?" but the context was in reference to President Obama as a younger man, who was more hopeful about what can be accomplished. It was not meant in a racist or insulting way, in that context.

Yes, Jon Stewart was critical of President Obama, but he is a satirist. Most people understand that satirists are critical of every administration.

The fact still remains that it was humor.

Yes, there were rule violations in that thread, but most of them were deleted.

While it was definitely critical of President Obama, I don't understand how it could have been viewed as over the top. It was humor, just humor.


Also, you asked what other framing you could use beside "pragmatist vs. idealists." I have an answer for you: just admit that some Democrats are more conservative than others. Neither side of that divide consists of 100% pragmatists or 100% idealists.

One example of that is DADT.

Some of us believe DADT was a compromise with the Republicans during the Clinton administration, a compromise that failed. Our side believes DADT should go and gay people should be allowed to openly serve.

Some actually believe DADT should stay and that gay people, who are openly gay, would make some straight soldiers uncomfortable.

That is just one example where neither side could be considered "pragmatists" or "idealists."

It is a fact that gay people serve openly in lots of other countries. There is nothing idealist about believing maybe America needs to catch up with the times before we fall behind the rest of the world. There is nothing pragmatist about believing gay people should remain in the closet. Those of us who have military families already know that there are lots of gay people already serving. Most people at the soldier level know it and really could care less. It's the brass, the higher ups, the officers, that get all up in knots about it.

While there may be some in our military who are outright homophobic, to say that gay people are idealists for wanting the right to openly serve because of those certain members of our military who are homophobic is to write our ENTIRE military off as homophobic, which they most definitely are not. It also writes off gay rights to continually say wait, wait, wait, when this issue is NOT an issue in most of the free world.

That is only one example. There are tons of others. Calling one group that wants to compromise with the Republicans, "pragmatists" and calling the rest of us "idealists" really is insulting to those of us who disagree with giving in to the Republicans. DADT was pragmatism and we now see it wasn't a good idea.

If you want to call it as it really is, just admit that some Democrats are more conservative than others, take "the left," "liberals," and "progressives" out of the About DU page and be honest about the new direction DU is taking, because it is definitely a rightward direction.