Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 03:49 AM Jan 2014

I "Fuck"ing support Will Pitt!

His post calling out Obama for using a vet as a prop was right and I support his guts for telling the truth. He's taking a lot of flack for standing up for what he believes and should know that he's not alone in thinking that our vets deserve better.

223 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I "Fuck"ing support Will Pitt! (Original Post) last1standing Jan 2014 OP
Even if I disagreed with Will I would stand with him. grasswire Jan 2014 #1
I'm with you 100%. I don't always agree with Pitt, he runs with his gut, on this his gut is right. Ellipsis Jan 2014 #2
yep reddread Jan 2014 #117
Free Speech is about Govt Intervention .....nothing else... VanillaRhapsody Jan 2014 #157
I stand with Will, even though I disagree with him on this. Scuba Jan 2014 #84
I agree. That is the "cause of the day." LuvNewcastle Jan 2014 #87
Including people who expressed an "opinion" when they never watched the SOTU VanillaRhapsody Jan 2014 #156
Thank you! Octafish Jan 2014 #98
I'm with Will Pitt. n/t Aerows Jan 2014 #135
Many across the Internet agree, but geek tragedy Jan 2014 #3
Your scruples are showing. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #4
Because I disagree with the Freepers? nt geek tragedy Jan 2014 #12
So, you will cede all power to the Freepers to think for you. stillwaiting Jan 2014 #90
Did you agree with them when Bush used the troops as props, bvar22 Jan 2014 #127
No answer, no surprise though. This was a very transparent attack on sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #145
The hypocrisy and manufactured outrage becomes more predictable and transparent every day. bvar22 Jan 2014 #180
Are you talking about yourself? LordGlenconner Feb 2014 #220
you got that right Skittles Jan 2014 #13
Reminder of your compassion for Corey Remsburg. geek tragedy Jan 2014 #18
I stand by that statement. Although you will find it difficult... Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #44
No, your lack of compassion for Corey Remsburg geek tragedy Jan 2014 #51
This veteran thinks your statement is shameful. Scuba Jan 2014 #83
I'm not surprised. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #85
You're not indicting a piece of my life, you're indicting your own ignorance. Scuba Jan 2014 #86
Sorry, I can't agree. The war is not separated from the soldier. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #123
Who then objectively determines which specific soldiers have absolute knowledge... LanternWaste Jan 2014 #124
an informative question reddread Jan 2014 #125
Why GravityCollaspe decides what is or isn't an illegal war.. VanillaRhapsody Jan 2014 #160
It's cute you think that I think I decide if a war is illegal. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #195
Any war not authorized by Congress is by default illegal. Gravitycollapse Jan 2014 #191
KABOOM ....right in the kisser! VanillaRhapsody Jan 2014 #159
It be becomes remarkably difficult to shame someone... Gravitycollapse Feb 2014 #196
Another goddamn 3-3 jury tie. And yes, if I explain I ALWAYS sign. Systematic Chaos Jan 2014 #25
Which is it? You're expressing agreement geek tragedy Jan 2014 #42
Yes. Systematic Chaos Jan 2014 #54
"How dare you make an accurate observation geek tragedy Jan 2014 #56
You know, I really, REALLY don't enjoy arguing with other members here. I seriously don't. Systematic Chaos Jan 2014 #66
Obama is about as good as we can do given the structural entrenchment geek tragedy Jan 2014 #68
Fair enough, I suppose. Systematic Chaos Jan 2014 #72
Or, to put it another way... OilemFirchen Jan 2014 #111
People are really enjoying your antics, seriously. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #120
What has been showing is his familiarity with Right Wing sites. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #187
Good find! Cali_Democrat Jan 2014 #7
I repeat: grasswire Jan 2014 #11
Well, I see Republicans as the enemy, not geek tragedy Jan 2014 #38
that's precisely what I said. nt grasswire Jan 2014 #52
Except in this case it's Pitt&Co and the Freepi geek tragedy Jan 2014 #55
take a deep breath grasswire Jan 2014 #57
Is this the part in the manual where you accuse the opposition of being VanillaRhapsody Jan 2014 #162
So why are you supporting Republican policies? And getting your information sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #132
It's called "proving a point" VanillaRhapsody Jan 2014 #165
Um... your example bemoans the fact that more were not "used." He felt the dead were slighted. Luminous Animal Jan 2014 #16
do you think they actually read it? Skittles Jan 2014 #21
He endorsed Pitt's post--moreover geek tragedy Jan 2014 #24
And you dragged FR in here as a non-sequiter? Luminous Animal Jan 2014 #29
No, pointing out that Pitt 's hatefest directed geek tragedy Jan 2014 #34
Nope. You are avoiding addressing the message using guilt by association. Luminous Animal Jan 2014 #50
When leftists who detest the President geek tragedy Jan 2014 #59
Actually in the timeline of reality they echo Pitt and since they hate Will... Ellipsis Jan 2014 #61
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" nt geek tragedy Jan 2014 #69
... Ellipsis Jan 2014 #78
'leftists'. You use the word as if you are not part of the Left. Is that true? sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #141
Give it a rest. pintobean Jan 2014 #142
Was the question directed to you? sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #143
I'll post where and when I want pintobean Jan 2014 #146
And I'll respond whenever and whenever I want to. If you don't like sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #150
Because you do it a lot. pintobean Jan 2014 #155
Do what a lot? Support DUers against right wing type attacks? Yes I do and will continue sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #217
Since I can't see that GT ever came back on this one, I'll venture an interpretation that... TroglodyteScholar Feb 2014 #207
And here you are, defending the usual RetroLounge Jan 2014 #144
And here you are pintobean Jan 2014 #151
Oh, look, you're trying to be cute now too... RetroLounge Jan 2014 #161
EXCELLENT Point yet again geek... VanillaRhapsody Jan 2014 #163
You give so much credence to those hate sites. Why? No one here gives sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #147
So what? Pitt will live. 840high Jan 2014 #189
Freeper: "I have to agree with the DU poster" Cali_Democrat Jan 2014 #36
I don't know what you're talking about. Lost track frankly. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #121
Pitt missed the whole point of the President recognizing Sgt. Remsburg brush Jan 2014 #166
I was waiting to see a post by someone who really understood it. Well done stevenleser Feb 2014 #206
Excellent post. Bobbie Jo Feb 2014 #212
You're stooping pretty low there. cui bono Jan 2014 #65
"The left" is not complaining about Remsburg getting applause at the SOTU. geek tragedy Jan 2014 #67
The applause isn't what the complaint is about. Way to twist the issue. cui bono Jan 2014 #76
"You're stooping pretty low there." NealK Jan 2014 #73
You would think your post leftynyc Jan 2014 #82
Now you're talking, leftynyc brush Feb 2014 #215
I always wondered where you were getting those right wing talking points. sabrina 1 Jan 2014 #116
LOL +1 L0oniX Jan 2014 #119
Well, you know, it's *totally* different when they agree with the Right. Dark n Stormy Knight Feb 2014 #214
So, we have to agree with Obama 100%, or agree with Freepers 100%. arcane1 Jan 2014 #128
What's your username over there, Geek? Scootaloo Jan 2014 #185
You should watch a tape of the address . . . brush Feb 2014 #216
The teacher was also a prop BainsBane Jan 2014 #5
You are talking about the war he's continued for five years, right? last1standing Jan 2014 #6
Indeed BainsBane Jan 2014 #10
I can guarantee I did not vote for Obama in 2016. last1standing Jan 2014 #23
Oh thank dog I didn't have a mouthful of soda as I read this exchange. Systematic Chaos Jan 2014 #30
Lol! NealK Jan 2014 #53
Nor do I BainsBane Jan 2014 #63
Pretty much nt kjones Feb 2014 #197
Nah, many of us would just prefer he had the cojones to do the right thing... Systematic Chaos Jan 2014 #19
Lambasting the rich folks? BainsBane Jan 2014 #27
Well, if we don't affirm yours, we're fucking repukes. Systematic Chaos Jan 2014 #31
Well, you're obviously having your own internal dialog BainsBane Jan 2014 #77
The voices in my head have been silent for a few hours now. Systematic Chaos Jan 2014 #79
I haven't seen Pitt's post - but I do know that the 'prop' meme is a Republican talking point... Tx4obama Jan 2014 #8
Cats have four legs. My dog has four legs. My dog is a cat. last1standing Jan 2014 #17
I'm pretty sure they will not understand your post Skittles Jan 2014 #26
If it doesn't gush about Obama's six-pack they generally don't. last1standing Jan 2014 #33
he does have a fine 6 pack Skittles Jan 2014 #40
If you start writing slash fiction about Obama and Bo you get automatic membership in the BOG. last1standing Jan 2014 #45
me no Tiger Beater Skittles Jan 2014 #62
LOL! Regardless of politics, they are a good looking family. last1standing Jan 2014 #139
Or maybe the people at Fox News and Free Republic geek tragedy Jan 2014 #47
gawd, yet another meme Skittles Jan 2014 #75
And yet you and your ilk have no problem using right wing tactics cui bono Jan 2014 #80
yes, this grasswire Jan 2014 #96
Rude comments? kjones Feb 2014 #198
^^^^^ THIS! You are attacked perpetually for being supportive of the Democratic President VanillaRhapsody Feb 2014 #202
ilk reporting for duty. yes I use right wing tactics when I support the President. Whisp Feb 2014 #208
They also claim to be warm blooded, but tests have proven inconclusive. AtheistCrusader Jan 2014 #35
Indeed Desert805 Jan 2014 #20
It's a lot more complex then a two party system. it's getting caught up in making a point... Ellipsis Jan 2014 #37
Logic fail. NuclearDem Jan 2014 #109
I'm sick of the DUers who think William is trashing our troops Skittles Jan 2014 #9
No, he doesn't hate the troops, just their geek tragedy Jan 2014 #14
more proof of lack of critical thinking skills Skittles Jan 2014 #15
No, he has expressed his personal contempt geek tragedy Jan 2014 #32
LOL Skittles Jan 2014 #39
Nah... there's a lot more to it then that your being too touchy. Ellipsis Jan 2014 #48
"one finds at Free Republic" I wouldn't know. Apparently you do. L0oniX Jan 2014 #122
I know, have you noticed that? They are so very familiar with all these right wing sabrina 1 Feb 2014 #204
"It's a literally visceral reaction of disgust to the President." RetroLounge Jan 2014 #148
ridiculous nt grasswire Jan 2014 #22
. City Lights Jan 2014 #110
Exactly, they are too busy writing in their charts and graphs Rex Jan 2014 #102
I think it's Fu*king support. JohnnyRingo Jan 2014 #28
I'm your huckleberry! n/t Aerows Jan 2014 #152
Post removed Post removed Jan 2014 #41
I do. Ellipsis Jan 2014 #49
More importantly, who cares what you think? quinnox Jan 2014 #60
Same goes for you you. tenderfoot Jan 2014 #64
I know you are AgingAmerican Jan 2014 #70
Oh, right, this needed another thread. MirrorAshes Jan 2014 #43
Thanks for kicking the shit. last1standing Jan 2014 #46
Wow you're itching for a fight aren't you? MirrorAshes Jan 2014 #58
LOL! You start with insults in your first post but I'm "itching for a fight." last1standing Jan 2014 #183
my thought too hfojvt Jan 2014 #74
K&R quinnox Jan 2014 #71
Kicked and recommended a shit load. Enthusiast Jan 2014 #81
Thanks. I just threw up in my mouth again. bravenak Jan 2014 #88
Oh Jesus Christ. Dawgs Jan 2014 #89
For real. Pitt's moronic thread got about 350 recs here but somehow, not enough people are Number23 Jan 2014 #169
+1 kjones Feb 2014 #199
It's interesting to hear about this, LWolf Jan 2014 #91
well said, teach. Thank you. nt grasswire Jan 2014 #105
DU doesn't stand for Drama Underground. berni_mccoy Jan 2014 #92
I support Will Pitt's right to post MineralMan Jan 2014 #93
I think somebody is using that soldier, but it ain't Obama.... nt Adrahil Jan 2014 #94
"Won't somebody PLEASE think of the children...!" kjones Feb 2014 #200
"Martha Coakley will win on Tuesday. Bank on it."... SidDithers Jan 2014 #95
At least he gives an opinion, not merely :thumbsup: and snide comments. last1standing Jan 2014 #184
Yeah, like SFC Cory Remsburg is Cha Feb 2014 #209
Flak from Flaks bobduca Jan 2014 #97
Smoochy, moochy...nt SidDithers Jan 2014 #101
Aww troll kisses so sweet! bobduca Jan 2014 #106
You would know...nt SidDithers Jan 2014 #108
FYI: This post was alerted. 1000words Jan 2014 #175
You made somebody mad, bro. Jury results: Skip Intro Jan 2014 #178
I'll sign this online petition. n/t PowerToThePeople Jan 2014 #99
10 deployments is obscene. Rex Jan 2014 #100
He was injured in 2009, so the blame for the 10 deployments lays at the feet of BUSH. n/t Tx4obama Jan 2014 #133
Oh no doubt it does, how many more extra deployments did our soldiers have Rex Jan 2014 #134
Props and Profits: A Fistful of Clickies: Whisp Jan 2014 #103
It's ProSense Jan 2014 #104
I don't think it's Vets you're worried about here. RetroLounge Jan 2014 #164
No, anyone who says anything against Obama gets 50 links from you. n-t Logical Jan 2014 #182
Will next year be a "Tribute to Hollywood?" last1standing Feb 2014 #213
Are you referring to the thread labeled 'Fuck'? randome Jan 2014 #107
I detest the tactic when the R's do it (they pioneered it under Reagan) & I detest it when the El_Johns Jan 2014 #112
I like Will, but that post was claptrap and nonsense alcibiades_mystery Jan 2014 #113
there are more fiascos than that! Whisp Jan 2014 #138
"24 Business Hours" fiasco" what was that one? Number23 Jan 2014 #172
So ludicrous and embarrassing that it's not worth recounting in full alcibiades_mystery Jan 2014 #174
"We may be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us." Whisp Feb 2014 #201
Sycophants unite! LordGlenconner Jan 2014 #114
I don't think that word means what you think it means. last1standing Jan 2014 #137
Groveling LordGlenconner Feb 2014 #219
LOL! Sounds like you pick out words at random and use them to feel clever. last1standing Feb 2014 #221
This message was self-deleted by its author LordGlenconner Feb 2014 #222
Whiners whine! n-t Logical Jan 2014 #181
We all have our crosses to bear. nt William769 Jan 2014 #115
haha.. one_voice Jan 2014 #167
I support him as a fellow DUer even when I disagree with him. Skidmore Jan 2014 #118
It was disappointing to see so much of the love/hate false dichotomy replies to his post. arcane1 Jan 2014 #126
If there weren't poster like Will I probably wouldn't frequent this website anymore. liberal_at_heart Jan 2014 #129
Yep 840high Jan 2014 #192
DURec! bvar22 Jan 2014 #130
Me too. One of his best articles. K&R Tierra_y_Libertad Jan 2014 #131
I am a sheep bleet bleet! Egnever Jan 2014 #136
All Presidents have used soldiers as props during this speech. It doesn't make it right. alarimer Jan 2014 #140
Is that guy still here? I thought they banned him at least 24 business hours ago. tritsofme Jan 2014 #149
I think it was more as an illustration of the mistakes that are/have been made Warpy Jan 2014 #153
I'll give this thread a warm and hearty '76' rec. Stay the course WP... eom Purveyor Jan 2014 #154
I support WillPitt's right to his opinion justiceischeap Jan 2014 #158
the K and the R.... mike_c Jan 2014 #168
Nicht. lonestarnot Jan 2014 #170
I support the man, but disagree with his post on this matter. riqster Jan 2014 #171
He is not afraid to tell the truth. I am also with Will. glinda Jan 2014 #173
UGH UGH UGH Laura PourMeADrink Jan 2014 #176
I'm very fond of Will Pitt. elleng Jan 2014 #177
I agree. Thank you for posting TBF Jan 2014 #179
I support him about as often as I support Obama. jazzimov Jan 2014 #186
I appreciate your post. Cool heads should prevail. lumpy Feb 2014 #203
A willing prop is still a prop. last1standing Feb 2014 #210
I support him. 840high Jan 2014 #188
Agreed -- but here's a point people are missing . . . markpkessinger Jan 2014 #190
That's very true but I believe there's more in this case. last1standing Jan 2014 #193
Good point! n/t markpkessinger Jan 2014 #194
I fucking support support stockings Whisp Feb 2014 #205
he can be a pompous ass at times - but at the end of the day - I support him Douglas Carpenter Feb 2014 #211
Derp Whisp Feb 2014 #218
I support your right to say what you want to and when you want to on DU. Rex Feb 2014 #223

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
1. Even if I disagreed with Will I would stand with him.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 03:56 AM
Jan 2014

The lessons of the last fifty years should have taught us all to stand in solidarity, to shelter those among us who have the skills and courage to speak truth and seek truth. The enemy of liberty is not Will Pitt. The cause of the day is not Obama's legacy, nor winning political arguments. The cause of the day is pushing back imperialism and corporatism and conservatism and bigotry and economic oppression.

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
117. yep
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:29 PM
Jan 2014

a few back biters looking to earn points they dont deserve should have their credentials questioned.
Not his. And I have bitterly disagreed with some of his mistakes.
I remember when free speech was the most important value this country could hold.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
157. Free Speech is about Govt Intervention .....nothing else...
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:32 PM
Jan 2014

the Govt cannot impede free speech...it is not guaranteed on a political forum...

But you knew that right?

LuvNewcastle

(16,820 posts)
87. I agree. That is the "cause of the day."
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 07:08 AM
Jan 2014

People who spit blood about a reporters opinion on the SOTU address reveal their misplaced priorities, in my opinion.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
156. Including people who expressed an "opinion" when they never watched the SOTU
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:31 PM
Jan 2014

or who just accepted on posters opinion of the SOTU? Because THAT is exactly what happened first...saw that with my own eyes!

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
3. Many across the Internet agree, but
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:05 AM
Jan 2014

I am not part of that bipartisan, Third Way group of people.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3117028/posts

Obama's SOTU use of SFC Remsburg as a prop (vanity)
FR | 1/29/2014 | self
Posted on January 29, 2014 at 11:24:55 AM EST by logi_cal869

I first caught wind of a thread about "the use of a soldier as a prop" less than an hour ago; it's amazing how little interest it's generated, aside from the ad hominem attacks against those that saw it less about 'honoring' SFC Remsburg, than 'using' him.

Late to rise & without coffee, it was easier than normal to not react and I took a devil's advocate stance, looking for fact, as I did not watch SOTU.

Where to go first? Web search came up with little; I went to DU and found this


Conclusion:


"Sometimes we stumble, we make mistakes..."
Frankly, I have to agree with the DU poster, title & all, but have to add my disgust at not honoring the fallen. But that would have drawn more attention to the fact that more soldiers have died under Obama than Bush, wouldn't it?

The soldiers I, & my boy, know, would not have permitted themselves to be used in such a manner without that honor, that of his fallen comrades.

What say you?



Free Republic stands with y'all. Congrats.


stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)
90. So, you will cede all power to the Freepers to think for you.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 09:51 AM
Jan 2014

Your "thinking" will constitute REACTING oppositely to whatever the fucktards in Freeperville think.

That type of thinking could EASILY be programmed into a robot.

Stopped watch and all…

There will be VERY, VERY few times that I ever agree with a Freeper, but there will be a few times.

I think for myself.

Freepers will be against Obama pretty much always. They don't think very clearly. I'll be damned if MY thinking will be a reactive and reflexive gesture based on anything they "think".

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
127. Did you agree with them when Bush used the troops as props,
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:06 PM
Jan 2014

....and was roundly condemned on DU?

I have been consistent in my condemnation of ANY President using our soldiers as props.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
145. No answer, no surprise though. This was a very transparent attack on
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 07:54 PM
Jan 2014

another DUer and everyone knows it.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
180. The hypocrisy and manufactured outrage becomes more predictable and transparent every day.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:58 PM
Jan 2014

It used to be funny,
now just pathetic.

 

LordGlenconner

(1,348 posts)
220. Are you talking about yourself?
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 03:57 PM
Feb 2014

Because based on what I've observed that fits you to a T.

Maybe a look in the mirror is in order.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
18. Reminder of your compassion for Corey Remsburg.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:20 AM
Jan 2014
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3573934

34. If you are injured knowingly fighting an illegal war, that is your fault, not mine...
Just as I would not feel particularly bad for a burglar who injures himself when he falls through a skylight trying to break into a home.

Are there good soldiers out there? Of course. But they are vastly outpaced by the hundreds of thousands of others who knowingly carry out illegal wars.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
44. I stand by that statement. Although you will find it difficult...
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:34 AM
Jan 2014

to find a good post at FR to compare it to.

And it's never quite as effective to equate me with the radical left.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
86. You're not indicting a piece of my life, you're indicting your own ignorance.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 07:02 AM
Jan 2014

Hate the war, not the warrior.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
123. Sorry, I can't agree. The war is not separated from the soldier.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 03:53 PM
Jan 2014

Without the soldier, war would not exist.

If you knowingly fight in an illegal, immoral war, I do not feel bad for you.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
124. Who then objectively determines which specific soldiers have absolute knowledge...
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 03:59 PM
Jan 2014

Who then objectively determines which specific soldiers have absolute knowledge of whether any given war is illegal or not?

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
125. an informative question
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:55 PM
Jan 2014

one of the premiere problems the Democratic Party seems to have (from a lifelong supporter and anti-war/imperialism, pro-peace and justice point of view) is a military migration of victimized soldiers, who, if they know nothing else for a fact, harbor distinct suspicions about the party of Bush and Cheney. As they flock to the blue tent, they bring with them a number of likely tendencies and beliefs which further the militarized agenda within the Democratic base. These are basic psychological conditions which reflect their own experiences, their concern about the safety and respect due fellow service people AND most likely a dyed in the wool belief in the relative moral rectitude of a machine that from other points of view CANNOT behave morally under the control of bought and paid for politicians who work for donors who collect military contracts.
I suppose its simply another Catch 22.
But, if soldiers cannot tell right from wrong, then we might want to give them just a little less say so in making decisions that effect everyone.
for myself, I think they are as capable and responsible for knowing right from wrong as anyone, but may have abandoned that choice through coercion, force or weakness.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
160. Why GravityCollaspe decides what is or isn't an illegal war..
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:37 PM
Jan 2014

I suggest all soldiers contact GC before they are deployed to ensure they are not allowing themselves to fight an GC unapproved war!

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
195. It's cute you think that I think I decide if a war is illegal.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 11:56 PM
Jan 2014

As if it isn't possible to produce a philosophical or legal argument for or against a war that is objectively true.

Were you a big fan of the Iraq war? Did one person decide it was immoral or illegal?

This subject demands critical thinking skills. I kindly suggest you utilize your own.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
191. Any war not authorized by Congress is by default illegal.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 11:48 PM
Jan 2014

Regardless of bullshit arguments to the contrary. From there, we can observe other less obviously illegal but no less immoral wars. Like the Afghan war.

If you don't know such wars are wrong by now, I have to seriously doubt your intelligence. As a soldier, you have a moral obligation to know if the war you go off to fight in is justified.

Are there going to be gray areas? Of course. But the argument that all soldiers are simply following orders, that they are victims of corrupt superiors, doesn't hold up to critical analysis. It's a cop out. And the general public laps it up like a bunch of idiots.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
196. It be becomes remarkably difficult to shame someone...
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 12:12 AM
Feb 2014

With their past statements of they still agree with them. I hold no shame over my comments on the matter. What I said before is what I say now.

If you knowingly fight in an illegal and/or immoral war, I do not have sympathy for you if you are injured. Just as I don't care much if a murderer is injured when killing his or her victim. That is the risk you take when you exit the bounds of what is ethically sound.

Systematic Chaos

(8,601 posts)
25. Another goddamn 3-3 jury tie. And yes, if I explain I ALWAYS sign.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:24 AM
Jan 2014

On Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:08 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Many across the Internet agree, but
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4418790

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is getting ridiculous. You can disagree hugely with Pitt, but it's just low to try left and right to equate him with the scum at Free Republic.

Has some cooth, for God's sake.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:18 AM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: The equating to free republic is essentially name-calling and I believe name-calling gets us nowhere, in a forward direction at least. People, be civil to one another. MoY
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Proof that even a broken, stuck-in-1995 website is right twice a...very long period of time. But regardless, to make this comparison is completely rude and unnecessary.

--Systematic Chaos

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
42. Which is it? You're expressing agreement
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:34 AM
Jan 2014

with the Freepers via the broken clock analogy but then claiming it's an insult for people to point out that agreement .

Systematic Chaos

(8,601 posts)
66. You know, I really, REALLY don't enjoy arguing with other members here. I seriously don't.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:54 AM
Jan 2014

This is the first time I've had a go-around with anyone else on the DU in as long as I can remember. Frankly, it ain't accomplishing shit and it's not healthy. I think I'm done in that regard. I know what I think and why, and it sure as shit isn't because I'm a right-winger.

Mind if I ask you where your opinions lie about the whole SotU? The Obama Presidency in general?

I missed the SotU and intend to go back by tomorrow afternoon and watch it all. So give me all the crap you want about defending Will Pitt without having watched the speech, but based upon my general overall opinion of this Administration I am more than somewhat confident that Mr. Pitt has it right. As for this Administration, I don't remember which issue it was published in, but The Nation magazine ran a piece about Obama's corporatist ties in probably 2005, maybe 2006, which warned us what we'd be in for if he were elected. From that moment on, I knew I was miles to the left of Obama and that if he were elected I would find myself at odds with how he ran the country. Well...here we are.

So what say you? Is this another eight years of Camelot or something in your eyes?

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
68. Obama is about as good as we can do given the structural entrenchment
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:58 AM
Jan 2014

of power and our dysfunctional system. He's a generally well-intentioned centrist squish.

His biggest sin has been to win elections. Lots of ideologues on both sides prefer to be out of power so they can complain without having any consequences attached to their decisions.

SOTU is a Rorschach test--those determined to praise it will find a way, those determined ahead of time will find a way to do so.

Systematic Chaos

(8,601 posts)
72. Fair enough, I suppose.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:03 AM
Jan 2014

I still think Obama needs to go on an almost unprecedented offensive against the 1% if he wants to make real changes, though. The status quo at this point is little more than a road to a slow, agonizing death for the country. This level of misery for so many people is simply not sustainable.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
111. Or, to put it another way...
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:18 PM
Jan 2014

"A man is very apt to complain of the ingratitude of those who have risen far above him."

- Oscar Wilde

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
120. People are really enjoying your antics, seriously.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:37 PM
Jan 2014

They speak for themselves. Not even necessary to argue with them anymore. Please continue ...


grasswire

(50,130 posts)
11. I repeat:
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:18 AM
Jan 2014

The enemy of liberty is not Will Pitt. The cause of the day is not Obama's legacy, nor winning political arguments. The cause of the day is pushing back imperialism [and militarism] and corporatism and conservatism and bigotry and economic oppression.

Very frankly, your apparent cause (protecting Obama from criticism) is largely irrelevant in comparison to the life-and-death, overwhelming struggles that are facing our country and our earth home.

I wish you could see the whole of the reality.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
162. Is this the part in the manual where you accuse the opposition of being
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:39 PM
Jan 2014

angry or hysterical? Isn't that on page 7?

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
132. So why are you supporting Republican policies? And getting your information
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:38 PM
Jan 2014

from Republican propaganda sites?

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
165. It's called "proving a point"
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:42 PM
Jan 2014

How else are you supposed to prove that the Far Left are in alignment with the beliefs of the Far Right? If you don't use their own words too?

But then....you knew that right?

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
24. He endorsed Pitt's post--moreover
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:23 AM
Jan 2014

Pitt 's main beef was that Obama didn't use Remsburg as a prop for an anti-war speech.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
34. No, pointing out that Pitt 's hatefest directed
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:29 AM
Jan 2014

at Obama won him fans over at Freeperville.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend, they figured .

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
50. Nope. You are avoiding addressing the message using guilt by association.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:39 AM
Jan 2014

It is trite and passé. And only a hand and foot full of DUers fall for that crap any more.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
59. When leftists who detest the President
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:47 AM
Jan 2014

echo the far-right, they do not get to play the solidarity card.

The assumption that Obama is evil and fu of ill intent is not a valid merely because the left and right fringe elements agree on it.

Ellipsis

(9,123 posts)
61. Actually in the timeline of reality they echo Pitt and since they hate Will...
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:51 AM
Jan 2014

it makes this topic extremely intriguing.

 

pintobean

(18,101 posts)
142. Give it a rest.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 07:44 PM
Jan 2014

No one is going to believe what you're trying to insinuate. You do this often, with anyone who dares to disagree with you. I think you're smart enough not to need to stoop to such low tactics.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
143. Was the question directed to you?
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 07:50 PM
Jan 2014

I'm confident that he can answer for himself. 'Leftists'. Being a Leftist I would never use that term in a 'I'm not one of them' context and as an insult.

 

pintobean

(18,101 posts)
146. I'll post where and when I want
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 07:56 PM
Jan 2014

just like you. If you don't like my observations, that's too damn bad.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
150. And I'll respond whenever and whenever I want to. If you don't like
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:04 PM
Jan 2014

my asking someone who goes to Right Wing sites and bring their garbage over here, then refers to people here as 'hate filled' and 'leftists' as if they are not part of this forum, that's not my problem. If that person refuses to explain his attacks on 'Leftests' then the question is answered.
I don't see why the question bothers YOU so much.

 

pintobean

(18,101 posts)
155. Because you do it a lot.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:12 PM
Jan 2014

I just thought I'd point that out for anyone who wasn't aware of it.

I'm no fan of GT's, and I have no problem with anyone giving him shit, but he is a leftist.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
217. Do what a lot? Support DUers against right wing type attacks? Yes I do and will continue
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 01:27 PM
Feb 2014

to do so regardless of whether or not it bothers you.

TroglodyteScholar

(5,477 posts)
207. Since I can't see that GT ever came back on this one, I'll venture an interpretation that...
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 01:23 AM
Feb 2014

...isn't far-fetched:

"Leftist" connotes a certain ideological rigidity, as opposed to a compromising or pragmatic approach. There is a place for that in politics, and I, for one, very very much prefer our side's ideologues to the right's. But it's true that many of us who consider ourselves deeply liberal are still not so sure (or even wishy-washy, if you like) on a variety of things that "leftists" might take a strong and immediate stance on.

In my view, both ways are valid and healthy for our party. We need the push-and-pull, especially since those across the aisle have basically fled so far from reality that they're a worthless, inconsequential caricature of the counterbalance they would provide were they a healthy, functioning party.

I say all this, of course, completely independently of the overarching discussion in this thread. In general, I take this view of the "soldier as prop" thing: every person serving in our military is an adult. If SFC Remsburg feels used, betrayed, shat-upon, whatever, I trust he will have plenty of opportunity to speak for himself.

He didn't look offended. Are those who cry foul at Obama going to get all over him for being a tool, too?

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
163. EXCELLENT Point yet again geek...
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:40 PM
Jan 2014

you sure have them rocked back on their heels tonight!

The truth hurts!

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
147. You give so much credence to those hate sites. Why? No one here gives
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 07:56 PM
Jan 2014

a shit what Fox has to say. At least you have finally admitted what we all knew, that you are desperately trying to discredit a DUer. So thanks finally for that admission.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
121. I don't know what you're talking about. Lost track frankly.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:40 PM
Jan 2014

Other than you are attacking Democrats. That's pretty obvious.

brush

(53,475 posts)
166. Pitt missed the whole point of the President recognizing Sgt. Remsburg
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:44 PM
Jan 2014

This was not a "use" of a solder as prop, imo. This was the 3rd time this president had met with Remsburg. The first two were before his injury. And after acknowledging his TEN DEPLOYMENTS and honoring him, the President said that it was time for us as a country to "GET OFF OF OUR PERMANENT WAR FOOTING" (his actual words).

I've never in my life time, and I suspect the same is the case of everyone else on this thread, ever heard a U.S. President utter such a profound anti-war statement. And that juxtaposed next to the honoring of a 10-deployment, disfigured solder was a not-so-subtle jab at the military industrial complex to stop with the wars where we need to keeping sending troops so many time that they get life-changing injuries.

If you call that "using" the solder then I guess the President is guilty.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
206. I was waiting to see a post by someone who really understood it. Well done
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 01:22 AM
Feb 2014

I'm surprised more don't get it.

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
65. You're stooping pretty low there.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:52 AM
Jan 2014

Do you really not understand that people of differing viewpoints can agree about some things?

Also, Freepers are always going to criticize Obama whether it's legit or not, so it stands to reason that if there's anything to legitmately criticize him on, and there's plenty, that the right wing is going to criticize him on it as well as the left.

And when the left does it it is out of patriotism and in defense of democracy.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
67. "The left" is not complaining about Remsburg getting applause at the SOTU.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:54 AM
Jan 2014

Only the rightwing and a certain faction at this website are.

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
76. The applause isn't what the complaint is about. Way to twist the issue.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:30 AM
Jan 2014

In ay event, I would say Will Pitt is on the left, you don't think he is?

And others who agree with him, and there are a lot. A lot. Just look at the responses and recs to his threads. Those people are left as well, at least many of them I know are.

It's not a certain faction on DU who agrees with Will, it's a bunch of people who are on the left, and some who are center as well I'm sure.

NealK

(1,791 posts)
73. "You're stooping pretty low there."
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:15 AM
Jan 2014

Yep, as low as the bottom of the Mariana Trench. Totally inexcusable.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
82. You would think your post
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 06:23 AM
Jan 2014

would get people to stop and think at what they're supporting but my guess is many will double down. I think the Commander in Chief acknowledging the real effect of war is exactly the kind of thing he should be doing with a large audience. Rather than showing the troops eating a turkey or petting a dog - Pres Obama showed what war does. Why are people here against that?

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
116. I always wondered where you were getting those right wing talking points.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:27 PM
Jan 2014

Now we know.

Peter King, Sarah Palin, Bush, Cheney, Karl Rove, Limbaugh, Hannity and a whole host of right wing liars and war criminals, support Obama's position on the NSA and on the TPP and the Keystone Pipeline.

THEY stand with you. Congrats.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
128. So, we have to agree with Obama 100%, or agree with Freepers 100%.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:08 PM
Jan 2014

Yes, because that's how the real world works

Your remarks are exactly what I was talking about in my last post. You try to stifle discussion, on a discussion board, with playground taunts.

Some of us can handle the complex subtlety of agreeing with some things, disagreeing with others, all in the same person.

brush

(53,475 posts)
216. You should watch a tape of the address . . .
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 09:20 AM
Feb 2014

before agreeing with the poster.

The President not only honored Sgt Remsburg, he made an unprecedented "anti-war comment" against the military industrial complex and it's need to deploy solders as much as 10 times.

Pls try to find the address and view it for yourself.

BainsBane

(53,003 posts)
5. The teacher was also a prop
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:12 AM
Jan 2014

As was everyone else the President introduced, just like every state of the union ever televised. SOTU addresses are politics as theater. So what's new? You all just wake up to this reality? Would you have preferred he not mention the war so you didn't have to think about it?

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
6. You are talking about the war he's continued for five years, right?
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:14 AM
Jan 2014

I want to make sure we're talking about the same war that he's using vets as props for.

BainsBane

(53,003 posts)
10. Indeed
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:16 AM
Jan 2014

Afghanistan: the very war the President you voted for in 2008 RAN on expanding. Pay attention to what they say during the election. They sometimes follow through.

Now why you picked that particular vet to get pissed off about, I have no idea. The whole reaction strikes me as a display of naivety. Like I said, what do you think those speeches are for?

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
23. I can guarantee I did not vote for Obama in 2016.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:22 AM
Jan 2014

I'll go even further to say that I absolutely will not vote for him in 2016 should he run.

As for the rest of your comment, I don't believe in voting for someone then giving them a free pass to do whatever they like. It's called accountability. Maybe you should look into it.

BainsBane

(53,003 posts)
63. Nor do I
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:51 AM
Jan 2014

My point is that focusing on that one vet in particular makes no sense to me. It's like you all don't think about something until it's on TV and cable news, and what matters most seems to be what's on TV more than actual policy.

I'm all for ending involvement in Afghanistan and avoiding other entanglements. What I am not going to get upset about is introducing a vet at the SOTU, no more than I would about the teacher or Punch Pizza guys.

Systematic Chaos

(8,601 posts)
19. Nah, many of us would just prefer he had the cojones to do the right thing...
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:20 AM
Jan 2014

...and end the unjust wars.

And holy shit but do I know this will never happen, but maybe he could have even spent a good third of that speech completely lambasting the rich fucks who are destroying the country. Maybe even call a few out by name and invite them to pack their shit and leave.

But what do I know. I'm just an impoverished soul, watching me and my wife get slowly crushed to death by the lack of safety nets and policy makers actually acting like they give fuck one.

BainsBane

(53,003 posts)
27. Lambasting the rich folks?
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:24 AM
Jan 2014

Seriously? What good does that do? How about proposing some actual policies to address equality? Or is this like MSNBC now: He's supposed to make you feel good by affirming your views ?

One president can't "end unjust wars." He can hasten withdraw from Afghanistan. But getting bent out of shape because he introduced a vet doesn't further that. You voted for a guy who ran on expanding the war in Afghanistan, and that is exactly what you got.

Systematic Chaos

(8,601 posts)
31. Well, if we don't affirm yours, we're fucking repukes.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:27 AM
Jan 2014

Guess that makes it a wash.

Edit to add: I voted for the Obama corporatist because he wasn't as terrifying as the other two nitwits who ran against him both terms. But who do I support? Anyone who will run on a true Progressive platform a la FDR. Who does that leave us with?

BainsBane

(53,003 posts)
77. Well, you're obviously having your own internal dialog
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:30 AM
Jan 2014

that bears no relation whatsoever to anything I've said, so enjoy.

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
8. I haven't seen Pitt's post - but I do know that the 'prop' meme is a Republican talking point...
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:16 AM
Jan 2014

... that the GOP and FoxNews are using to bash Obama.

Are you saying that Democrats are using the Republican talking point to bash President Obama too?

What a shame.

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
17. Cats have four legs. My dog has four legs. My dog is a cat.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:20 AM
Jan 2014

I hear republicans breath air so you should probably start holding your breath now.

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
33. If it doesn't gush about Obama's six-pack they generally don't.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:28 AM
Jan 2014

Maybe if I'd included some pictures of Bo or Obama emerging from the ocean in his swimsuit they'd see the light.

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
45. If you start writing slash fiction about Obama and Bo you get automatic membership in the BOG.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:35 AM
Jan 2014

With accompanying artwork, of course.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
47. Or maybe the people at Fox News and Free Republic
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:37 AM
Jan 2014

are just biased against Obama?

It used to be frowned upon here to echo rightwing attacks on Democratic presidents.

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
80. And yet you and your ilk have no problem using right wing tactics
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:37 AM
Jan 2014

while feigning outrage over an agreement of the left and right about a criticism of Obama.

I wish just once I would see a credible argument that was about policy and issues from you guys. Just once.

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
96. yes, this
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 01:46 PM
Jan 2014

The tactics are precisely the same that the RWNJ and Bushies have used for years now. Slash and burn, rude and crude tactics. Used now by Obama groupies. To what end? To what end? All this damage to DU, to what ultimate end? The tactics sure aren't winning Obama any supporters. The tactics sure aren't making common progress toward Democratic or democratic goals.

To what end, all this effort to divide?

kjones

(1,053 posts)
198. Rude comments?
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 12:28 AM
Feb 2014

All I keep hearing is "if you aren't mad at Obama for this, you're probably stupid, that or a mindless supporter. (groupie, I guess you say)."

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
202. ^^^^^ THIS! You are attacked perpetually for being supportive of the Democratic President
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 12:45 AM
Feb 2014

on a Democratic forum....called "groupies" etc....but you guys are just saints....The supporters are the ones here being accused of being the "divisive ones"!!! For simply supporting the SUCCESSFUL and twice elected by a majority vote Democratic President!

 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
208. ilk reporting for duty. yes I use right wing tactics when I support the President.
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 01:24 AM
Feb 2014

on a democratic forum



tripping all over yourselves, aren't you.
carry on.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
35. They also claim to be warm blooded, but tests have proven inconclusive.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:30 AM
Jan 2014

Better safe than sorry, off to my sun rock.

Ellipsis

(9,123 posts)
37. It's a lot more complex then a two party system. it's getting caught up in making a point...
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:30 AM
Jan 2014

at the expense of the individual. Something this society does way to often, disenfranchising someone who ends up exploited and their accomplishments minimized. Attempting to make a point at the fruitlessness of the conflict this soldier got fucked over. It wasn't intentional but it's what happened... and I'd guess this will be revisited.

 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
109. Logic fail.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:14 PM
Jan 2014

People can arrive at similar conclusions for vastly different reasons.

The GOP/Fox/FR are going to oppose anything the Kenyan Muslim socialist traitor does almost simply by virtue of who he is and what party he's a part of.

People on the left can be against it because they're sick of seeing soldiers exploited for nationalistic purposes.

So this disgusting "you're just FREEPERS!!" ad hominem is not only low, it's a complete logic fail. It's as stupid as "you like the interstate highway system, therefore you approve of the Holocaust."

Skittles

(152,966 posts)
15. more proof of lack of critical thinking skills
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:19 AM
Jan 2014

William doesn't hate Obama OR our troops - what he hates is the never-ending SENSELESS carnage that is the war in Afghanistan

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
32. No, he has expressed his personal contempt
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:27 AM
Jan 2014

for the President pretty regularly--hence the hilarious comment that Obama's speech was "poison " that made poor Will "sick to my soul." Also Pitt commented that the president was someone he " used to respect."

It's a literally visceral reaction of disgust to the President. Same shit, different pile as one finds at Free Republic.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
204. I know, have you noticed that? They are so very familiar with all these right wing
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 12:52 AM
Feb 2014

sites. It definitely explains for me why I always wondered where they got their right wing talking points from.

And the fact that it is so important to them what anyone on those sites has to say, says a lot, but not what they apparently think it says.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
102. Exactly, they are too busy writing in their charts and graphs
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 01:56 PM
Jan 2014

who they think slighted Obama...they have lost their minds and covet the POTUS like a god. It is sick watching supposed progressives refuse to think for themselves.

JohnnyRingo

(18,581 posts)
28. I think it's Fu*king support.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:25 AM
Jan 2014

While I often disagree with Pitt's commentary, I'm glad he has a forum, and I'm privileged to read his posts. I believe it's good to expand my horizons.

Response to last1standing (Original post)

MirrorAshes

(1,262 posts)
43. Oh, right, this needed another thread.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:34 AM
Jan 2014

Actually, it really didn't. Keep that shit a'stirrin though I suppose.

MirrorAshes

(1,262 posts)
58. Wow you're itching for a fight aren't you?
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 04:44 AM
Jan 2014

I haven't even given my personal opinion on any of it, yet here you are with guns blazing.

But no, my post was not meant to make myself feel better. I was fine to begin with. I just know an easy "fishing" thread when I see one.

Enjoy your thread though, it's got all the right elements to get you onto the greatest page in no time.

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
183. LOL! You start with insults in your first post but I'm "itching for a fight."
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 11:11 PM
Jan 2014

Then you double down with more insults and asinine accusations.

I'd suggest looking in a mirror if I thought you'd see a reflection.

hfojvt

(37,573 posts)
74. my thought too
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:17 AM
Jan 2014

the first thread got 300+ recs.

Are we supposed to believe that almost nobody is standing with him?

Very few posts around here draw 300+ recs.

 

quinnox

(20,600 posts)
71. K&R
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:02 AM
Jan 2014

Agree or disagree, Pitt wrote a heartfelt and passionate OP. I'm glad he didn't back down from it, despite the insane rage and crazed reactions from unhinged quarters.

Speaking personally, I would never let what a hard core fan club thinks or says alter or influence my opinions on these matters of importance. It would be like being afraid to say Justin Bieber has no talent, in a forum of fanatical Bieber fans. In other words, fuck 'em. It would be cowardly not to say what you really think. That is my opinion.

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
88. Thanks. I just threw up in my mouth again.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 07:12 AM
Jan 2014

Sir, ma'am?? I think I'm lost. Will you please show me the way out of Free Republic?? I seem to have lost DU.

 

Dawgs

(14,755 posts)
89. Oh Jesus Christ.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 09:33 AM
Jan 2014

The Will Pitt love fest is getting so bad that now people are starting posts stating so.

Come on people.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
169. For real. Pitt's moronic thread got about 350 recs here but somehow, not enough people are
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:12 PM
Jan 2014

supporting him. And this person feels compelled to "brag" about how they supported said moronic thread as if anyone gives a...

LWolf

(46,179 posts)
91. It's interesting to hear about this,
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:02 AM
Jan 2014

although I haven't read any posts giving him flack. I haven't read that many posts about the SOTU, and posted in fewer.

It's interesting because while I've enjoyed reading his work since he was a teacher, I've always thought he went way out of his way to give Obama more time and more leeway than he really deserved. He remained loyal and supportive long beyond the point I thought it was pretty obvious that Obama was not the second coming of JFK or MLK or FDR or Jesus Christ himself. When he finally does begin to step up to the plate and take a more critical look, he's now "taking flack?"

I'm sure he can handle it. Anybody who doesn't bow and toss flowers along Obama's path takes flack from those at DU who put personality before issues. I should know; I've got the scorch marks to prove it, and have been taking that flack since Obama started making appointments in November and December of '08.

But then, I'm just one of those reviled public school teachers to blame for every ill this nation suffers; nobody hangs on my words, lol.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
93. I support Will Pitt's right to post
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:39 AM
Jan 2014

whatever comes into his head. I support everyone's right to do so.

Res ipsa loquitur.

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
184. At least he gives an opinion, not merely :thumbsup: and snide comments.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 11:15 PM
Jan 2014

But that doesn't describe anyone we know, does it Sid?

bobduca

(1,763 posts)
97. Flak from Flaks
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 01:48 PM
Jan 2014

easily remedied by IGNORING all of those same 30 posters who are calling for him to be burned in effigy.

Its the same pom pom shaking street thugs every time. ignore them and move on everybody.

Skip Intro

(19,768 posts)
178. You made somebody mad, bro. Jury results:
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:54 PM
Jan 2014

On Fri Jan 31, 2014, 06:31 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Aww troll kisses so sweet!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4420855

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

a consistently anti-dem poster calling another DUer a troll.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jan 31, 2014, 06:42 PM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Poor choice of words, poster needs to rein it in.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Meh. Probably deserved. Leave it.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
100. 10 deployments is obscene.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 01:53 PM
Jan 2014

I liked the speech up until that part - they could go outside, walk right down the street and find a homeless vet and honor him too...but we all know that will never happen.

All I really want to say about this is that 10 deployments is an obscene amount and his superiors let him down in a big way.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
134. Oh no doubt it does, how many more extra deployments did our soldiers have
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 06:39 PM
Jan 2014

because of the needless invasion of Iraq? I blame his superiors for sending him that many times, until eventually he became broken enough to not have to go anymore.

That is fucked up and you know it.

BUSH, still off the hook for various war crimes. Some things never change.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
104. It's
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 01:57 PM
Jan 2014

"He's taking a lot of flack for standing up for what he believes and should know that he's not alone in thinking that our vets deserve better."

...well-deserved "flack." Our vets "deserve better" than to be labeled "props" because of a tribute to personal resilience.



RetroLounge

(37,250 posts)
164. I don't think it's Vets you're worried about here.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:41 PM
Jan 2014

Did someone say something bad about President Tiger Beat?



RL

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
213. Will next year be a "Tribute to Hollywood?"
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 03:24 AM
Feb 2014

Maybe a "Tribute to the Stars" or "Tribute to the Red, White and Blue!"

If the talking point on this fiasco is going to be "Tribute to Personal Resilience" like the State of the Union is some sort of awards show, the administration is scraping the barrel dry.



 

randome

(34,845 posts)
107. Are you referring to the thread labeled 'Fuck'?
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:06 PM
Jan 2014

If so, I don't bother with threads that don't offer something interesting right off the bat.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

 

El_Johns

(1,805 posts)
112. I detest the tactic when the R's do it (they pioneered it under Reagan) & I detest it when the
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:20 PM
Jan 2014

D's do it.

Why?

I consider it manipulative, like tear-jerker films.

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
113. I like Will, but that post was claptrap and nonsense
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:20 PM
Jan 2014

One of his worst efforts outside the "24 Business Hours" fiasco.

 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
138. there are more fiascos than that!
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 06:50 PM
Jan 2014

but whose counting.

and Jesus rose again on the third day, for the second or third time

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
174. So ludicrous and embarrassing that it's not worth recounting in full
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:34 PM
Jan 2014

here's a link to the famous thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1186820

Just as a note, Karl Rove has still yet to be indicted in the Plame Affair.

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
137. I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 06:47 PM
Jan 2014

Sycophants usually grovel around a leader who sends out talking points and expects his followers to spout them back on forums like this word for word. I supported a poster who wrote an OP and was then mercilessly attacked using the same "fuck"ing talking point in several threads. I did this because I agree with the message, not because I feel the need to protect a messiah, unlike yourself.

It would be wise of you to learn the difference. It will help you to not look like a fool.

Response to last1standing (Reply #221)

Skidmore

(37,364 posts)
118. I support him as a fellow DUer even when I disagree with him.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 02:33 PM
Jan 2014

And I stand up for my right to disagree and say what I believe too. Life is funny that way.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
126. It was disappointing to see so much of the love/hate false dichotomy replies to his post.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:04 PM
Jan 2014

It wasn't enough to agree or disagree with him. It was all either "Obama hater" or "Obama lover" with no room for anything in between.

It was childish, irrational, and counter-productive. Not to mention, it avoids actual, you know, discussion of the issues.

Name-calling. Taunting. They aren't just for conservatives anymore, apparently

liberal_at_heart

(12,081 posts)
129. If there weren't poster like Will I probably wouldn't frequent this website anymore.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:11 PM
Jan 2014

It is Will and posters like Will willing to speak up for liberal ideals and for the people and workers of this country and standing up to the 1% and holding our government accountable that keep me coming back to this website.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
130. DURec!
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 05:32 PM
Jan 2014

A better way to "honor" those who have given so much (or had so much taken from them under fraudulent conditions)
would be to:

*Double the funding for the VA

*Double the pensions for wounded and disabled vets

*Double the benefits to families of soldiers killed in service

*Double the funding for those programs that help vets find good jobs

*Double the funding for a NEW "GI Bill"

Now THAT is HOW to HONOR our soldiers!
....NOT to use them a props for applause lines at the SOTU.

Maybe at the next SOTU, the President can read the names of ALL our soldiers who have been disabled in ALL of our Occupied Countries in that year?


I don't always agree with Will Pitt,
but on this one I do.
Strongly.

I objected when Bush-the-Lesser used our soldiers as props.
I still object when ANY politician does it.

alarimer

(16,245 posts)
140. All Presidents have used soldiers as props during this speech. It doesn't make it right.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 06:52 PM
Jan 2014

No matter who does it.

That guy should never have been ALLOWED to deploy 10 times. His commanders (up and including the President) should have forbidden it, as they should for anyone else, even if he volunteered to do it.

And Obama should have pointed this out at the speech. That we made a mistake in even starting these wars and that he wa doing his best to wrap them so this wouldn't happen to anyone else.

Instead, we got more "freedom isn't free" bullshit.

tritsofme

(17,325 posts)
149. Is that guy still here? I thought they banned him at least 24 business hours ago.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:03 PM
Jan 2014

Didn't see that thread either, but it seems like something he would say. Not exactly surprising.

Warpy

(110,913 posts)
153. I think it was more as an illustration of the mistakes that are/have been made
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:08 PM
Jan 2014

when diplomacy isn't/wasn't considered. However, to each his own interpretation. Yes, the poor guy was a prop. Sometimes you need to use props, especially when half the people you're talking to are Republicans. Those folks are slow.

That thread was such a shitstorm by the time I woke up that I didn't bother weighing in. I support Will Pitt's absolute right to be wrong about something. He does it so seldom as to be statistically negligible.

justiceischeap

(14,040 posts)
158. I support WillPitt's right to his opinion
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 08:33 PM
Jan 2014

but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it or yours. But good for you that you agree with WillPitt.

riqster

(13,986 posts)
171. I support the man, but disagree with his post on this matter.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:16 PM
Jan 2014

I believe it's the first time I have disagreed with him, now I think about it.

Still a great writer IMNSHO.

TBF

(31,922 posts)
179. I agree. Thank you for posting
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 10:56 PM
Jan 2014

this OP. Will Pitt is one of the few people in this country who is calling what he sees and publishing it. I'm actually a little further to the left than him, but very much appreciate that he at least gives a damn and is willing to speak out.

jazzimov

(1,456 posts)
186. I support him about as often as I support Obama.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 11:17 PM
Jan 2014

There are times when I agree with him, there are times when I disagree with him. Just as I do with Obama.

On this particular issue, I have to disagree with Will. I saw the SOTU speech.

I saw the soldier in question. I saw him try to get up in anticipation. I saw the smile on his face. I saw his "thumbs up".

This was HIS night. It's the least any of us can do for him. Including the President.

He didn't look like a "prop" to me. He looked like a HERO.

Yes, 10 deployments sounds ridiculous. But as POTUS said, his first and foremost motivation was to get through his rehab to "help his teammates", which to me sounded like he was asking for an 11th deployment.

Yes, I think that 10 deployments are ridiculous. But HE obviously didn't.

Personally, I think all of this discussion over whether or not he was used as a prop is just ridiculous. I want to know what HE thought.

And, looking at his face and his attitude - I think he saw this as HIS night. I don't think he thought he was being used, at all.

So, everyone that decries his being used as a "prop" - try asking HIM.

This is what ticks me off about political blogging - ask the people involved. Isn't that what Democratic bloggers are supposed to do? Ask the people who are actually involved?

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
210. A willing prop is still a prop.
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 01:41 AM
Feb 2014

But then that doesn't matter to those who's only purpose is to push an agenda without compassion. I find it disgusting that a Democrat is pushing the idea that we should support endless war because one of its victims MIGHT be a supporter of it.

Maybe your posts should try to inform instead of manipulate. This wasn't that soldier's night, it was Obama's. The soldier was nothing more than a side show for what has become a carnival presentation because of cynical ploys like bringing in shattered human beings as props.

markpkessinger

(8,381 posts)
190. Agreed -- but here's a point people are missing . . .
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 11:48 PM
Jan 2014

The fact of the matter is that these special guests presidents invite to State of the Union addresses are, in reality, always props for the president who invites them, regardless of whether that president has a 'D' or an 'R' after his name. And this is why I would say to those who suggest that to agree with Will's point is to align oneself with Freepers, may I point out that Freepers should be called out on their hypocrisy concerning this very point (i.e., that all recent presidents have invited guests to their SOTU speeches who served as "props."

Will is not wrong on this point, but Freepers are rank hypocrites about it.

last1standing

(11,709 posts)
193. That's very true but I believe there's more in this case.
Fri Jan 31, 2014, 11:53 PM
Jan 2014

For me, the rank hypocrisy is too blatant to be ignored. How does one send a man into a completely unnecessary battle then use him as an example of the pointlessness of that same war when he comes back broken?

The freepers are in an uproar because the Kenyan isn't sending troops to every country inhabited by brown people at once. Their opinions mean nothing in this conversation.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
223. I support your right to say what you want to and when you want to on DU.
Sat Feb 1, 2014, 04:49 PM
Feb 2014

I will not play the US vs. THEM game with you. Only a few people here are that sad and lonely enough to enjoy that game.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I "Fuck"ing sup...