HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Should we add a Dem-bashi...

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:26 PM

Should we add a Dem-bashing clarification to the GD SoP?

Currently, the General Discussion Statement of Purpose reads:

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.


I propose that we ask DU admins to add the phrase "No FOX-style Dem bashing." By "FOX-style" I mean gratuitous, insulting, over-the-top, topically irrelevant dog-whistling of the type seen on FOX News and other RW outlets. Benghazi's, you might say. Your thoughts?
33 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
Great idea! Let's do it.
6 (18%)
Let's at least consider adding "No FOX-style Dem bashing" to the GD Statement of Purpose.
1 (3%)
Let's discuss this thoroughly before doing anything rash.
0 (0%)
Not keen on the idea but wouldn't object to it.
0 (0%)
Terrible idea. Epic fail.
26 (79%)
Other.
0 (0%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

239 replies, 12916 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 239 replies Author Time Post
Reply Should we add a Dem-bashing clarification to the GD SoP? (Original post)
ucrdem Mar 2014 OP
undeterred Mar 2014 #1
ucrdem Mar 2014 #3
undeterred Mar 2014 #6
msongs Mar 2014 #2
Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #4
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #28
Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #101
ucrdem Mar 2014 #103
Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #112
Spazito Mar 2014 #168
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #107
Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #110
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #119
Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #150
MannyGoldstein Mar 2014 #188
Vashta Nerada Mar 2014 #195
Andy823 Mar 2014 #223
TheKentuckian Mar 2014 #165
Ed Suspicious Mar 2014 #13
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #25
Ed Suspicious Mar 2014 #46
JaneyVee Mar 2014 #62
Ed Suspicious Mar 2014 #66
hobbit709 Mar 2014 #151
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #69
Ed Suspicious Mar 2014 #88
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #96
MADem Mar 2014 #189
L0oniX Mar 2014 #214
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #17
ucrdem Mar 2014 #23
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #30
ucrdem Mar 2014 #35
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #74
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #45
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #86
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #29
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #34
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #43
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #105
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #108
Andy823 Mar 2014 #224
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #61
Bobbie Jo Mar 2014 #5
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #133
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #7
ucrdem Mar 2014 #11
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #16
ucrdem Mar 2014 #20
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #37
ucrdem Mar 2014 #57
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #65
ucrdem Mar 2014 #75
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #79
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #95
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #48
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #32
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #44
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #49
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #59
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #63
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #68
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #51
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #72
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #81
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #104
treestar Mar 2014 #197
baldguy Mar 2014 #8
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #33
quinnox Mar 2014 #9
Bobbie Jo Mar 2014 #10
quinnox Mar 2014 #12
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #36
quinnox Mar 2014 #92
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #97
quinnox Mar 2014 #99
Rex Mar 2014 #106
Andy823 Mar 2014 #225
Shoulders of Giants Mar 2014 #14
ucrdem Mar 2014 #15
Shoulders of Giants Mar 2014 #19
ucrdem Mar 2014 #26
questionseverything Mar 2014 #54
ucrdem Mar 2014 #82
questionseverything Mar 2014 #161
Shoulders of Giants Mar 2014 #230
questionseverything Mar 2014 #239
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #38
ucrdem Mar 2014 #185
defacto7 Mar 2014 #18
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #39
defacto7 Mar 2014 #113
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #191
1000words Mar 2014 #21
tkmorris Mar 2014 #22
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #41
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #52
tkmorris Mar 2014 #138
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #141
pscot Mar 2014 #24
RKP5637 Mar 2014 #47
Art_from_Ark Mar 2014 #111
WillyT Mar 2014 #27
ucrdem Mar 2014 #31
WillyT Mar 2014 #40
ucrdem Mar 2014 #50
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #67
ucrdem Mar 2014 #70
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #76
ucrdem Mar 2014 #78
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #80
ucrdem Mar 2014 #84
madinmaryland Mar 2014 #71
ucrdem Mar 2014 #77
madinmaryland Mar 2014 #83
ucrdem Mar 2014 #91
MADem Mar 2014 #234
think Mar 2014 #58
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #42
morningfog Mar 2014 #53
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #56
eridani Mar 2014 #55
Agschmid Mar 2014 #60
dionysus Mar 2014 #64
Rex Mar 2014 #73
LineLineLineReply !
dionysus Mar 2014 #163
VanillaRhapsody Mar 2014 #93
freshwest Mar 2014 #145
LeftyMom Mar 2014 #85
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2014 #89
scarletwoman Mar 2014 #109
laundry_queen Mar 2014 #115
U4ikLefty Mar 2014 #144
Fumesucker Mar 2014 #147
QC Mar 2014 #154
City Lights Mar 2014 #157
Rex Mar 2014 #164
one_voice Mar 2014 #170
neverforget Mar 2014 #87
Deep13 Mar 2014 #90
ucrdem Mar 2014 #94
Eleanors38 Mar 2014 #98
Skip Intro Mar 2014 #100
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #114
Logical Mar 2014 #118
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #120
Logical Mar 2014 #121
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #124
Logical Mar 2014 #125
ucrdem Mar 2014 #130
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #132
freshwest Mar 2014 #146
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #169
pkdu Mar 2014 #196
Andy823 Mar 2014 #227
ucrdem Mar 2014 #129
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #137
flamingdem Mar 2014 #237
Douglas Carpenter Mar 2014 #102
kath Mar 2014 #143
Skittles Mar 2014 #178
L0oniX Mar 2014 #219
Cha Mar 2014 #116
ucrdem Mar 2014 #127
Cha Mar 2014 #134
Logical Mar 2014 #117
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #122
Logical Mar 2014 #123
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #126
Logical Mar 2014 #128
ucrdem Mar 2014 #131
Bobbie Jo Mar 2014 #135
sheshe2 Mar 2014 #140
mvd Mar 2014 #136
Nye Bevan Mar 2014 #139
Marr Mar 2014 #142
SidDithers Mar 2014 #148
TheKentuckian Mar 2014 #166
flamingdem Mar 2014 #233
cui bono Mar 2014 #149
gollygee Mar 2014 #152
djean111 Mar 2014 #153
bigwillq Mar 2014 #155
Bluenorthwest Mar 2014 #156
TheKentuckian Mar 2014 #190
whatchamacallit Mar 2014 #158
KG Mar 2014 #167
Hissyspit Mar 2014 #171
clg311 Mar 2014 #159
Skittles Mar 2014 #176
JoePhilly Mar 2014 #160
Jamaal510 Mar 2014 #175
rrneck Mar 2014 #162
ucrdem Mar 2014 #172
rrneck Mar 2014 #192
ucrdem Mar 2014 #193
rrneck Mar 2014 #198
ucrdem Mar 2014 #200
rrneck Mar 2014 #201
ucrdem Mar 2014 #202
rrneck Mar 2014 #209
ucrdem Mar 2014 #210
JackRiddler Mar 2014 #173
ucrdem Mar 2014 #174
Skittles Mar 2014 #177
ucrdem Mar 2014 #179
Skittles Mar 2014 #182
ucrdem Mar 2014 #183
Rex Mar 2014 #180
Skittles Mar 2014 #181
Rex Mar 2014 #184
MADem Mar 2014 #186
ucrdem Mar 2014 #187
Trajan Mar 2014 #211
ucrdem Mar 2014 #215
Trajan Mar 2014 #220
Rex Mar 2014 #221
MADem Mar 2014 #222
Trajan Mar 2014 #226
MADem Mar 2014 #229
Andy823 Mar 2014 #231
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2014 #194
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2014 #199
snooper2 Mar 2014 #203
ucrdem Mar 2014 #204
snooper2 Mar 2014 #206
ucrdem Mar 2014 #207
Zorra Mar 2014 #212
ucrdem Mar 2014 #213
Zorra Mar 2014 #218
Teamster Jeff Mar 2014 #205
ucrdem Mar 2014 #208
L0oniX Mar 2014 #216
ucrdem Mar 2014 #217
TroglodyteScholar Mar 2014 #228
flamingdem Mar 2014 #232
Andy823 Mar 2014 #235
flamingdem Mar 2014 #236
ucrdem Mar 2014 #238

Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:29 PM

1. Other: Separate Dem-Bashing forum

You have to contribute more to the party to get in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to undeterred (Reply #1)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:32 PM

3. I like it.

GD: Bash (premium membership required)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #3)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:36 PM

6. And it sounds like a party!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:32 PM

2. how bout a forum where named democrats are worshipped as the new saviors :-) nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:36 PM

4. We already have a group for that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vashta Nerada (Reply #4)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:13 PM

28. We sure do!

BOG!

Sadly some weep and moan that some people support this President.

And before you go on and say we mindlessly support Obama, let me say that you know nothing about us and you never will. Your glass will always be half empty. That's a sad way to go through life. My glass will remain half full.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #28)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:30 AM

101. There's support, then there's worship.

 

One is healthy. One is zealotry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vashta Nerada (Reply #101)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:33 AM

103. Worship, no. And you can't win without a little zealotry.

So I say zealotry, bring it on! Spread the word, register Dem! Vote Dem! Otherwise hello president Palin.

p.s. have you ever tried to register voters?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #103)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:05 AM

112. There isn't a snowballs chance in hell that Palin would ever be president.

 

Don't even pretend for a second that it could happen.

Second, if there's a viable liberal third party candidate that is more liberal than the Democrat running, you can bet your ass that I'll vote for that third party candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vashta Nerada (Reply #112)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 03:18 PM

168. That is often what was said about George Bush before he did become President...

all too many, myself included, thought he was a joke, that he would never become President and yet he did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vashta Nerada (Reply #101)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:38 AM

107. Oh, I see it every day...

with the adoration of Snowed-in, GG and now Will Pitt!

Deal with that fact Vashta!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #107)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:03 AM

110. You're obviously unaware of the works of Will Pitt, aren't you?

 

Maybe you don't remember any of the liberal causes he wrote about since 2000.

He dared criticize Obama about Iraq and a crappy part of the ACA, and certain group members through a shit fit.

SMDH. SMDH, indeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vashta Nerada (Reply #110)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:30 AM

119. Oooh I am not unaware.

Bog'ers are able to read and actually understand the facts!

Oh wow Pitt dared, he dared to criticize Obama and a part of ACA that had nothing to do with this President, Do go on Vashta!

No, Obamacare Won’t Cover Every Drug — Just Like Every Other Insurance Policy
BY IGOR VOLSKY ON DECEMBER 10, 2013 AT 12:40 PM


Under the law, insurers must offer drug benefits as part of 10 essential health care benefits, meaning that millions of uninsured Americans will now have drug coverage for the very first time. But the coverage won’t be limitless. Insurers will continue to rely on drug formularies — as they currently do in the private market and Medicare Part D — to decide which prescriptions are covered and which are not.

snip

States — not the federal government — select the benchmark and insurers then offer coverage for the drugs listed in those formularies. “What the vast majority of states have chosen is a common small business plan, so you know it’s saying what will be available in the exchanges and in the individual market generally is what’s popular among small businesses now and that seems like a reasonable place to start,” the Kaiser Family Foundation’s Larry Levitt explained.


But yes, there are certain limits: a formulary, for instance, may cover three drugs for treating a certain condition but not two others. Obamacare — like all insurers currently operating in the market — has a fix for that. ACA regulations demand that a health plan must have an “exceptions process” in place that allows patients to request and gain access to clinically appropriate drugs that aren’t covered by the health plan (in addition to internal and external appeal processes). So, if a health plan does not cover a particular drug that a patient absolutely needs, their doctor can certify medical necessity to extend coverage. Insurers have relied on drug formularies before the law went into effect and already have exceptions processes in place, meaning that most “will not have to implement significant changes.”

Snip

And therein lies the irony of the attack: Republicans have traditionally seen high deductibles and limited coverage as a way to control individual health care spending. Now that Obamacare gives patients that choice, they’re suddenly complaining that the insurance is not generous enough.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/12/10/3042741/drugs-obamacare-coverage/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #119)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 08:10 AM

150. You still didn't answer my question.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vashta Nerada (Reply #110)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:40 AM

188. Sorry, Vashta, looks like you've been SERVED by a superior intellect

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #188)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 04:30 AM

195. Ha!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vashta Nerada (Reply #110)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 04:59 PM

223. Well...

Their is "criticizing" and their is plain hateful bashing, like when you call the president a POS, and tell him to F off!

One is acceptable and one is just plane stupidity. You can be the judge of which is which!

I have no problem when someone complains about things the president does, but when someone goes over the line into rightwing crazy talk, it should not be acceptable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #28)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:53 PM

165. You both have a half a glass of water. Not a drop is added or taken away by how either spins it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:47 PM

13. BOG is here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #13)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:07 PM

25. So very sad isn't it?



In case you misunderstood...

BOG

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #25)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:29 PM

46. I was banned after a few very mildly critical posts about policy direction of the administration.

It is the only group, forum, whatever from which I have been removed. I was absolutely hurt and offended that my thoughts which were only meant to spur academic-like discussion would be taken so out of the realm of my intention and I was angry that they could/so flippantly disregard my points, points that I thought all decent people in good conscience would be willing to take up for the benefit of the party and in the interest of thoughtful discussion. When I was summarily banned by a 100,000 plus post poster who is lord of the group... Well, it brought to light for me the fanatical devotion of the BOG people and it made me realize that there were people here who weren't interested in discussion, only in expressions professing reverential adoration of a man who I thought was cool, but like all men, flawed. They sought to obscure those flaws from their group's eyes. It was weird and it was cult-like. I have since had trouble with the BOG people. I just cannot relate and in the end I guess I'm glad I'm not part of their odd little spin-doctorish group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #46)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:42 PM

62. You got all of that because

 

One poster out of 200,000 decided to ban you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #62)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:53 PM

66. The ban opened my eyes to the nature of the group. Time and experience with them outside of

the BOG shaped and reinforced my expectations of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #66)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 08:17 AM

151. BOG's theme song is Home On The Range

"Where seldom is heard a discouraging world and the skies are not cloudy all day"

In the real world of course things happen.

And I go by Teddy's words
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #46)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:56 PM

69. It is a group not a forum.

Last edited Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:51 AM - Edit history (1)

Yes there are rules. You abide by their mission statements. All the groups have them. Sorry, but that is how they work. Just like AA, HOF and LGBT.

There are plenty of places to disagree. That is what GD is for. It's not like we don't post there too. We do, a lot. Ah, that is where the lively conversation comes in.

Yet is there not one safe place in your house that you find comfort in after a long day? One where you can kick back and relax. Maybe to laugh sometimes to cry? To commiserate with a friend? To have a conversation without interruption? Well that is what the groups are, that is why they were set up. It is our comfort zone.

I hope that you can understand that. I am sorry you were hurt. If you wish to talk about that sincerely, let me know. I have not been a host for long yet I am willing to lend an ear. I would reinstate you if you wish, yet if you post you go by the rules. I didn't make them, yet they are the groups rules.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #69)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:13 AM

88. I get it now, at the time, the way I used DU was to read and reply to the latest threads.

I guess it was a lack of understanding of how DU worked. If The thread was in latest threads and I felt like replying, I did. All I knew was I posted to a latest thread, received what I thought was some strange pushback, responded to that and next thing you know, I could no longer engage. All I knew was that I just got a message stating that I was summarily banned and could not for the life of me understand why. I thought for a moment that I was banned from DU. It was incredibly frustrating. I appreciate the offer to reinstate, but I'm afraid I'm more up for a lively from multiple viewpoints type of discussion than what is offered in a group like the BOG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #88)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:17 AM

96. I appreciate your thoughtful response, Ed.

I have no problem with a lively debate either!

I just feel the need to kick off my shoes once in awhile. Especially after a long day at work.

Peace~

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #88)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:45 AM

189. I've gotten caught in a protected group by mistake a time or two.

The only thing to do is apologize/delete. I try to remember to check the group I'm in before I open my mouth. As I said, I've erred, especially when going to a thread from the front page.

It's not that you can't make the points you want to make, you just can't make them THERE. Some of those groups are looking for supportive conversation, not bashing/trashing/drama.

We've got self-help groups, the interfaith group, the assorted politicians' groups, LGBT, gender groups, quite a number of safe-havens. Let people have their little areas--it's not hurting anyone. People who need to make a point can start a thread--there's no quota or limit on thread starting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #13)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:13 PM

214. ^^^this^^^

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:56 PM

17. I have an idea! :-)

We need a Snowed-In and GG adoration Group! Oh, another, someone suggested the other day that Will Pitt should have one too!

Yes!

They are adored here, wow some might call them, the followers, "bots"!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #17)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:04 PM

23. GD: GG

That would keep things organized wouldn't it?!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #23)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:14 PM

30. Hey urcdem!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #30)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:18 PM

35. Hiya, sheshe!



p.s. it was 10-9 for a minute there so there's hope!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #35)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:59 PM

74. Hope springs eternal~

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #17)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:28 PM

45. Well they outright admitted that they are here for the money.....

 

its just about page clicks for them.....they think they have bought DU!

So yes I think you may be onto a new name for such phenomenon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #45)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:10 AM

86. Yes Indeed!

Money Lyrics

[EMCEE]
Money makes the world go around
The world go around
The world go around
Money makes the world go around
It makes the world go 'round.

A mark, a yen, a buck, or a pound
A buck or a pound
A buck or a pound
Is all that makes the world go around,
That clinking clanking sound
Can make the world go 'round.

[GIRLS]
Money money money money money money
Money money money money money money
Money money money money money money
Money money

[EMCEE]
If you happen
To be rich,
[GIRLS]
.......Ooooh
[EMCEE]
And you feel like a
Night's enetertainment,
[GIRLS]
...Money
[EMCEE]
You can pay for a
Gay escapade.
[GIRLS]
Money money
Money money
Money money
Money money
[EMCEE]
If you happen to
To be rich,
[GIRLS]
.......Ooooh
[EMCEE]
And alone, and you
Need a companion
[GIRLS]
...Money
[EMCEE]
You can ring-ting-
A-ling for the maid.
[EMCEE]
If you happen
To be rich
[GIRLS]
.....Ooooh
[EMCEE]
And you find you are
Left by your lover,
[GIRLS]
...Money
[EMCEE]
Though you moan
And you groan
Quite a lot,
[GIRLS]
Money money
Money money
Money money
Money money
[EMCEE]
You can take it
On the chin,
[GIRLS]
.....Ooooh
[EMCEE]
Call a cab,
And begin
[GIRLS]
...Money
[EMCEE]
To recover
On your fourteen-
Carat yacht.

[EMCEE]
Money makes the world go around,
The world go around,
The world go around,
Money makes the world go around,
Of that we can be sure.
(....) on being poor.

[ALL]
Money money money-
money money money
Money money money-
money money money
Money money money money money money
Money money money money money money
Money money money money money money

[DANCE BREAK]

[EMCEE AND GIRLS (In Canon)]
If you haven't any coal in the stove
And you freeze in the winter
And you curse on the wind
At your fate
When you haven't any shoes
On your feet
And your coat's thin as paper
And you look thirty pounds
Underweight.
When you go to get a word of advice
From the fat little pastor
He will tell you to love evermore.
But when hunger comes a rap,
Rat-a-tat, rat-a-tat at the window...

[GIRLS]
At the window...

[EMCEE (spoken)]
Who's there?

[GIRLS (spoken)]
Hunger!

[EMCEE (Spoken)]
Ooh, hunger!

See how love flies out the door...
For

[EMCEE]
Money makes
The world...
[GIRLS]
...Go around
[EMCEE]
The world...
[GIRLS]
...Go around
[EMCEE]
The world...
[GIRLS]
...Go around
[EMCEE]
Money makes the
.... Go around
[GIRLS]
...Go around

That clinking
Clanking sound of
Money money money money money money
Money money money money money money

[EMCEE]
Get a little,
[GIRLS]
Money money
[EMCEE]
Get a little,
[GIRLS]
Money money
[EMCEE]
Money money
[GIRLS]
Money money
[EMCEE]
Money money
[GIRLS]
Money money

[EMCEE]
Mark, a yen, a buck
[GIRLS]
Get a little
[EMCEE]
Or a pound
[GIRLS]
Get a little
[EMCEE]
That clinking clanking
[GIRLS]
Get a little
Get a little

[EMCEE]
Clinking sound

[GIRLS]
Money money
Money money...

[EMCEE]
Is all that makes
The world go 'round

[GIRLS]
Money money
Money money

It makes the world go round

http://www.stlyrics.com/lyrics/cabaret/money.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:14 PM

29. So as Democrats we are NOT supposed to be pleased with them when they do great things....

 

According to your rules we bash them.....or say nothing at all...

I might remind you...THIS is Democratic Underground....for the purpose of supporting and helping to elect Democrats....that includes PRAISING them. Understand?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #29)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:17 PM

34. No I don't think he/she gets that, VR.

Never will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #34)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:25 PM

43. Some how "Punching Democrats" for sport constitutes "supporting them and helping them get elected".

 

That is how insidious it is...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #43)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:34 AM

105. Well their mission is..

to hold his feet to the fire.

Gawd dammit they voted for him twice! They even canvassed for him, worked their collective asses off for him. They helped put him in office, they did their work!!!! Then they left him on his own. No support. None.

Now it is a complete misunderstanding of the facts. The GOP is the one that betrayed this country. Yet they just moan and a wail. He betrayed me! He betrayed me!

Rend clothes and tear out hair here, he betrayed their trust.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #105)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:43 AM

108. Well then I guess it is THEY that suck at politics not us....

 

We weren't expecting "the One" "the Savior" (what ever the latest fad phrase they are using is) THEY were expecting "the One" "the Savior".....when THEY (not us) didn't get a Savior or The One....they were the ones lamenting their "bad choice at the polling booths"......meanwhile the rest of us who have had our expectations met or exceeded are constantly accused of it! Ironic isn't it? YET they want to make US feel bad about who WE voted for....even though as we see....they CERTAINLY suck at choosing leaders....why should we EVER listen to them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #105)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 05:07 PM

224. Yep voted for him twice

And yet some of them were into "bashing" him in just a few months after they voted for him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:41 PM

61. We are expected not to like Democrats on a Democratic Forum whose mission states"

 

to support and help elect more Democrats"....you mean that kind of "worship"? Using your analogy and looking at the mission statement....I guess that makes Democratic Underground a church. That means you are here to attend the "service".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:36 PM

5. You would think that would be inherent.

Fox-style...yeah you would think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #5)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:10 AM

133. Sadly they don't think, Bobbie Jo. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:37 PM

7. Other. How about a "No DUer Bashing" codicile?

I would like to see an end of threads that are started for the sole purpose of labeling and dividing DUers.

No good ever comes from those threads.

Yes, individual DUers disagree with each other on any number of things. However, the insistence of dividing DUers into camps and then broad-brushing their viewpoints is destructive and makes DU suck.

I want to see an end of DUers accusing each other of not posting their individual opinions in good faith.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #7)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:44 PM

11. No objections but I think that's considered a jury issue.

As I understand it, hosts decide on Statement of Purpose violations (lock/leave), juries decide on Community Standards, including DUer bashing ("This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate", and admins decide on Terms of Service (everything else, including supporting Democrats). So I suppose what I'm suggesting is giving GD hosts a reason to lock offensive posts that don't call out a DUer or whine about DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #11)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:54 PM

16. Well, you're asking about making an addition to the SOP. This is the addition I propose.

I'd like to see the SOP of GD expanded to include a statement that it is not permitted to start threads for the sole purpose of "bashing" fellow DUers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #16)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:01 PM

20. Ah.

Well I wouldn't object but at least there's a protocol for addressing DU-er bashing violations, and juries are expected to consider it. Right now Dem-bashing sort of falls between stools and neither hosts nor juries have explicit instructions to consider it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #20)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:19 PM

37. I think politicians ought to be fair game. Why should they be protected?

Politicians aren't affected by what's posted on DU, but DUers are certainly affected by what politicians DO.

I see no reason to protect politicians from being criticized, I'm only interested in protecting DUers from being attacked by other DUers for criticizing politicians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #37)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:36 PM

57. I'm not ruling out criticism, just FOX-style bashing.

They're different in that "criticism" implies a basic level of respect, regardless of how strongly a poster might feel about a particular policy, proposal or statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #57)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:51 PM

65. I would say that "FOX-style" is in the eye of the beholder.

Who decides what sorts of criticism is "FOX-style"? I don't even know that means.

You say that it has to do with "a basic level of respect" - but why should "respect" be enforced? Are politicians our betters that we must tug our forelocks and hold our tongues?

I've always been taught that respect must be earned. If a DUer feels that a politician has not earned that DUer's respect, why should they not be free to express it? It does nothing to take away the freedom of those who disagree to express their disagreement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #65)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:01 AM

75. The reason is that we want to win elections.

That's what politics comes down to doesn't it? If you don't win you're at the mercy of your rivals and these days that's a very dangerous place to be.

So, while I absolutely understand the desire to talk trash about pols you despise on a discussion board, the fact is that DU has a certain bellwether quality and come election time that trash-talk is gonna bite us in the butt. There are other reasons but that's the basic one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #75)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:06 AM

79. Nah, winning elections just for the sake of winning is not the end of politics

 

Exercising power responsibly is the end of politics. You can win all the elections you want, not listening to the needs of the people who put you there is not exercising power responsibly.

You should go visit a few city council hearings. Because you have no clue what government is about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #75)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:17 AM

95. I believe in the truism, "All politics are local". When it comes to elections, what someone says

about some politician in DC is irrelevant to everyone except the person who actually lives in that politician's district.

In any case, we haven't even reached Primary season yet. Let's freely hash out what we want, and who we think sucks and why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #16)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:29 PM

48. that is already against the rules....

 

wow...just wow...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #7)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:15 PM

32. Oh great then they just come here and BASH BASH BASH Democrats with no

 

reprisal at all...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #32)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:26 PM

44. Reprisal? How about simply making counter arguments?

A "No Bashing DUers" rule would cover everyone - no matter which viewpoints you hold.

It would mean that the SOP would not allow someone to bash YOU for expressing YOUR viewpoint.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #44)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:30 PM

49. that is ALREADY the rules....

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #49)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:40 PM

59. First of all, there are no "rules" per se. There are "Community Standards" and SOP.

Community Standards are nebulous at best, and entirely dependent on the whim of random juries.

On the other hand, if the SOP clearly stated that GD is not to be used for starting threads bashing other DUers it would hopefully serve to significantly cut down on OPs which serve no purpose other than division and stoking flame wars.

I think that would be a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #59)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:42 PM

63. There is a mission statement....

 

which states "support and help elect Democrats" what part of "Bashing each other" accomplishes that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #63)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:54 PM

68. I'm against "bashing each other" - as I clearly stated in my first post on this thread.

That's my whole point. I'd like to see an end to DUers "bashing each other".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #44)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:32 PM

51. How do you make counter "arguments" to hate?

 

It wastes alot of time....

By your thinking....why don't we just let Republicans come...we could just 'make counter-arguments" right?

Because that is OH SO productive to have to constantly do that right? Same thing is happening but from wolves in sheeps clothing...they are here to "Punch Democrats" it is THEIR mission....not to make congent arguments in good faith. They are not honest brokers...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #51)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:58 PM

72. Who said anything about letting Republicans come?

Stop accusing your fellow DUers of ill intent just because they don't see things the same way you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #72)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:07 AM

81. We ALREADY do not suffer them...BECAUSE all they do is "punch Democrats" on DU

 

why should we allow anyone else to do it? Would you expect to have to spend your time "counter-arguing with them" (the Republicans) as if bashing Democrats should HAVE to be defended endlessly on Democratic Underground. Why should we allow Libertarians to come to Democratic Underground to "bash Democrats"....they are here to "suppress the vote" not to elect more Democrats.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #81)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:34 AM

104. Are you going to vote in the Midterms? Are you going to vote for Dems running for local offices?

Are you going to vote for Dems running for state offices? Are you going to vote for a Dem running for the Congressional seat in your district? Are you going to vote for a Dem Senator if one of your state's Senate seats is up for election?

If your answer is yes to all, then you are no different from pretty much everyone else on DU. No votes are being "suppressed" by DUers expressing their opinions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scarletwoman (Reply #7)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 07:48 AM

197. Oh really?

That's interesting. Then there are a couple I can think of who you would vote to ban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:41 PM

8. A place called "Democratic Underground" shouldn't be a forum for putting Democrats under the ground.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #8)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:16 PM

33. In fact quite the opposite....it says so right in the Mission Statement....

 

this is NOT "Punch a Democrat Underground!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:42 PM

9. I said no, but would reconsider if the most ardent Bog-ers got to make the new rules list

 

It would be worth it, just to see how long the list was, and what was said in it as to what constitutes "bashing". I'm guessing it would be a pretty long list.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quinnox (Reply #9)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:44 PM

10. I think no Fox style garbage is enough.

Leave it at that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #10)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:46 PM

12. Ok, but not sure if some of the more hard core supporters would be satisfied with that

 

It is too open to interpretation and they might want it to be a lot more specific.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quinnox (Reply #12)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:18 PM

36. Easy to solve....if they are on DU and NEVER have a positive thing to say about Democrats

 

Ever...then they ARE NOT here "to support and help elect more Democrats" and are CURRENTLY in violation of that...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #36)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:16 AM

92. You seem to have this thing all figured out. Maybe you should be one of the ones who help draw up

 

the new rules of showing proper respect to our Democratic leaders...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quinnox (Reply #92)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:18 AM

97. If you are here...for the sole purpose of "punching Democrats" and it becomes obvious that it is all

 

you do here....then you are not "supporting or helping to get more Democrats elected" which is the express mission of this site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #97)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:24 AM

99. Wonderful. You can be lead "enforcer" of these new rules. Put us all in line.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quinnox (Reply #99)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:37 AM

106. Careful, you are about to get your first ODS red flag!

 

I'm looking over their new rules and regulations manual, the uniforms are tight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quinnox (Reply #99)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 05:31 PM

225. So...

Are you only here to only bash democrats and never say anything positive about them, because I think that's what VR was saying? You said "put us all in line" so I am a little confused.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:47 PM

14. No, some deserve it.

See John Edward, Joe Lieberman, Rod Blagojevich... Having a D behind your name should not make you free from criticism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shoulders of Giants (Reply #14)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:53 PM

15. Okay but there's criticism and there's criticism.

You can appreciate Edwards' virtues as a candidate, or lack thereof, or discuss his moral failings without dragging his haircuts or his big-ass ranch into every sentence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #15)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:00 PM

19. I voted for Rod Blagojevich

The things I would have to say about that awful excuse for a human being now would make make Hannity say "ease up." No, some people are terrible human beings and deserve what they get, despite if there is a D behind their name. If something like that would get me banned, then so be it. I'm sure if I voted Edwards, I would feel the same about him now, but I dont really think about him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shoulders of Giants (Reply #19)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:07 PM

26. Blago

I don't live in Chicago so I never got up-close and personal but it always seemed to me that his offenses were of the rather ordinary kind. But to hear the media you'd think he'd committed some heinous unspeakable crime. I mean seriously, what pol doesn't consider quid-pro-quo when making appointments, financial or otherwise? That's what politics is all about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #26)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:34 PM

54. blago was a good gov

night before he arrested he was on the steps of a shuttered factory, standing with the laborers that bank of America was screwing out of pay...telling the bank if you do not pay what you owe the state of Illinois will not longer do business with you

we went to bed cheering

next morning fbi arrested him

took them 2 trys to convict him

he asked dems to do fund raisers for him...is all I ever knew he was convicted on (why wouldn't a dem gov want a dem senator that could raise funds)?...now if he was gonna "sell" the seat to a repub,i would of been pissed but that was not the case

Christy has done hundred times worse and he is still walking free

seigleman got nothing and he rots in prison

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to questionseverything (Reply #54)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:08 AM

82. That was my impression too.

Though I know a lot of Illinois folks despised him, so there was probably some truth to the accusations, but how much of that was thanks to the media blitz? They did much the same thing to Kucinich when he was mayor of Cleveland or at least that's how I understand it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #82)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:44 PM

161. yes some hate him

he was all about protecting the 99%

Illinois has huge money problems, blago would not raise income taxes, he wanted to make companies that did business in Illinois but paid no income tax pay a simple 1/4 of 1 % tax on their gross....big business hated that

I still think it is a great idea

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to questionseverything (Reply #161)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 07:24 PM

230. Was Rod Blagojevich protecting the 99% when he was attempting to extort a children's hospital?

Sorry, but even if a politician agrees with me on the issues, if he or she is of contemptible character, then I have no use for him or her. Rod Blagojevich is where he belongs. And I voted for him for governor. Worst vote ever. Its this vote why I cannot support this "anti dem bashing" rule.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shoulders of Giants (Reply #230)

Mon Mar 31, 2014, 05:25 PM

239. since the koch's werent gonna fund him

Children's Memorial Hospital CEO: Blagojevich ask was "inappropriate," "illegal."
By Natasha Korecki on May 16, 2011 2:23 PM | 1 Comment | No TrackBacks
Reporting with Lark Turner

A different witness is up, but government prosecutors are staying on the same theme: Children's Memorial Hospital.
The hospital's CEO, Patrick Magoon, is now testifying about a pediatric rate increase he sought in the fall of 2008. Prosecutors contend Magoon was shaken down for a campaign contribution after he asked for state help at his institution.
In testimony, Magoon said he reached out to then-Gov. Blagojevich via letter seeking the rate increase and heard nothing back. Blagojevich was in control of the rate increase, which went to doctors who treated Medicaid patients at Children's.
He then asked former Cubs manager Dusty Baker to talk to Blagojevich, a Cubs fan.
That got a response and eventually, Magoon got a call from Blagojevich himself in October of 2008.
Blagojevich told him he'd get the rate increase but he asked him not to make the decision public until after Jan. 1 of the following year.
"Only five days had lapsed," according to Magoon, and he got a second call.
This time it was from Blagojevich's brother, Rob, who also happened to be the head of the Friends of Blagojevich campaign fund.
He asked Magoon to kick in $25,000 to his brother's campaign fund. And he asked that it be done before ... Jan. 1st.
"From my perspective, the two were linked and one, in my point of view, was in exchange for another," Magoon told Assistant U.S. Attorney

///////////////////////////////////////

children's hospital conjures up visions of poverty but the ceo testifying made over 1.8 million?


RANK NAME STATE HOSPITAL REVENUE HIGHEST-PAID EXECUTIVE TOTAL COMPENSATION ADJUSTED COMPENSATION
1 CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER OH $1,461,074,989 James M. Anderson - President & CEO $1,747,573 $1,577,367
2 CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA PA $1,439,522,728 Steven M. Altschuler- President & CEO $2,070,775 $2,070,775
3 CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL BOSTON MA $1,348,731,678 James Mandell - CEO $1,962,538 $663,132
4 TEXAS CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, HOUSTON TX $1,001,158,792 Mark A. Wallace - President $1,430,013 $1,430,013
5 NATIONWIDE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, COLUMBUS OH $918,711,467 Steven Allen - CEO $1,111,264 $1,111,264
6 CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER DALLAS TX $912,034,106 Christopher J. Durovich - President & CEO $2,845,980 $2,128,120
7 CHILDREN'S HEALTHCARE OF ATLANTA, INC. 1 GA $872,173,403 James Tally-CEO 2 $3,474,172 NA
8 PACKARD CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL AT STANFORD CA $772,101,422 Christopher Dawes-President & CEO $1,102,983 $641,714
9 CHILDREN'S NATIONAL MEDICAL CENTER DC $730,275,611 Edwin K. Zechman Jr.-President & CEO $1,987,629 $1,987,629
10 SEATTLE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL WA $707,928,519 Thomas Hansen - CEO $1,209,562 $1,209,562
11 CHILDREN'S MERCY HOSPITAL, KANSAS CITY MO $684,116,645 Randall L. O'Donnell - President & CEO $5,987,194 3 $1,902,203
12 CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF WISCONSIN, MILWAUKEE WI $588,727,332 Jon E. Vice - President $5,465,948 4 $5,465,948
13 CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL DENVER CO $588,534,289 James Shmerling-President & CEO $1,088,845 $1,088,845
14 CHILDREN'S HOSPITALS & CLINICS, MINNEAPOLIS MN $565,417,744 Alan L. Goldbloom -President & CEO $1,324,535 $1,262,436
15 COOK CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER, FORT WORTH TX $563,749,365 Rick W. Merrill-President & CEO $1,006,707 $1,006,707
16 CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF LOS ANGELES CA $546,993,497 Richard Cordova-President & CEO $1,159,984 $1,026,269
17 CHILDREN'S MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, CHICAGO IL $533,957,494 Patrick Magoon - President & CEO $1,802,955 $1,802,955

////////////////////////////////////

dem spend MOST their time begging for money and some go to jail for "doing it wrong"

but Christie appointee Sampson has made millions off his law firms connections and so far nothing from feds

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shoulders of Giants (Reply #19)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:19 PM

38. Blagojevich is in jail now....

 

he has been bashed into prison...you won't find anyone on DU that will support him at all..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #38)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:37 AM

185. Bashed into prison...

Exactly. It's happened in my own little town. Happened to a city council member I voted for mayor on the very afternoon I cast my mail-in ballot. Resigned that day. Weird huh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 10:58 PM

18. It's too ambiguous

for my small brain. I have no idea what the mentioned list means in logical or specific terms. Someone would have to judge what that means and then there will be another storm of infighting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to defacto7 (Reply #18)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:20 PM

39. Do you support Democrats on DU or do you ONLY come here to criticize them...

 

its is pretty simple...and part of the mission of this site...to "support and help elect" them...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #39)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:08 AM

113. I understand the premise

what I don't understand is the wording that would easily determine who fits into which category in a way that a rule can be followed that is consistent to everyone who reads the SOP. The wording used in the poll question is not any better at determining what the change would accomplish.

"No FOX-style Dem bashing" What is that? I don't watch Fox anything.

Then the explanation, "gratuitous, insulting, over-the-top" That's already implied or written into the TOS..

"topically irrelevant dog-whistling of the type seen on FOX News and other RW outlets" I have no idea what that is and everyone who is familiar with those terms would give a different degree of value to those terms.

What I am saying is that the wording would need to be comprehended with little ambiguity. In the end, it would come down to a judgment that is already made by the jury.

Honestly, I don't know what wording would accomplish the goal determining who is one or the other emphatically. Then there's the issue of reality among humans..... not a good idea.

Maybe I'm taking this too seriously...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to defacto7 (Reply #113)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 02:00 AM

191. That has nothing to do with what I said.....and the rule is already in place...

 

gIf you have come to DU SIMPLY to complain and criticize and NOTHING else...then how can that be considered to be in support OF Democrats....its one thing to be a Democrat with a criticism or two....but to have NOTHING but criticism...then how is that in anyway constructive? In fact...that is not "constructive" at all...that is destructive. It is being JUST as recalcitrant as the Teabagging Republican and FOX News viewers...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:02 PM

21. I like turtles.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:02 PM

22. Much too vague

It can't work. You know what "No FOX-style Dem bashing" means TO YOU, but I can guarantee you that 100 random DUers will have 100 different opinions about what that means to them. Rules must be tediously specific, or they are ripe for abuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tkmorris (Reply #22)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:21 PM

41. It means that IF like a Fox News viewer would do....you ONLY come on DU to punch Democrats

 

then you are neither supporting them or helping them get elected. If you NEVER post anything positive about them...then like a Fox News viewer....you are not here to support or elect them...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tkmorris (Reply #22)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:32 PM

52. Systematic bashing of a Democratic President...

With never a post that praises any action this President takes is bad for Democrats. Why the new outrage now? Are people being told that it is hopeless, that we should just stay at home in 2014 and not vote?

We already have that abuse of the rules here, tkmorris, sad but true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #52)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:23 AM

138. Yes we do have abuse of rules here

What I am saying is that to change that in a positive way means being VERY specific. "Fox style bashing" doesn't say anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tkmorris (Reply #138)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:29 AM

141. Agreed!

Thanks tkmorris.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:06 PM

24. I think we need a whine bar

We could put it in the darkest corner of the lounge, back behind the stuffed penguin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pscot (Reply #24)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:29 PM

47. LOL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pscot (Reply #24)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:05 AM

111. Would that be one of those exploding penguins?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:07 PM

27. Again... Back In The Day... What Would You Do With Joe Lieberman And Zell Miller ???

 

They were both Democrats.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Reply #27)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:14 PM

31. Neither are Democrats now so it wouldn't apply to them.

And DU didn't exist when Lieberman was on the national ticket.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #31)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:21 PM

40. They Were Both Democrats When They Appeared At The Republican Conventions...

 

DU was around for Miller, and Lieberman was discussed ad nauseum after DU was formed, so you really didn't answer the question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Reply #40)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:31 PM

50. As I understand it DU3 has only existed since April 2011.

Miller left the Senate in 2005 (wonder why) and Lieberman left the party after losing his primary in 2006.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #50)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:53 PM

67. And I have been around since

 

Oh...

Member since: 2003 before July 6th

I joined in late 2001 to be exact. So answer what Willy asked. What do you do about Lieberman and Miller?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #67)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:56 PM

70. Hosts and juries did not exist prior to 2011.

You're welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #70)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:02 AM

76. And we still had standards.

 

Actually we had better standards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #76)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:05 AM

78. Possibly but this SoP was written for DU3.

You see now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #78)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:07 AM

80. Derived from the other two

 

What you want is the ability to shut up people you do not agree with. Nice try buster. You are quite transparent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #80)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:09 AM

84. Thanks, I try to be as transparent as possible. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #50)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:58 PM

71. Can you explain what DU2 and DU1 and DU1.1 were? They existed long before DU3.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madinmaryland (Reply #71)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:03 AM

77. Okay but the current SoP and division of duties is circa DU3.

So however things were arranged prior to 2011 doesn't really have any bearing on the current SoP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #77)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:09 AM

83. Regardless of which DU version you have been on, WHINING about DU is a quick way to

get your OP locked/hidden or whatever.

And you are whining about DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madinmaryland (Reply #83)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:15 AM

91. I'm making a constructive suggestion.

So what's yours?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madinmaryland (Reply #83)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 07:53 PM

234. The thread opening post just makes a suggestion, asks a question, provides options.

That's the only post the hosts can vote on. It's not "whining about DU." If I were still a forum host (and I did it for quite a bit when we first fired up here), I'd vote to leave it.

Anything below that post is a job for a jury. Juries generally don't lock for SOP. They often don't lock for TOS violations!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Reply #27)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:39 PM

58. max baucus technically still is......

 


How Max Baucus, the Next Ambassador to China, Killed Progressive Health Care Reform




Sen. Max Baucus' opposition to regulating the health and insurance industry made it impossible for the Democrats to take full advantage of their 60 vote majority in the Senate. He not only lead the handful of centrist Senate Democrats against Obama's plan, but also empowered Republicans and right-wingers, including Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Glenn Beck, to exploit the Democratic divisions.
Let's concede that President Barack Obama's decision to appoint Senator Max Baucus as his ambassador to China is a clever political ploy. Baucus had already announced he wasn't going to seek re-election next year, but if he leaves the Senate now, Montana's Democratic Gov. Steve Bullock can appoint a replacement who can run next year as the incumbent, increasing the odds that the Democrats will hold onto that seat.

It's just unfortunate that Obama couldn't send Baucus to a democratic country so he could see first-hand what a decent universal health care system looks like. Almost any democracy country would do, since all of them -- including Canada, Germany, France, New Zealand, Sweden, England, or Japan -- cover more people at a much lower cost than the United States.....


Read more:
https://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/12/20-4

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:22 PM

42. that was then....this is now....

 

You know....how far back you want to go?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:34 PM

53. Have the current SoP enforced, that will go a long way.

 

Any changes would be useless when the current SoP is not enforced.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #53)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:36 PM

56. YES the mission says "to support and help elect Democrats" period...

 

if you come here to "punch Democrats" you are in violation of the mission...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:35 PM

55. Might as well require discussion of issues instead of personalities n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:41 PM

60. I don't feel it needs to be part of the SOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:49 PM

64. how bout a "don't drink a fifth, smoke crack, or rip bong hits before posting OPs" addendum?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dionysus (Reply #64)

Fri Mar 28, 2014, 11:59 PM

73. True, this could happen.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #73)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:19 PM

163. !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dionysus (Reply #64)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:16 AM

93. How about we don't waste everyone's time on Democratic Underground whose express mission it is:

 

"to support and elect more Democrats" by forcing them endure to endless Democrat Punches from those that "claim" to be fellow Democrats. However....I fail to see how allowing that to happen "supports and helps get more Democrats elected"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #93)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 03:38 AM

145. Nailed it. There have been elections all year and opportunities to eduate voters on issues wasted.nt



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:09 AM

85. How about new people stop telling the regulars that we're Doing It Wrong?

It's getting really fucking old.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #85)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:14 AM

89. You noticed this too?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #85)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:47 AM

109. Amen to that! (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #85)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:11 AM

115. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #85)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 03:09 AM

144. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #85)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 05:32 AM

147. Ouch..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #85)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 08:48 AM

154. Nailed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #85)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 09:45 AM

157. Fuckin' A!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #85)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:28 PM

164. Actually I like it when they expose themselves as authoritarians.

 

It goes to show why so many people are banned in the BOG. Thankfully they will never get their wish, this is a liberal website and they just cannot stand it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftyMom (Reply #85)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 08:23 PM

170. How many years does a person have to be a member...

to not be considered a new person? When can they look forward to not being dismissed as if they're less because they're new?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:11 AM

87. Ignore and trash thread work great too.

I've used trash thread function more in the last few weeks than I have ever before.

Out of sight, Out of mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:15 AM

90. Who the hell worries about this shit?

Seriously, who has time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Deep13 (Reply #90)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:16 AM

94. No one is required to vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:21 AM

98. Another strict restriction? Like "guns?"

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:27 AM

100. Define Dem-bashing. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skip Intro (Reply #100)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:10 AM

114. Uuum, give me a second here.

Oh wait I have one!

"Fuck you, Mr. President, you piece of shit used-car salesman.

From my heart and soul, fuck you."


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024685964

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #114)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:28 AM

118. Still whining about that? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #118)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:34 AM

120. The sad part.

You support that statement from Will Pitt! You take pride in it as Pitt does. Has he apologized? No and he never will. He owns that and so do you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #120)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:37 AM

121. Not everyone worships Obama! Some are disappointed! Some....

 

Act like the GOP who worshiped Bush!

Will can defend himself! But he has a right to complain.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #121)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:41 AM

124. Yup. You own it!

And Will needs his rec's from his supporters to make his sad point. Talk about worship.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #124)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:44 AM

125. You are in the minority here! Isn't there some posts from.....

 

Someone you need to kick??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #125)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:49 AM

130. You'd be surprised. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #125)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:55 AM

132. How am I in the minority on Democratic Underground!?

Are you saying that a supporter of this President and the foundations of the Democratic Party that upholds equal rights for every citizen is in the minority. I am in the minority here!? On DU!!!!! Why because I am a woman and chose to speak out, WTF!

As for your cute comment about kicking threads, which ones do you refer to. I am sure I know, yet I wish to hear you say it.


You are walking a tight line here, Logical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #132)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 03:50 AM

146. Sorry. Anyone supporting the DNC platform on equal rights for every citizen IS in the minority here.

Last edited Sat Mar 29, 2014, 04:23 AM - Edit history (1)

Mainly because they don't need such facts, only fury.

These Do-Nothings profess a commitment to social change for ideals of justice, equality, and opportunity, and then abstain from and discourage all effective action for change. They are known by their brand, 'I agree with your ends but not your means'.

~ Saul Alinsky


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #146)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 07:44 PM

169. Sad truth don't you think, freshwest?

And a great quote from Saul Alinsky!

Thank you~

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #125)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 05:26 AM

196. What Minority ? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #125)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 05:39 PM

227. I am confused

Are you saying that the "majority" of people here on DU are all for the "fox news style" of bashing democrats? That calling the president a POS and saying F you Obama is what the majority of the people on this board would approve of?

I really find that hard to believe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #114)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:48 AM

129. I think that's about as good an example as there is.

I imagine some will disagree however.

p.s. thanks sheshe!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #129)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:21 AM

137. Great Op ucrdem.

And thank you.

That last post, I am in a minority here? Gotta say that pisses me the hell off! You probably already read my response.

I/We are not a minority.

LOL I love your avatar!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #114)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 10:27 PM

237. wow, didn't know it went that far



we gotta little Fox running around this Den!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 12:32 AM

102. if we can also add, "No advocating policies that would be condemned by everyone on DU if they were

carried out by a Republican administration."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Reply #102)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:43 AM

143. Good one DC. you win the thread!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Reply #102)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:26 AM

178. that's gonna go right over their heads, Douglas

yes indeed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Douglas Carpenter (Reply #102)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:18 PM

219. ^^^this^^^

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:16 AM

116. Might as well wish for and vote for whether it

could happen or not, eh ucr!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #116)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:46 AM

127. Yeah this one might need a little retooling

but ya gotta start somewhere right?

Back atcha Cha!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #127)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:15 AM

134. It's a start! Like ACA.. in spite of all the liars trying to get rid of it..



ucr

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:27 AM

117. I love knowing who voted "great idea", not a shock! nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #117)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:38 AM

122. I love knowing who voted "Epic Fail", not a shock! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #122)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:40 AM

123. Notice who is winning! The ones who realize the Democratic Party....

 

Is not working like it should!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #123)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:45 AM

126. You and your supporters are winning?

Or whining.

Your way sure as hell won't get out the vote in 2014, now will it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #126)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:46 AM

128. Be a sheep! Fine with me. I will take Will over the poster you support any day!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #128)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:51 AM

131. Well as long as we're picking teams. . .

oh forget it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #128)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:16 AM

135. huh?

What a bizarre post.

Forming a dodgeball team after school?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #128)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:27 AM

140. The poor little lamb that was lost astray.

Bah Bah Bah....keep following Pitt.

Where he leads you will follow~

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:16 AM

136. I'd say "other"

I'd like to see reasoned criticism over FOX-style bashing. Obvious conservative troll insults should always be dealt with. But I am afraid too many posts will be alerted as "FOX-style" and people will be afraid to post their opinions. So I say hold off on this idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:23 AM

139. Lots of people here bash Obama for signing free-trade agreement after free-trade agreement.

Not me, because I happen to favor free trade. But that does not necessarily mean that I think the people who oppose free trade should be banned from expressing this opinion in GD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 02:38 AM

142. Possibly the dumbest post I've read all week.

 

Congratulations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 05:48 AM

148. Add it to the TOS, and ban the fuckers that continually engage in it...

This town needs an enema.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #148)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 03:13 PM

166. I thought you hailed from a village?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #148)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 07:48 PM

233. +1 we need a DU dog house

TIME OUT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 05:52 AM

149. You mean like not using ODS, Putinista, firebagger, Obamabot and such

against other DUers? I'm all for that!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 08:18 AM

152. I don't like the dichotomy

There is fair criticism, and people should be able to criticize any politician, including the POTUS.

OTOH people have moved from reasonable criticism to unreasonable bashing and name calling. I think it's gone too far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 08:22 AM

153. How about something that defines what, exactly, a Democrat IS.

 

Right now, looks like all being a Democrat means, for some, is that there is a "D" after the name. That's it. That's all.
I now have the impression that there is no Republican so low, so base, who couldn't have his sweatshirt embroidered with a "D" on the back, and instantly have the mindless support of some.
Eventually, at this rate, what we will have is a government full of various shades of GOP.
And, to make it even better, the Third Way DNC doesn't really support progressives.
The ultimate goal of the Third Way is not to gain control and magically become liberal or progressive. it is to govern as GOP would have. Austerity'n'all. IMO, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 08:50 AM

155. Terrible idea.

 

Politicians, of any party, sometimes deserve to be bashed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 09:11 AM

156. I point out that the admins killed Meta for good reasons.

 

This thread and the dozens like it are some of those good reasons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #156)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:54 AM

190. But now the toothpaste fails to retreat back into the tube and it just is all over the place.

If the Meta was a bad a idea getting rid of it seems worse because the meta folks just keep on rocking and it has infected the overall host.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 10:29 AM

158. Haha, I knew this is where you were heading

from the day you showed up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #158)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 03:16 PM

167. word.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #158)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:34 AM

171. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 10:37 AM

159. Be honest. You want to get rid of anyone who criticizes Obama or Hillary. NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clg311 (Reply #159)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:21 AM

176. nooooo.....it is strictly Obama

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 10:41 AM

160. Nah, much better to have their impotent rage posted here, than to have it ...

... roaming the streets distracting from our GOTV efforts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #160)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:06 AM

175. LMAO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sat Mar 29, 2014, 01:45 PM

162. A lack of enthusiasm could be considered bashing. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #162)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:47 AM

172. Perhaps. But "FOX-style Dem bashing" is something else.

And if I can clear up one other point: the added phrase is soley to give hosts guidance in deciding whether or not to lock disruptive threads. Juries already have complete discretion in deciding whether or not to hide, so this would not affect jury decisions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #172)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 02:02 AM

192. Host duties are centered primarily on placement rather than content.

Last edited Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:16 PM - Edit history (1)

There's a place on DU for almost every subject under the sun. Generally when the hosts lock an OP it's because it should have been posted elsewhere. Hence the questions about kitteh threads and the like. The "no whining" clause concerns itself primarily with complaints about the treatment of DUers by other DUers via the jury system. Since we police ourselves, watching the watchers is a subject of considerable interest. The problem is that since the demise of Meta, GD gets the bulk of that traffic. Meta was eliminated because of the intramural conflict associated with distributed authority.

It seems to me that DU is designed to modulate the degree of partisan special interest among its members. Protected groups are for the most hard core partisans devoted to certain subjects while the forums are a place for the general population to meet. Hence the ability of group hosts to block certain members.

It's not hard to find accusations of "right wing talking points" being flung about. Those are the result of partisans in various interest groups reacting to a perceived failure of partisan fervor in others. It is a subjective evaluation, and "FOX style bashing" would simply be included in the repertoire of those accusations.

In the end the hosts would find themselves evaluating the fervor of people's political leanings rather than doing the job for which the position of hosts was created: proper OP placement. Evaluation of content is the purview of juries.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #192)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 02:12 AM

193. Let's make it simple: they're centered on the SoP.

From the "Forum Hosts FAQ" visible to all:

Q. What do forum Hosts do?

A. Forum Hosts have one very simple job: they lock threads which violate the Statement of Purpose in the forum they are hosting.

Q. How do Hosts decide what to lock?

A. Every forum has a Statement of Purpose which is used to determine what kind of threads are permitted. For example, the Statement of Purpose for this forum (General Discussion) is:

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. No posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports unless there is really big news. No conspiracy theories. No whining about DU.


Hosts must use their own best judgment to decide whether or not any given thread in their forum is in line with the Statement of Purpose.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=hosts&volunteer=1002

That's why I'm focusing on the GD SOP, because locking and leaving is a host function. Hiding is done by juries but I'm only talking about locking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #193)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 10:47 AM

198. That's a distinction without a difference.

Both are stopping the conversation. It's already difficult enough to host without adding more content to the mix. We already have extended conversations about what constitutes "whining" without adding other content considerations. One thing is certain, the hosts forum isn't an appeal court when a jury declines to hide a post.

Can you define "FOX style" bashing in such a way as to distinguish it from any other type of "bashing"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #198)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:19 AM

200. The current GD SoP is 29 words; this would add 5.

"FOX-style Dem bashing" is a metonymy for dog whistles and other gratuitous insults. It's defined at more length in the OP but I think it's clear enough. In any case, hosts are instructed to use their best judgment when deciding how to respond to SoP alerts:

Hosts must use their own best judgment to decide whether or not any given thread in their forum is in line with the Statement of Purpose.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #200)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:27 AM

201. You're wrong.

It's not clear enough. And the reason it's not clear enough is because each of us defines "over the top" differently. We make that assessment based on subjective criteria including partisan enthusiasm, perceived partisan enthusiasm, personal likes and dislikes, popularity or it's lack, and no doubt a host of other factors that the hosts cannot control or evaluate.

I'll ask you again. Can you provide a definition for "Fox style" bashing? Understand, a definition requires some sort of objective standard. Can you provide that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #201)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:29 AM

202. The info I've posted is 100% accurate. Check the link. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #202)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:48 AM

209. Um, yeah.

Here's a link for you.

I am currently a GD host, and if you want me to lock OP's with "dog whistles", "incorrect style", and "over the top" content you need to exibit something other than the behavior that makes those determinations impossible.

You think you know what a "dog whistle" is, but your definition will not be the same as anybody elses. How the hell are the hosts supposed to regulate inferences?

You're not asking the hosts to be fair, you're asking the hosts to defend your personal understanding of partisan loyalty. Unfortunately you don't even have an objective standard for your own feelings, much less anything that would suffice for others.

I'll ask you again. Do you have an objective standard for proper expression of opinion sufficient to distinguish it from the expressions of our political opponents?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #209)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:50 AM

210. Thank you. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:57 AM

173. Everyone can see where that would head.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #173)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:04 AM

174. I'll tell you where: no change whatsoever except GD hosts would have more guidance

in deciding whether to lock threads, PERIOD. Juries: no change. TOS: untouched. Hosts: still plenty of discretion to lock or leave at liberty, but in close shaves, an incentive to lock outlandish threads and head off shit-storms.

Also: a lock is not a hide. If hosts lock a thread, it has no effect on a member's transparency. It can also be undone relatively easily, whereas a hide is forever. But this would not affect hides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #173)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:22 AM

177. all of DU would be like the BOG

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #177)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:26 AM

179. Fat chance. And this is soley a lock-leave matter, not a jury direction.

No member is going to be any worse off for having a GD thread locked, but it would create a more serene and less divisive DU experience for everyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #179)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:33 AM

182. aw please

get over yourself already - if you can't take the heat, stay in the BOG

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #182)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:34 AM

183. Why would you doubt it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #177)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:32 AM

180. Well it IS the people from the BOG pushing this.

 

Epic fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #180)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:33 AM

181. well no shit

their panties are being wadded tighter and tighter

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #181)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:36 AM

184. Careful you are about to get an ODS red card!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:38 AM

186. It's not criticism that is the problem, it's the nasty, foul-mouthed name calling.

Some posts I've seen here sound like they were written by LefTEAS, not lefties. I think that kind of bitter, vitriolic commentary is just unnecessary. It also gives way too much "joy" to the wingnuts and Paulbots who read this place and pick over the comments like the losers they are, having no lives.

It's actually possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

We should at least try.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #186)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 01:40 AM

187. That's why I suggested "FOX-style Dem bashing,"

to make it clear we're not talking about garden-variety criticism. We're talking heavy duty dog whistling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #186)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:06 PM

211. Righteous indignation against the powers that be

 

Is the essential form of dissent

This is an adult forum, and adult language is occasionally used ... trying to stifle that language is an attempt to stifle dissent, and THAT is unacceptable ...

A huge NO FUCKING WAY for this ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trajan (Reply #211)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:14 PM

215. Dog whistling like a FOX star is not an essential form of protest.

Not to us anyway. People keep recalling that DU was founded in 2001 as a refuge from the storm. So why invite that noise in now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #215)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:26 PM

220. You keep referring to FOX ...

 

Your attempt to associate anybody who takes issue with the President with FOX is obnoxious and absurd ...

It is naked character assassination, pure and simple, ... a smear tactic that is itself the REAL problem, yet it is YOU using it here in DU ...

THAT is the true abomination, not the honestly felt dissents that you are attempting to stifle ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trajan (Reply #211)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:28 PM

221. Well this poll is an epic failure.

 

But you have to expect them to try and stifle discussion, it is what they do in the BOG all day long...well did, now they only talk to themselves. THAT is what they want for GD. Just say no to echo chambers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trajan (Reply #211)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 04:46 PM

222. Swearing like a fifteen year old at "authori-TEH" is not "righteous indignation" though.

And it's not dissent.

It's called "Making an immature ass of yourself."

It demonstrates an inability to express oneself effectively. Not a good look for anyone claiming to be a wordsmith.

If this is an ADULT forum, it would behoove people to behave like ADULTS--and not charter members of the Terrible Twos Tantrum Team--if they want to be taken seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #222)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 05:32 PM

226. Your interpretation is hardly definitive

 

Perhaps you focus more on the messenger than the message ...

You obviously have a different perspective as to what is more important: the messenger or the message ...

I heard what Will said, and I had no objection to his language usage ... none whatsoever ... I heard the message, loud and clear ....

Fussing about HOW he said what he said seems to me to obfuscate what his message was, and I believe THAT was the intent of the anti-free speech wing of the Democratic party ... out in force here in DU ...

Tis a pity ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trajan (Reply #226)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 06:24 PM

229. It's definitive enough for most major publications.

People who write like that don't last long as reporters. You don't open up your Boston Globe or even your edgy Mother Jones and see a surfeit of that kind of language. Yet, that author can't seem to get away from it. Seems like a downward circling cycle, to me.

It wouldn't matter if the reincarnation of Mary, Queen of Scots wrote that. It was a lousy thing to say, and it didn't advance any argument. It did focus attention on the writer--so if you're accusing me of paying untoward attention to the messenger, you might want to have a look at the thread that lit that stupidity off--ALL the attention went to the messenger... and maybe THAT was the goal?

If a writer can't write so that his message is "obfuscated," (to note your point) then maybe that writer ought to grab a clue--particularly when he expects to make a living at the keyboard. Tis a pity, indeed, especially when that's yer paycheck....

This has absolutely nothing to do with "free speech." One can make a clear and persuasive point without being, dare I say, a "piece of shit" about it. And if one chooses to be a "piece of shit" and express oneself in an "assholish" fashion, then one should be prepared for some free speech pushback from people who are sick to death of childish histrionics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #229)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 07:28 PM

231. +1000 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 03:05 AM

194. Not only no, but FUCK NO, and please don't ask again.

 

YOU might want to post in an echo chamber, but I don't. And for those of you who do, there's this place called the Barack Obama Group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 10:53 AM

199. What you mean "WE", Kimosabe?

 

Should we storm DUs gates with pitchforks in defense of those who turn to jelly when a particular politician isn't properly revered?

You go first. We're right behind ya.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:36 AM

203. ROFLMAO that list is like a who's who of socialist DU'ers LOL

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #203)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:38 AM

204. What list?

I didn't post a list.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #204)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:42 AM

206. stare at your OP for a bit and you'll figure it out :)

 

I have to run to Lowes and grab one more sheet of glass tile for my inlay in the bathroom...


Always happens, just a little bit short

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #206)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:44 AM

207. I didn't post any lists in the OP.

Good luck with the tile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #203)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:07 PM

212. Just because some posters are literate, perceptive, intelligent, have superior deductive reasoning

skills, don't bow before authority, and don't engage in idol worship, it does not mean they are socialists.

Although some are.

I imagine the majority of RW corporatist conservatives think of all forms of socialism as a great evil; in fact I'm sure of it

"Socialism only works in two places: Heaven where they don't need it and hell where they already have it." --Ronald Reagan

"President Obama is taking the country down a dark path -- but there's still time to save ourselves.

"If you look at FDR, LBJ, and Barack Obama, this is really the final leap to socialism," she said. "But we all know that we could turn this around and we can turn this around fairly quickly. We're still a free country." --Michelle Bachmann

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #212)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:08 PM

213. Modest, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #213)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:17 PM

218. heehee! Aww, did I hit a nerve? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:42 AM

205. Us little people should not criticize Dems

Only Corporations and big money donors should have that right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Teamster Jeff (Reply #205)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 11:45 AM

208. You can criticize Dems on DU. This is about something else. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:14 PM

216. Are you whining about DU bro?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #216)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 12:16 PM

217. No. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 06:09 PM

228. Not just no--HELL no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Original post)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 07:47 PM

232. Send the Doggie Whistlers to the Dog House

I swear some of them are so naive they don't even realize they sound like Fox! Ruf Ruf

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamingdem (Reply #232)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 09:59 PM

235. Or they just don't care.

I still think some here just want the attention and they know if they bash Obama fox style, it's worth hundreds of recs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Andy823 (Reply #235)

Sun Mar 30, 2014, 10:25 PM

236. Hmm wonder if they learned that from the Teaparty!

I like your icon VOTE is right!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamingdem (Reply #236)

Mon Mar 31, 2014, 01:40 AM

238. lol

Who needs the Teaparty when we have our own local heroes ?

p.s. speaking of votes thanks . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread