General Discussion

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)

17. This is nothing new. The right vs left fight has been going on since the founding of the party.

Sat Jun 29, 2013, 09:25 PM

Jun 2013

The right wing of the Party has been ascendent since '92 but the left is beginning to fight back. The right feels threatened and makes more demands for "loyalty" and tries to defend indefensible right wing policies. Just as the Scoop Jackson, "hard hat", Democrats tried to defend the war in Vietnam and decried the Reds and Hippies.

So, here we are again. Left vs Right for the heart of the party.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

218 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

civil war on DU [View all] DonCoquixote Jun 2013 OP

I Appreciate the Sentiment, On the Road Jun 2013 #1

Indeed, I still don't know what I should be supporting or objecting! arcane1 Jun 2013 #4

Because it is indefensible. That's not the issue. cui bono Jun 2013 #18

It's absolutely defensible. See my #13 nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #22

No, spying on the American people is not, nor ever was defensible. It is against our laws. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #51

What the administration is doing is totally defensible. You have never addressed my dissertation on stevenleser Jun 2013 #52

I can..... Th1onein Jun 2013 #87

That is your opinion, not a fact based response. stevenleser Jun 2013 #93

Did you see the warrant? Th1onein Jun 2013 #102

What you and I opine isn't at issue. What is at issue is the law and the Constitution. The best stevenleser Jun 2013 #104

Did you see the warrant? Th1onein Jun 2013 #106

I answered. My opinion of the warrant is irrelevant. What's at issue is the law and Constitution. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #109

Your opinion of the warrant is relevant if you wish for others to give your opinion Th1onein Jun 2013 #130

The fourth amendment does not apply to National Security Surveillances. And I am not asking anyone stevenleser Jun 2013 #131

The Fourth Amendment applies to US persons. Th1onein Jul 2013 #207

That is not completely correct. If Americans are participating in foreign sponsored acts against stevenleser Jul 2013 #208

THE QUESTION WAS: HAVE YOU SEEN THE WARRANT? Th1onein Jul 2013 #209

Your opinion of the warrant is indeed irrelevant. MNBrewer Jun 2013 #204

BINGO! Th1onein Jul 2013 #210

babble. storing all calls is not an 'exception'. it's storing all calls, all data, *everything*. HiPointDem Jun 2013 #140

Storing, seizing.... MNBrewer Jul 2013 #216

Please provide the full legal citations for the all case titles you've posted. Melinda Jun 2013 #146

Steven, this is about *domestic* surveillance, not foreign espionage muriel_volestrangler Jun 2013 #147

The records don't contain content. Galraedia Jun 2013 #188

The records ARE content. MNBrewer Jul 2013 #217

Agreed. You can't have a warrant that specifies searching all the houses in Cleveland... HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #123

No, no, and no. stevenleser Jun 2013 #126

85% of FISA warrants in 2011 were drug-related. HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #128

Link please. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #129

Transcript of Sen Feingold questioning DOJ. HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #134

+1. HiPointDem Jun 2013 #141

EXACTLY. Thank you. Th1onein Jul 2013 #211

Yup. Indefensible. Enthusiast Jun 2013 #26

Before FISA, warrantless wiretapping was legal for foreign intelligence purposes. During the cold stevenleser Jun 2013 #29

Now we are all suspected and you sound just fine with that.......nt Enthusiast Jun 2013 #33

So quick to go ad hominem. Thats the problem with folks on your side of the issue. No, what I want stevenleser Jun 2013 #35

If the ad-hominem fits, wear it......nt Enthusiast Jun 2013 #41

Yes, you should. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #46

There is no ad hominem about it. Enthusiast Jun 2013 #54

You have no facts, you dont understand the issue being discussed, and are making it all about me. stevenleser Jun 2013 #70

I do understand that the government engaged in the greatest act of surveillance in all of history. Enthusiast Jun 2013 #80

You're already wrong. Prior to FISA in 1978, warrantless wiretapping was legal. All the President stevenleser Jun 2013 #81

There are far more solid arguments against your position.......nt. Enthusiast Jun 2013 #82

No one on DU has ever provided any, despite my transcript being out for three weeks. stevenleser Jun 2013 #83

I'm not going to dig up the threads but Enthusiast Jun 2013 #85

You can't crush an argument if you provide no facts. Insulting me doesnt crush my arguments. stevenleser Jun 2013 #86

The problem is, your facts are in question..............nt Enthusiast Jun 2013 #94

No, they're not. I'm supported by relevant federal appeals court decisions and the facts and history stevenleser Jun 2013 #95

I'm sorry to inform you of this fact but Enthusiast Jun 2013 #98

And another comment with an ad-hominem at the close. You really can't help yourself, can you? stevenleser Jun 2013 #107

Has the country recognized this pronouncement? treestar Jun 2013 #184

Here is the cross post of the transcript in GD. You can see the responses for yourself. No one stevenleser Jun 2013 #89

It is always the same. zeemike Jun 2013 #99

So make a fact based argument against what I wrote. I'm all ears. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #103

What again? zeemike Jun 2013 #110

IF you are conceding that there are no facts you can bring to bear to refute me, I accept. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #112

Your arguments are bogus....nt Enthusiast Jun 2013 #111

With that kind of logic you should apply for a job helping Rush Limbaugh. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #113

Bogus Enthusiast Jun 2013 #116

just repeating that treestar Jun 2013 #186

When someone makes a bogus assertion, as you have, Enthusiast Jun 2013 #191

Like your "omergerd you hate Obama!" "logic" in this thread? nt Union Scribe Jun 2013 #120

Which is something I said never... nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #121

No, because at least that would have been funny. Union Scribe Jun 2013 #124

Which post, the one where the person had a paragraph long rant at Obama that was all one sided stevenleser Jun 2013 #125

Now *that's* an ad hominem (nt) muriel_volestrangler Jun 2013 #148

Now who is engaging in ad hominem attacks? Th1onein Jul 2013 #215

Legal does not make it right or defensible. Ms. Toad Jun 2013 #137

What you believe and what the courts interpret treestar Jun 2013 #185

So how about waiting until the case is heard then, Ms. Toad Jun 2013 #198

I don't see many posters with their hair on fire on this treestar Jun 2013 #202

Or perhaps you are too willing to believe that the ONLY valid objection Ms. Toad Jun 2013 #203

I think you have a very liberal definition of the word "oversight" that I do not agree with. MNBrewer Jul 2013 #218

Oh yes, Steven, only YOU know about the issue being discussed. Th1onein Jul 2013 #214

Wow....that kinda reminds me of something that went down here... Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2013 #71

Sure, see my #13. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #74

no ad hom. you are defending it & sound just fine with it. fact. HiPointDem Jun 2013 #142

We've given you that, Steven, but it doesn't seem to matter to you. Th1onein Jul 2013 #212

And thankfully that omission was fixed after it was abused. Then it was unfixed to protect sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #55

OK, Well in That Case... On the Road Jun 2013 #36

LMAO. So true! But the folks you are talking about won't see it. stevenleser Jun 2013 #43

In a matter of conscience, Eddie Haskell Jun 2013 #178

They is spying on me! snooper2 Jul 2013 #206

I believe most of us are not worshippers or haters of Obama. Curmudgeoness Jun 2013 #2

Except ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2013 #53

I do not think Obama is evil, and I have supported him Curmudgeoness Jun 2013 #60

Me, either. And I've been looking. BlueCaliDem Jun 2013 #168

I'm happy to K&R this rational thread. arcane1 Jun 2013 #3

I would suggest ... 1StrongBlackMan Jun 2013 #57

If people want right-of-Clinton, they should vote GOP leftstreet Jun 2013 #5

+1, but its a lesson we failed to grasp twice DJ13 Jun 2013 #8

+2 Enthusiast Jun 2013 #28

You've managed to straw man all of DU with that comment. Quite an accomplishment. stevenleser Jun 2013 #24

Actually, no it does not. RC Jun 2013 #64

If I'm right that no one here wants right of Clinton, then that poster did post a straw man. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #68

actually, I did not DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #149

It was the OP's claim, not mine leftstreet Jun 2013 #69

I stand corrected and apologize. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #75

After watching Bill Clinton take our party to the right I find it impossible to accept... L0oniX Jun 2013 #6

One thing is for sure: railsback Jun 2013 #7

No they are laughing at us because some of us zeemike Jun 2013 #105

No, they're laughing because after years of accusing the Right of being fact-free railsback Jun 2013 #114

No that is not true zeemike Jun 2013 #117

I didn't say they were concerned about the NSA. They like that shit railsback Jun 2013 #173

Well that is true enough. zeemike Jun 2013 #190

That post lacks objectivity treestar Jun 2013 #9

first off, define "my side" DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #150

the ones calling others "authoritarian shitheads" treestar Jun 2013 #170

and THAT is who you lumped me in with? DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #174

Indeed. I am ashamed of many DUers who I have long respected. longship Jun 2013 #10

Not trying to be a total smart-ass (OK, maybe just a little), but HardTimes99 Jun 2013 #11

+1 most important thread on DU in a while (nt) Recursion Jun 2013 #92

Accusing me of supporting slavery is fair? baldguy Jun 2013 #101

That's how you can tell marions ghost Jun 2013 #12

Damn, but how I wish you would make this an OP, so HardTimes99 Jun 2013 #133

+1. HiPointDem Jun 2013 #143

key word,civil DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #151

To rigid thinkers marions ghost Jun 2013 #169

I'm surprised I can see your post. I've trashed NSA, Snowden and Greenwald. I've done that because stevenleser Jun 2013 #13

I just moved to Vegas this year. The temp hit over 115 today.... Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2013 #79

Interesting MFrohike Jun 2013 #145

Too many people have too much invested in what others on THIS BOARD do or think alcibiades_mystery Jun 2013 #14

Nothing that happens on DU has any bearing outside of DU. Some may think it does, but no. cherokeeprogressive Jun 2013 #15

You're right, of course. It's amazing to see the number of posts where some think this matters. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #58

Wait for 2014 nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #16

This is nothing new. The right vs left fight has been going on since the founding of the party. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #17

...and its not a Republican plot burnodo Jun 2013 #20

I doubt DU has much 840high Jun 2013 #19

The tent is too damn big. GeorgeGist Jun 2013 #21

If this is Civil War I belong to the Union flamingdem Jun 2013 #23

K&R! Some don't even recognize the existence of an oligarchy......nt Enthusiast Jun 2013 #25

Since most likely Hillary will run in 2016 and be the nominee, I wonder about the "won't tolerate still_one Jun 2013 #27

I don't know anyone on DU who hates the president Doctor_J Jun 2013 #30

Yes, you are demonstrating so much non-hate with that post. Please, let no one ever "not-hate" me stevenleser Jun 2013 #32

What a complete load of shit.........nt Enthusiast Jun 2013 #34

I'm trying to think of a way your two posts to me so far could be worth less. I can't. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #37

+1 well said Steven flamingdem Jun 2013 #38

Stating the truth about this "Democrat" isn't "hate." duffyduff Jun 2013 #39

It's not the truth, like most negative comments you see about Obama here. It's biased B.S. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #40

This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Jun 2013 #42

There was nothing but hate in that post. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #44

This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Jun 2013 #47

It's a fact. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #48

This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Jun 2013 #56

That is fucking awesome. Autumn Jun 2013 #201

+1 DCBob Jun 2013 #78

you can't distinguish between criticism of policy & "hate". HiPointDem Jun 2013 #144

You are apparently under a misconception LWolf Jun 2013 #154

Cleverly written Kolesar Jun 2013 #158

+1 leftstreet Jun 2013 #73

+1 sibelian Jun 2013 #196

Arguments for the status quo are ridiculous at this point! Enthusiast Jun 2013 #31

er DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #152

To crush your enemies demwing Jun 2013 #45

Excellent Conan reference! And the rest is unfortunately true as well. stevenleser Jun 2013 #49

Yeah, too many, in fact demwing Jun 2013 #97

Refusing to join the fray, I instead will join this meta-fray ABOUT the fray wtmusic Jun 2013 #50

I agree that the name calling is awful and pointless MannyGoldstein Jun 2013 #59

I believe Obama Phlem Jun 2013 #72

Why can't people see this? summer-hazz Jun 2013 #135

+1 sibelian Jun 2013 #197

I would say the same on Obama's gay rights policies dbackjon Jun 2013 #61

I would say that LGBT folks would be right to say that, but not so much on the NSA issue, etc. stevenleser Jun 2013 #65

Where you here for the Obama/Hillary War? Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2013 #62

Good luck with this, though I think your OP is a little one-sided, but well-intentioned. Denzil_DC Jun 2013 #63

++ flamingdem Jun 2013 #66

The GOP did plan it that way. They've bought out both sides of media. And they're ratfucking us. freshwest Jun 2013 #91

I think ratfucking is always a possibility in political activity, especially online, Denzil_DC Jun 2013 #108

Absolutely nailed it. nt Bobbie Jo Jun 2013 #122

Hate to burst your bubble, but the party leadership, including anyone that will be Egalitarian Thug Jun 2013 #67

i don't know if they themselves are the oligarchy BOG PERSON Jun 2013 #90

Any plausible Democratic candidate is just the better wing of the same oligarchy. leveymg Jun 2013 #76

We Need To Be Clear That The Democratic Party Is Run By The 1% - Accept That Or Demand Change cantbeserious Jun 2013 #77

There may be an entrepreneurial opportunity here... pinboy3niner Jun 2013 #84

knock JEFF9K Jun 2013 #88

"I don't see how this can help Republicans." Denzil_DC Jun 2013 #100

How does electing and supporting LWolf Jun 2013 #153

Thanks for providing an excellent example of what we've been talking about above. n/t Denzil_DC Jun 2013 #155

I'm not sure what you mean LWolf Jun 2013 #157

"I only saw you talking about attacks on Obama supporters above." Denzil_DC Jun 2013 #164

Okay. I thought I looked pretty closely, LWolf Jun 2013 #165

This is not an interrogation. n/t Denzil_DC Jun 2013 #166

Okay. It's a one-way street. Got it. nt LWolf Jun 2013 #167

the choice JEFF9K Jun 2013 #171

I wasn't aware Obama was standing for a third term. n/t Denzil_DC Jun 2013 #179

dem. vs. rep. JEFF9K Jul 2013 #205

An unintended play on words perhaps? 99Forever Jun 2013 #96

sigh again DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #175

Well sir... 99Forever Jun 2013 #181

I am not talking about GOP DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #182

Ah yes... 99Forever Jun 2013 #187

Well, at least you admit you dont care to work with people DonCoquixote Jun 2013 #189

A Civil War... On DU.... And neither side has selected me as their ruler yet? Fools... Ohio Joe Jun 2013 #115

The bright side BainsBane Jun 2013 #118

Generally, I read all posts before I comment... summer-hazz Jun 2013 #119

"Look , all you assholes are wrong and I'm right " Narkos Jun 2013 #127

Good points, DonCoquixote Hekate Jun 2013 #132

What principles do we stand for, together, regardless of whomever is president? Fire Walk With Me Jun 2013 #136

It's a nice sentiment, but we are far too well played by the right. jeff47 Jun 2013 #138

^^ the truth is right up there flamingdem Jun 2013 #139

Some of us are not that angry over Obama's NSA policy. Progressive dog Jun 2013 #156

It is a "scandal" made up by the GOP, and it is trolling by DUers Kolesar Jun 2013 #159

No, Kolesar, that is not correct at all. Th1onein Jul 2013 #213

Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #160

LOL....is that a promise? maddezmom Jun 2013 #161

Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #163

Darn! I missed seeing another one. In_The_Wind Jun 2013 #172

Well said. There is a lot at stake in upcoming elections. DrewFlorida Jun 2013 #162

The people defending the NSA actions ARE republicans Corruption Inc Jun 2013 #176

Indeed Oilwellian Jun 2013 #183

The Teabaggers want a civil war everywhere. Turbineguy Jun 2013 #177

Liberals are united against this nonsense...Democrats are not. davidn3600 Jun 2013 #180

There's no civil war. woo me with science Jun 2013 #192

+ 1000 sibelian Jun 2013 #195

The corporate Dems Harmony Blue Jun 2013 #200

"Civil War"? Hardly that big a deal. CakeGrrl Jun 2013 #193

good thread Liberal_in_LA Jun 2013 #194

It looks to be a little too late for 2014. Ash_F Jun 2013 #199