We're not going to reach our goal this fund drive. Let's talk.

[Skinner]

So, it's now Friday, and as I post this we haven't even reached 600 donations yet. Unless we experience some kind of miraculous and unprecedented turn-around, we aren't going to reach our goal of 1000 donations by Sunday night. But before you stop reading, the point of this post is not to beg you to dig deep and donate and put us over the top. On the contrary, the point of this post is to tell you this:

Message received.

You don't like what DU has become. Maybe you have very specific complaints, or maybe you don't really know exactly what it is that you don't like. But what you do know is that you wish it was more like the old DU. A community. A place that was special. Where we had big disagreements, but at least you felt like we all had something in common.

Yeah, I miss that DU, too.

I miss it so much that it makes my heart ache. I lie awake at night agonizing over it. I can barely bring myself to read my email anymore. I'm burned out and tired.

We (the DU Admins) knew that having a Democratic Administration would make things a lot more complicated and difficult here on DU, but I don't think we really had any clue how difficult it would be. I know that many of you believe the solution is simple. I know this because you send me scolding shame-on-you emails demanding that I do {whatever} and then DU would be better. I wish I shared your certainty.

We have been very cautious and deliberate in our attempts to improve the way we run DU, and I think -- especially on the moderator-side -- we have made a lot of very important progress. But the whole effort has the feeling of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Our approach has been to "do what we've always been doing, only better," but I am starting to think that much more radical change is necessary.

Here's the problem in a nutshell: Back when Bush was President, he represented the center of gravity in politics -- the focal point that determined "Which side are you on?" -- and everyone on DU actually was on the same side. Now that Barack Obama is President, he has become the center of gravity. I think it's clear that we still broadly agree on the issues, but we disagree on how best to get there, how long it should take, and how much compromise we are willing to accept. Those are the disagreements that matter now. To be blunt, we are not all on the same side anymore.

Imagine if during the Bush Administration, Democratic Underground had welcomed people who thought the president was doing a bad job, *and* people who thought the president was doing a good job. DU would have sucked. Sure, it might have been worth the effort to stop by every once in a while to argue with conservative idiots, but nobody would have felt like DU was their home, their safe-haven, their community.

This is the situation we face. Nobody is "safe" anymore. DU doesn't "belong" to anyone. We all want this to feel like a community, but we have two fairly large groups of people who each seem to believe that they are the rightful heirs to this community, and that the other side doesn't even have a legitimate claim to be here.

And here I am, grasping to the naive and outdated hope -- against all the available evidence -- that maybe we can all figure out a way to share DU.

I could "solve" our problems pretty easily by picking a side. If I did that, at least the people who would remain here would know that they own DU. They would know that they have a home and a safe haven again. And they would take comfort from knowing (finally) that the DU Admins are on their side, rather than cold, distant, unpredictable creatures whose allegiances are not entirely clear and who could turn on them at any moment.

But I am not prepared to give DU to either side. I see all the people who are still here (thank you for still being here, by the way, despite everything) -- some posting and some, sadly, only lurking -- and I see the people who built this community. Great people. Generous, big-hearted, smart, interesting people. Some of you might post strange and unpleasant things now -- including some things that cut very deeply -- but I remember what you were like before, and I remember how much I liked you then.

So we keep doing what we're doing. But I harbor this simmering doubt. I feel obligated to censor people, even though I have never liked doing it, and like it even less now than I ever have. I feel obligated to serve as an authority figure to a community of people (including myself) who are naturally skeptical of authority. I feel obligated to keep deleting posts and banning people, even though I know that each time I do it serves as "proof" that I have already picked a side, that I am already hopelessly biased, and that I cannot be trusted. I long to let you all take responsibility for yourselves, to give the community the ability to police itself and set its own limits, but in the past our efforts to do so have been rejected almost every time.

I think it might not be a bad thing that we're not going to reach our goal this fund drive. Perhaps it will provide us with justification to experiment with some really radical changes to this place. The Admins have discussed a lot of ideas, but we honestly don't know what's going to work, or what you all will be willing to accept. I think, to start, we're probably going to post some kind of member survey next week to better understand your attitudes, and get feedback on a bunch of different ideas. I'll be curious to learn if you are willing to try any of them.

Thanks for listening. And thank you for being part of this community.

[xchrom]

1. thanks for talking to us skinner.

i do think a lot of us are having financially difficult times.

several threads this week were eye openers.

[Donnachaidh]

23. that is a point that I see many people here and in other forums MISS

I'm really not sure that the lack of donations is due to unhappiness about board postings. I DO believe that the lack of donations is due to the FACT that many many of us are still hanging on by the skin of our teeth. the economy is in the crapper. The lack of donations reflects that FACT.

There is a LOT of pain out there, and many are keeping their net going only because it has become (sometimes) the only way to apply for jobs. That means that everything else they would normally give to has to be put off. Robbing Peter to pay Paul isn't an option for many who are long-term unemployed or underemployed. Because quite literally that few bucks they may have given in the past is now needed to pay for their kid's lunch at school, or to put a couple of gallons of gas in their car to look for work.

Times are much harder than anyone wants to acknowledge.

[Frisbee]

259. Couldn't agree more...

I donated, but not nearly as much as I would like to have. Times are tight everywhere. But no matter what, DU is my home away from home.

[NikolaC]

1261. Same Here

I just got a job after being unemployed for a year. I wish that we could have donated more, but we can't until we get on a firmer footing. I appreciate DU a great deal. I have lurked more than posted over the last couple of years because things have gotten very intense and I would rather not get in the middle of the fight. I am addicted to reading DU though, it has been a daily ritual for me to come on here for the last few years.

[bobbolink]

542. Further, some of us are literally dying, and it doesn't matter to others.

It comes to the point where it is no longer possible to care when you aren't receiving care.

[laughingliberal]

1329. +1 nt

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

582. What Donnachaidh said. I gave $5 at the beginning of the year when I had a little bit to spare.

I'm on emergency unemployment now. I think, Skinner, perhaps the lack of donations is being taken too personally by the mods. I really think it's more about the economy and the fact that a lot of us are hurting right now. If the choice comes between paying for food and medicine and giving to DU, I'm going for the food and medicine.

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

619. New Unemployment Claims SURGE, Hit Highest Level Since November 2009

Please consider this may be the more likely scenario. It's horrific out there.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/19/new-unemployme...

<snip>

WASHINGTON (AP) -- New applications for unemployment insurance reached the half-million mark last week for the first time since November, a sign that employers are likely cutting jobs again as the economy slows.

The Labor Department said Thursday that initial claims for jobless benefits rose by 12,000 last week to 500,000, the fourth increase in the past five weeks. Wall Street economists forecast that claims would drop.

The four-week average, a less volatile measure, rose by 8,000 to 482,500, the highest since December. There were no special factors that distorted the numbers, a Labor Department analyst said.

The increase suggests the economy is creating even fewer jobs than in the first half of this year, when private employers added an average of about 100,000 jobs per month. That's barely enough to keep the unemployment rate from rising. The jobless rate has been stuck at 9.5 percent for two months.

<snip>

[zanana1]

1328. Exactly.

Here's my $5.00. I'm afraid it's the best I can do. Maybe getting rid of some of the "extras" for awhile would help. There are ALOT of groups; maybe we just dont need that many.

[ChazII]

1344. My family is in the same boat.

I am lucky to have a job but with two family members and high medical bills as well as hospital, DU will have to wait.

[babsbunny]

1064. I am not happy that our Prez is Bush lite. He isn't Prosecuting

Folks who allowed Torture. And I hate the unrecommend. I think we should start over. And I have no money either. I don't want to be in America anymore. I want to run far from here.

[maryf]

1379. I really hate the unrecommend too.

Maybe without it we'd see which types of forums would really be popular. I think I've used it once and was ashamed of myself...

[Stardust]

1385. I hate the unrec, too. I vowed not to donate until it was gone, but caved

time and again. I cannot fathom why anyone would think they serve any positive purpose.

[defendandprotect]

1704. IMO, it's hurting the line up of articles here ....don't know what others think????

The quality of the "news" articles that remain visible to the members

isn't what it used to be!

On the other hand, seems some members who used to be vigilant about posting

articles may have been some of those "purged"???

[RKP5637]

1623. I know exactly what you mean. I think exactly the same! I just do not like

what the country has become in my long lifetime. It's no longer about "We the People." The majority of the people IMO. I feel duped, manipulated and propagandized anytime I listen to MSM, politicians and often much of the internet.

[Mimosa]

1224. ^ Donna's Right: It's the Economy , Not the Politics Here ^

I donated what I could. Just means eating less beef.

[SCantiGOP]

170. whenever I feel discouraged

I watch this short video and remember how it felt on November 4, 2008:


Run time: 00:27
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZYjVL1sc7w

[calimary]

919. That was a GREAT video, SCantiGOP! Thanks for posting!

I watch this short video and remember how it felt on November 4, 2008:


Run time: 00:27
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZYjVL1sc7w


Just wanted to be able to find it later - I'm putting it in my journal too.

And Skinner - I don't know what the answer is to the questions in your OP. I'm just glad DU is here, warts and all, to post, to vent, to read, to lurk, to learn, to be broadened and enlightened and expanded, and yeah, sometimes infuriated. But at least we know we're among friends and family here - and certainly friends and family argue. But they're still friends and family after all is said and done.

Keep up the good work (or, hell, even what you might be concerned that might be bad work)! We all needed, bickering as we go.

And btw - I also agree that plain ol' economics may play a larger part here. There's LOTSA hurt out there, in the DU community and beyond. Unless you're a major corporation, you are probably feeling pain - and maybe a great deal of pain.

We love you Skinner, and we love DU!

And - uh - to my fellow DUers - because I MYSELF love DU and hate to see people unhappy and hurting, please allow me to be a Machiavellian pig-dog for a moment here (begging your forgiveness in advance):

If you're having a glum moment, PLEEEEEEEZE consider a little tonic (at least a temporary one) that I put in the sticky collection - about my kid's band. Please go check out their music (if you like alt/rock music, that is) and rock out for a few moments and forget about your troubles for maybe three minutes or so, at a time. You might actually feel a little better for a little while. Won't cost anything just to click on "PLAY!"

http://www.acidicband.com
http://www.facebook.com/ACIDICband
http://www.myspace.com/ACIDICband

[femrap]

415. +1

It's the economy, stupid.

The DLCers and the Progressives will always be at odds.

[tblue]

Truth is, I think a lot of us are using Facebook now.

I do. And I have sort of created my own DU-type community. But DU is still important to me. Maybe, Skinner, we need to create a stronger DU presence on Facebook. I think we could leverage that somehow. If I think of any good ideas for how to do that, I'll shoot you a msg.

[Capn Sunshine]

848. hey, good luck with THAT

I don't think DU has ever tracked your retail preferences and taste in site visiting and and needs you might post about and sold them to the highest bidder.

Facebook does. Why do you think Newscorp bought a chunk of MySpace? Don't be naiive enough to think they aren't coming after Facebook next.

Whatever you do on DU, I sincerely doubt it is as public or your web preferences as commercialized and filed as they are with Facebook.

[femrap]

979. I hadn't thought of that...

I don't do Facebook...something about the concept bugs me. I would never put my real name out there or a picture. Maybe it's because I attract 'weirdos' IRL and I don't want to start the same attraction online.

Plus I'm old. And I love privacy.

[LostinVA]

1255. You can block everything and everyone except who you want

[femrap]

1347. Maybe I'll look into it....

Thanks.

[Kali]

708. another here

I managed this drive (because I haven't looked at my bills this month yet - something may be short but not DU this time - heh) but I know last drive I almost didn't make it at all.

I know there is fighting over real issues but it doesn't really bother me that much, I am sorry people are feeling left out of the community they helped form.

I do hate seeing the stupid shit from last year reappearing in the lounge, like some kind of sick anniversary event.

[Plucketeer]

782. What xchrom says....

but,.... The end of this month, I'll have been a proud DUer for 3 years. I'd guess that fact denies me the ability to recall the "good old days" of DU. But reading your post, Skinner - the thing that whacked me right betwixt the peepers is that your summation is almost exactly the predicament that makes the Democratic Machine to seem unable to move with clarity and focus.
With the GOP, you have legions of dullards who can't be bothered to sort things out objectively. It's SO easy to point them in one direction. Kinda like iron filings aligning themselves with magnetic lines of force. It's not a fraternity for thinking folks.

The flip side is a community of thinkers. Lots an lots of folks with receptive, reflective, conceptive noggins. Folks that actually KNOW what compassion is, and don't have to have catchy slogans to remind them of it. Folks that think outside of their own selfish interests - free of predjudice and presumption. These points (qualities) and more make for a mix so complex that it oft times defies any attempt to summarize it. That is the Democratic party - how COULD DU be expected to even come close to the hypnotic trance allegiance that the faithful of Fox "news" perform under???

Stop losing sleep, Skinner. There was a revered leader who once observed that you can't please everybody all the time. I donated cause I can, but I know alot of folks who are trying to figure out how they're gonna eat. And that's no joke! Local food bank shelves here are BARE - not just skimpy, but BARE. That's never happened before.

[klook]

1493. Great post

Astute summary of the differences between GOP "iron filings" and Dem unherdable cats.

[roguevalley]

1404. I am waiting for October when I can re-up. I have never been so

flat busted. This place is my refuge and I've always been a paying member. I will again, Skinner. I wish everyone would give a dollar each time then this place would sing.

[Broken_Hero]

1748. Thats the reason why I haven't donated

credit cards are tight, and our money is being spread between 4 households.

[tallahasseedem]

2. Skinner, I completely agree.

There are many times that I have thought of you and the rest of the crew wondering how in the hell you can deal with all of this. Democratic Underground is not what it used to be, but I will continue to support it because I believe that we can, one day, get back.

God Speed.

[H2O Man]

3. I will be

sure to put a check in the mail early next week. DU is definitely the best internet site for progressive and liberal democrats.

[hlthe2b]

413. Plus we've got H2O Man....

[mzmolly]

617. You contribute so much, regardless

H20 Man.

[bdamomma]

1370. well said H2O man I still think DU is the best.

I love the diversity here.

[CurtEastPoint]

4. Thanks, Skinner. I just donated...not much, but I did. DU is special to me. n/t

[Maeve]

5. Sympathies, Boss

Things change, but I still think Will Rogers got it right..."I don't belong to an organized political party; I'm a Democrat." And that's more obvious when we're in power than when we're not.

edited to add: well, you're one donation closer, anyway!
DU Admin and mods are the best on the Internet!!!

[bobbolink]

576. The people in Will Rogers time didn't talk to each other with such hatefulness.

They didn't get death threats from expressing their view.

The atmosphere in this country and on DU has become hateful because we accept it as inevitable. Older generations are appalled.

[awoke_in_2003]

1191. as I mentioned downthread...

death threats are okay if you are a good writer

[bobbolink]

1375. Even if you're a mediocre writer with a big ego.

[Jamastiene]

1439. On DU nowadays...

Death threats = forgivable and the poster is un-TSed.

Posting the number 7 = un-fucking-forgivable, not no way, not no how, person stays TSed forever.

We can't talk about the issues that, at one time, meant something to the Democratic Party.

Equal rights?
-We are asking for too much when we ask to be considered equal human beings under the law.

Poverty? The Reagan Bootstrap Mantra gets hurled at you like you deserve only the worst life has to offer.

Care about Social Security? You are not being "pragmatic." Never mind the fact that the LAST Democratic president left Social Security stable and possibly savable.

Have a problem with re-segregating public schools AND only funding schools for the richer neighborhoods? Some teacher was mean to somebody when they were five fucking years old and that person never got over it. So, all teachers are bad and deserve public floggings and poor kids deserve to dodge bullets to go to underfunded public schools.

Health care? Somehow, it is ABSOLUTELY impossible for America to have health care like Canada's system. Canada has it, but, NOOOOOOOO, for us, IM-fucking-POSSIBLE.
Since when has America been the country that says "We can't?" Since when has America been the country that gives the fuck up before ever even trying to make something better?

And we are supposed to pretend that all of this is ok? Why is out and out Reaganism the new Democratic Party? There is so much wrong with this picture, I don't even know where to begin.

Sorry for ranting, but I heard what happened and I'm not happy about it. If it wasn't for the fact that I can find news here that MSM would never show, I'd probably quit loading DU any more, sadly. There is just something WAY wrong here.

[awoke_in_2003]

1706. we should have seen this coming...

when people defended the fact that Obama had Rick Warren say a prayer during the inauguration. Warren was, is, and always will be a homophobe. Our president reached out to him. Very fucking sad.

[truth2power]

1721. I agree with this statement in your post...

"If it wasn't for the fact that I can find news here that MSM would never show, I'd probably quit loading DU any more, sadly. There is just something WAY wrong here."

I feel I'm not allowed to express honest concerns that I have.

[babylonsister]

6. You're a great writer, Skinner, and I recognize the spot

you are in, between a rock and a hard place. Yes, it's worse here than it ever was under idiot son despite the fact we have a Dem president. I wish I could help you with an answer that wouldn't alienate anyone because we are all parts of this whole that is DU.

I hope you find the wisdom of Solomon, but will support whatever decisions you have to make to make DU a bit friendlier place to come to during these contentious times.

And thanks to all of you, and the mods, for all of your efforts.

[OneGrassRoot]

7. Thank you for sharing your thoughts...

Much appreciated!

[kpete]

8. ok, ok

i will donate, kpete

p.s. I think DU is still an amazing place!

[HereSince1628]

9. Of course, with rising unemployment it might not be the community

that's the problem with the fund raiser but people's anxiety about parting with their money.

Remember the polarity during the Democratic Primary? DU made it's contribution goals and the place held together.

[ChiciB1]

11. I'm Sure The Economy Is Having An Effect... But, Dig Deeper... It's NOT

completely what's going on! Do appreciate your comments though!

[geek tragedy]

13. The economy isn't any worse than it was during 2009. nt

[ChiciB1]

36. Well, I Was Trying To Be Diplomatic... But I'm More Inclined To Agree With

you "geek" because of my perceptions on situations that have evolved here! I post less and less myself and it really has nothing to do with the economy! But I've never had a lot of extra money to donate overall! Still I have managed to donate in the past!

And I also like your analogy about the 4 types! Having been attacked sternly in the past I've tried to veer away from getting into "dog fights" most of the time! Still I have been surprised at some of the UGLINESS that has gone on, as there are those who continually FIGHT no matter what!

While I disagree with issues, I don't stubbornly reply to the nastier comments made to me!

[SoCalDem]

59. I never even used the "ignore" feature until the primary season of '08

never felt the need to until then.. I know that most of the ones still on it have gone bye-bye, but I am still amazed at "some" people here who always have a devil's advocate stance on anything, and who always have something nasty to say in their attempt to disagree.

[hobbit709]

44. Is for some of us.

[SoCalDem]

62. I just found out last night that a friend of ours who's a single father of 3 teens lost his job.

He's very depressed & has been looking, but so far nothing.. In another month he'll be losinig his house

[Xenotime]

909. It continues to get worse with no hope in sight.

[bigtree]

541. definitely has gotten worse for me

I want to write an essay on how things just seem to disintegrating around me as a result of my impoverished condition. I've lost my car registration due to an inability to pay fees, but I'm still obligated to drive the car if I don't want to be homeless and hungry. Forced to be a criminal because of my inability to keep up with MVA fees . . . I feel like shit most of the time these days. I don't think I've ever been this pessimistic.

[stevenleser]

1126. What you are describing is me circa 2002-2005 after my 2001 layoff

I thought I would never get out from under it all. I'm still paying some things off from that period and my retirement was wiped out.

[Hissyspit]

73. It's CONTINUED bad.

It may not be worse, but two years of bad is worse than one year of bad. It's had a continued effect on people's abilities to give. (Not intending to deflect blame from the Bush years, just making a point on effect.)

[lark]

584. Continued BAD leads to hopelessness

In 2009, I think a lot of people still had hope for the economy. Now it's become so evident that the banks, Wall St., etc., don't give a fuck about anything other than their profits and are driving the country into bankruptcy by sitting on their money and not investing. Hope is in very short supply these days. I fear I will be supporting my 25 year old son forever, which puts a severe drain on my wallet. I will donate a few bucks, but I sure can understand why many can't afford to.

[Mariana]

135. That's true, but lots of people are in much worse shape now

than they were then just because it's been going on so long.

My best friend (not a member here) has been struggling for two years. She managed to keep her head above water until just recently, but she's finally gone under. She's gone through her savings and she's lost her business and she's losing her home and she and her daughter are going to be moving in with me soon, because she can't afford the up-front costs to rent a crappy two-room apartment.

There are so many others like her. Some, maybe many, are members here.

[classof56]

426. I commend you for being there for your friend, and opening your home to her.

I am deeply sorrowful that she and so many others are watching their lives turned upside down after years of being good, productive citizens who worked hard to make their own way through life and do the right thing. Bless you for caring!

[bdamomma]

1373. I commend you too, the disappearing middle class is

drowning it just really sucks.

[Sheepshank]

171. the one big difference betweem 2009 and 2010

is after a year of unemployment, all reserves are used up and the situation does feel much more frantic and dire. So on a personal level, it's worse.

[another saigon]

oh really?

because it is for my family.

[SammyWinstonJack]

501. For some of us it is. Guessing it isn't for you?

In that case, good for you.


I can't afford to donate to DU at this time.

[Lorien]

Neither can I. I've spent most of the past two years unemployed

I just picked up a bit of work, but the hole I find myself in is deep at this point. Creditors call nonstop. When you owe others money you really don't have the right to make donations.

[Mimosa]

1247. Lorien, I donated because of *wonderful* caring members like you.

It's tough for many of us.

I donated what little I could because I love you, Bobbolink, Octafish, defend and protect and more people than I can list!

[Lorien]

1266. Thanks Mimosa!

[muddrunner17]

590. Except that people have been struggling for another year.

[JDPriestly]

594. The economy for the corporations and rich is better, but for

those of us on DU, it is much worse. That is because more and more of us are recognizing that, although his economic policies have failed to revive the economy, Obama continues to whistle the corporate tune, continues to keep the same DLCers on his staff. And so we have lost hope. Those of us on Social Security, we who are retired or jobless, those who are homeless aren't just suffering economically, we are tired and depressed and disillusioned.

I, for one, post nearly every day. I know what my educational background and personal experience are, and I know that I have a broader knowledge base and better understanding of much of what is going on than many on Obama's cabinet and certainly most in Congress. I think there are a lot of DUers like me.

And I am frustrated because I know how much we need change at the top of our political structure, and I see how little change we are getting.

I stay on DU out of fear for what will happen if we don't at least have a sane person in the White House. But I am so disillusioned with Obama that I don't even know whether I will bother to vote again until he is out of office.

As for giving to DU, I give once a year. I'm not working. My husband and I are on Social Security, and frankly, unless we have major changes in this country, I do not see that the powers that be will keep their promises to me and other Social Security recipients who paid into the system expecting to be able to live security in our senior years. I have no hope until Obama and his corrupt team leave office, and we can finally select a candidate for the presidency who speaks for and acts for the people of the United States and not some corporate masters who could care less about our country and us.

It's not you, Skinner, it's Obama. He double-crossed a lot of people.

[Confusious]

608. The longer the bad economy goes on, the more people

Will withdrawl into their Bunkers.

[Confusious]

609. The longer the bad economy goes on, the more people

Will withdrawl into their Bunkers.

[sofa king]

I've been dead broke ever since I got here.

That was, what, seven years ago? I'm lucky I don't live under a bridge, and in point of fact I actually did for a while.

Some of us simply aren't competent or lucky enough to be able to afford to donate. I'm sorry for that, just as I am grateful for the person who donated for me this time.

Someday, perhaps, I'll be able to return the favor.

[Orsino]

710. More people jobless, wages down, and worry about joblessness up.

Yes, the economy's worse.

[Jax]

902. You got yours

from your posts that is all that matters to you.

sick shit.

[Lorien]

1122. I was wondering

who "ignored" is, but now I have an idea.

[xxqqqzme]

934. Maybe not for you!

The economy in California is much worse than '09. I could afford a few Angels games last summer. Even treated my sister and son to birthday games. Haven't been to one game this year. Money is very tight out here.

[laughingliberal]

1331. It is in some places. Unemployment is up in NV as are foreclosures. Can't speak for other places...

but we're dying here.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

53. I agree that the economy/jobs market.........

has more than a little to do with it. I've been out of work for 16 mos. and am embarking on a career as an adult college student/poverty explorer. I love DU, but my resources have necessarily become a bit more precious to me right now.

Skinner, I wish you the best and continued success. If I can find two spare pennies to rub together, they're yours.

[eppur_se_muova]

178. More than anxiety for some of us --

I'd like to donate, but just not right now. I'm planning to donate after the fund drive is over (that's when I might have some funds to deposit). It's not a sign of any disenchantment with DU.

[Subdivisions]

569. Nope, for me it's the community. There's a faction on this site that has

made me, and those who think like I do, feel unwelcome here. There have been numerous unfair bannings while others who were banned for grievous acts were allowed to return. We've been swarmed by that faction, who attempt to beat you down if you don't think exactly like they do. I have have attempted numerous times to alert admin/mods on certain things only to be ignored. And, a lot of my friends are now gone, either TSed for speaking their mind or they've simply faded away from what DU has become.

I feel that some in this community don't want me here and I don't feel like the DU admin appreciates me or my donation. I'm just a dollar sign here. I didn't used to feel that way.

[geek tragedy]

10. I'd say there are really four groups.

1) Hardcore Democratic partisans who are going to "have Obama's back" and see a lot (but certainly not all) of the criticism as destructive.
2) People who see Obama as part of the problem, not the solution. To them, he is someone to be opposed, period.
3) People who will often get upset about something (rightfully so most of the times) and rant about Obama this or that and have a generally low opinion of the administration's performance for long periods of time, but in the end they want him to succeed and support him;
4) the people who wish this was an awful lot less about Obama and more about issues

As a member of (1) who thinks the current President is flawed and sometimes foolish, I can recognize that no one should be driven out of DU for being a member of any of those broad groupings. At the same time, conflict between groups (1) and (2) is going to be inevitable. Because groups (1) and (2), while they have some ideological overlap, are partisan opponents just as much as Republicans and Democrats are partisan opponents.

Because, when someone says that Obama did to auto-workers what Reagan did to air traffic controllers (yes someone actually said that) we're beyond policy disagreements and into open partisan warfare.

[babylonsister]

16. You left out

rethugs; I'm convinced we've been infiltrated by trolls who have been smart enough not to get caught...yet.

[Monique1]

155. babylonsister

I have said this before also and got slammed!

[flamingdem]

191. I agree. The nastiness and negativity benefits the rethugs, divide and conquer nt

[librechik]

199. word, sister n/t

[City of Mills]

205. Absolutely

That's why I don't understand the shock and outrage when certain threads get unrecced right away, it could be agenda driven but it could easily be lurking Republican trolls too...why flip out about it?

[steve2470]

509. I agree with you

I've read many posts and wondered about their true allegiance. It seems like the motive is to tear down anything good about Obama and the party.

At some point, if you are that unhappy with Obama and the current status of the Dem party, you are really better off (unless you just want to fight) going to another message board.

I'm definitely not 100% satisfied with the party or with Obama, but I'm willing to give the man credit where credit is due. He's a LOT better than Bush and the R's.

[The Green Manalishi]

1182. That is *EXACTLY* the kind of statement that pisses me off.

" At some point, if you are that unhappy with Obama and the current status of the Dem party, you are really better off (unless you just want to fight) going to another message board.

A) Damn right I'm willing to fight, and not because I "just want to".

B) Major components of the Democratic party are dysfunctional and/or in the control of the military industrial complex; if calling attention to that fact and fighting it causes someone to think I'm " unhappy with Obama and the current status of the Dem party" maybe the problem isn't me. As a matter of fact I am sure it isn't.

C) Please keep your definitions of "better off" to yourself.

Thank you. Please bear in mind, my argument is not with *you*, but with the STATEMENT!

[defendandprotect]

1225. Inviting others to leave DU because you're unhappy with their cricitisms.....

At some point, if you are that unhappy with Obama and the current status of the Dem party, you are really better off (unless you just want to fight) going to another message board.

isn't really wise . . .

unless you also want to be invited to leave?

[steve2470]

1419. sorry for the hasty post

I sincerely retract the sentence about the leaving DU. I was wrong. I apologize.

[cascadiance]

588. I've actually seen one just yesterday on a separate message board bragging about posting here...

... and "infiltrating lightly" initially after just creating a new userid here. I know who this user is, but I'll let him expose himself later, as I'm sure he will at some point. Everyone deserves a fair shot if they post responsibly. But yeah, I think that also "colors" the dialogue at times too.

[POAS]

663. There are disruptors that do not want DU

to succeed, and they are not all coming from the right.

[defendandprotect]

1219. Presumably, you're saying liberal posters here want DU to fail?

Could you explain that comment a bit further, please --

What evidence do you have of that?

[SidDithers]

1537. Absolutely...

there are "liberal" posters here who want DU to fail. Don't be naive.

Sid

[LostinVA]

1257. Liberal posters want neither Obama nor DU to fail

[bluethruandthru]

1338. Exactly right. It's frustrating to bring up something that the administration has done

that you feel is off the mark..and then get attacked and told that you're not giving Obama any credit for what he's done right! I want the party and Obama to succeed...but I don't think that refusing to tolerate any criticism of Obama's decisions will make that happen. I'm very happy about many, many things Obama has done...and I'm unhappy about a lot of things too. I'm not trying to tear him down...I want him to do better.

[creeksneakers2]

1504. Are you being attacked, or

are you receiving disagreement? I see lots of complaints about not being allowed to express opinions but have never seen it happen.

[Joey Kidd]

1549. I agree.

And swarming people who dare to criticize Obama is making far more damages than any legitimate critic of this administration.Is it done on purpose or out of ignorance ?

[defendandprotect]

1700. We might ask them?

Though their reasoning always seem to be fear-based to me --

I don't get it!

They also seem to pull a blanket of "this is a private website" over the issue, as well --

Evidently they think PRIVATE means "no criticism allowed"--?

The think about free speech is that it protects the sayer, not the listener!

[LiberalFighter]

797. The difficult part is being able to determine the trolls that have managed to stay.

It would be nice if we could individually tag them so it would be easier to track their history. So if I thought one might be a troll I could click and it would be a reminder at a later time if I run across that poster again.

[tanyev]

1000. You don't have to use the buddy list for buddies.

Just sayin....

[LiberalFighter]

1027. I will check that possibility out. Will then have to remember they aren't buddies.

[Diane R]

817. I agree with babylonsister. I think there's been an infliltration.

I think some people posed as Democrats, and made more than a few posts to prove it, to be in a position to help bring DU down. Can't prove it of course, but the tone changed drastically, and many posts seem like they could come from FR.

[butterfly77]

960. Exactly..

I often wondered which of the CONS who we often see on teevee are posting and helping to divide even more..

They have been onboard DU full force since before the election and all during the lead up to inauguration.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

1243. I guarantee you that some of those most vocal in their critiques will implode and reveal.

It's happened before and it'll happen again.

[FreeState]

980. The reasons I have not give this time

There are several:

1) Im poor.
2) Im unhappy with how I have been treated by some of the Admins - which has nothing to do with how the site is moderated (Skinner if you want more info on that feel free to msg me).

I think a robust dialogue from all sides of the democratic party is important - even if it gets messy.

[JuniperLea]

1015. Yep...

The smart Pubbies are the hardest to deal with... any one of us can take on a TeaBagger... they don't last long here, thankfully.

[readmoreoften]

1050. Let me guess which "side" you think they're on. I agree with you, I just think they're on

the other side.

[LostinVA]

1259. +1

[DCBob]

1106. no doubt there are rethug trolls.. not many but enough to cause trouble..

not sure how to deal with them but its a problem.

[shireen]

1380. yup! the serial unrec'ers, for starters

and when i referred to them in a post using the "t" word (the one you used in your post), my post were deleted. Apparently, it's against DU rules to call someone by the "t" word. Even if it's true. That's what i was told by admin when i asked why my post was deleted. When i asked if there was an appropriate DU-sanctioned term for unrec'ers, I got a one-word response: "people".

Get rid of the "t"s -- the serial unrec'ers. Or get rid of the unrec feature. It will help decrease the animosity on DU.

[Violet_Crumble]

1520. When I read yr post I wished we had the ability to unrec posts...

Not sure why that urge hit me when it did, but there ya go.

[CLANG]

1640. Correct, I can pick them out pretty well

Some are so obvious, but they never seem to be TS'd. I only have two beefs with DU:

1) The unrec feature which is only benefiting trolls and malcontents
2) The discussion of the event that changed the course of world history being relegated instantly to a small invisible sub-forum that can never make the greatest page. If I could ask Skinner one question directly it would be about the treatment of that topic.

Other than those 2 things, I love DU, and I'll always contribute when I can.

[Skinner]

17. To be clear, I do not believe that everyone on DU falls neatly into two groups.

I think there are lots of DUers who are capable of getting along just fine with each other, regardless of how they feel about the President and Democrats.

But the fact remains that many of us find ourselves on opposite sides of a new divide. And that is a huge change for this community.

[geek tragedy]

35. This place was even worse during the 2008 primaries, IIRC.

Ugly, ugly, ugly stuff between Obama and Clinton people.

Maybe the difference is that there was an inevitable closure to all that. The winning side obviously stayed, and the losing side either fell in line like loyal Democrats or hit the bricks.

[Skinner]

43. I think there are two differences:

1) As you said, we knew there was an end to the primaries.

2) We still had John McCain (and Bush) to unite us.

[geek tragedy]

102. Well, we very well may have Speaker Boehner to unite us in 2011.

The ironic thing is that I'd be a lot more inclined to offer criticism of the current administration if I understood myself to be amongst fellow travelers, i.e. people who want it to succeed but think it is making mistakes.

But, I deliberately refrain from doing so because I don't want to feed the dynamic/strength of those trying to tear the administration down, those who view themselves "at war" with the Obama admin (their word choice, I shit you not).

Maybe I'm unique. But probably not.

[nightrain]

432. and some may need "speaker Boehner" to learn how to interact more effectively.

Having been called a freeper and a rethug many times by BOGers last summer when the health insurance debates were hot and heavy, I can tell DU posters and readers that debating skills of some/many are sorely lacking. As a Dem, I am not inclined to reach out to those who make ad hominem atttacks because their debating skills are weak.

[unapatriciated]

1026. I agree with you.

I have been called many things during the HCR debates and questioned on whether or not I was really a dem. Told that I just didn't understand and was either naive or stupid. I have been involved in HCR since 1991 and saw the problems in this bill. When I tried to explain those problems that's when the name calling would begin. I am neither naive nor stupid when it comes to the Insurance Industry and HCR.

[OhioBlue]

885. You're not unique at all.

I'm the same way. Sometimes I feel defensive before I even open DU.

[chimpymustgo]

257. I truly wish this could be more about ISSUES than people. We used to stand for a set of core values

as Democrats and progressives. It's heartbreaking to see them abandoned.

[MissDeeds]

825. I so agree

The core set of values that used to define us now seems to divide us. Some want to hold strongly to them, others are comfortable with a more amorphous interpretation. Now we are divided into camps of conservadem, leftist, neo-liberal, centrists and so forth. The party is splitting, and DU is reflecting that split.

[niceypoo]

999. People who abandon their core values never had them to begin with

Core convictions dont change with the prevailing wind

[readmoreoften]

1052. I can get behind that.

[hlthe2b]

431. Fear (disbelief) at Sarah Palin still unites us...

but I fear that the dissent on DU may speak to what befalls us in November and that is something to fear.

As for DU, a lot of that is growing pains, I think.... Plus the economy. The cycles of dissent are disturbing, but we do still seem to be able to move past them...

I know that I still appreciate DU--as much as I did on Inauguration Day, 2001, when it literally was a sanity saver.

[JJ]

1153. At least we still have FOX

There may be hope yet.

[yurbud]

1638. the difficulty with the ''big tent'' approach: is the Democratic Party just a label

or a set of ideas?

Some people who get elected as Democrats fight for few of the ideas their Democratic constituents want them to.

When there is a difference between the pols and the people, we should be allowed to state that without being locked for being ''divisive.''

[yurbud]

1639. the difficulty with the ''big tent'' approach: is the Democratic Party just a label

or a set of ideas?

Some people who get elected as Democrats fight for few of the ideas their Democratic constituents want them to.

When there is a difference between the pols and the people, we should be allowed to state that without being locked for being ''divisive.''

[Stardust]

1390. Or maybe some on the losing side hang around stinking up DU. Bitter, negative losers.

[Skidmore]

478. Skinner, what is that divide?

I get very confused by mixed messages I'm getting from some. There is nothing that I disagree with which is put forth as "liberal" and "progressive" policy. I just am gobsmacked when pointing to the realities of what one is able to do to move policy forward, you get flamed and have much derision heaped on you. This is the divide as I see it. Having worked in policy development, there is a reality that you run up against which many people do not understand. It is the point at which your best intentions and highest hope run smack into reality. Personally, I have given up on trying to initiate constructive dialogue looking for common ground and I have attempted it several times only to watch the threads sink into flamefests. I abandoned them when this happened. Didn't feel good about doing so but getting nowhere is not worth the effort.

I fall in the camp of those who will not abandon the effort that got us this far because doing so will set us back even further. Reality is that the past 30 years saw much effort put into training a generation of "conservatives"/radicals. There is much to roll back and not everyone is on the page we are on. There will be no left wing savior arise magically from the mists if we abandon the hard work of pushing forward and it cannot be done all at once. We do what we can and keep the coals burning for another day.

I may be wrong but I think that just a little effort to show some common courtesy and respect for ideas not your own would go a long way toward finding common purpose. Very few issues out there are dichotomous. We do have a few, I agree. However, we live in a nation filled with many viewpoints. If we don't learn to live together on these forums, what can we hope for the nation?

[pnwmom]

928. +100. n/t

[SlipperySlope]

1393. Some of it could just be burn out.

Skinner, thanks for the heartfelt post. I'll try to be very brief.

It would be foolish to disagree with you on your main point. The community *is* divided. The party *is* divided. But I don't think that is the only reason you may be falling short on fundraising.

Many of us are just burnt out right now. We suffered through Bush. We fought the good fight for Obama. We felt that we would be rewarded for our effort. But it sometimes feels like it was all for nothing. Meanwhile, the system wants the same level of effort from us. But I, for one, just can't muster the passion right now.

I'll say this; despite whatever fracture the community is suffering through, DU remains one of the best places to hang out on the internet.

[Ichingcarpenter]

30. I'm basically a 3 on your list but you should add a financially category

I was foreclosed on and no longer have a credit card and I know
others that are really struggling too on DU who used to be secure
and able to contribute and are not now with counting pennies.

I think Skinner our lord and master (I mean that in a good way)
should just extend the pledge drive

[JustAnotherGen]

86. One more group to add

5. Those of us that when push come to shove - will always go into a voting booth and pull a D - Lever. These folks (myself included) are happy about some things, mad about others but know that even the most Conservative Democratic is better than ANY Conservative, Neo-Con, Libertarian, Christian Theocrat, etc. etc.

We may not get into any of the dog fights at DU. We probably sit on our hands more often than not. But we are always open to reading other peoples' pov's because it enhances our ability to debate people In Real Life who do not fall in ANY of those four groups - read - something to the right of Ben Nelson. We are active in political campaigns at the local level, and give money nationally to candidates. We are the put your money and time where your liberal/progressive thoughts are.


Key Point - I've been registered here for a few years and have less thank 2K posts. But I love to read. If I've not given yet (and intend to do so tomorrow when doing my bills) it's because . . . . I'm learning at DU about candidates outside of NJ that need help - and I've sent them $500 this week. From MN, to SC, to CA, to TX . . .

[susanwy]

1004. Ditto

You summed up my presence on DU rather nicely!

[Lost-in-FL]

1735. Here here!!

I am here to check what is important in politics on a day to day bases. The reason I don't post much is because really, i don't have the temperament to get into fights with anyone. I have already enough to deal with both at work and also being too busy with school.

I can see why people would be dissatisfied with DU lately. The arguments can get too intense sometimes and some people have no restraints when it comes to being plain nasty. It might be perhaps an indication that they care too much about the issues but seriously, who needs all that. On the other hand, there are very few people here that even when an argument is not very 'progressive' in a way, they take the time to try to get to an understanding of the issue in a way that everyone benefits from the discussion. That is now rare. The DU of a few election cycles ago was a lot of fun.

I too donate to candidates DIRECTLY that exhibit true progresive values. I am very proud of my congressman (Grayson) and tend to donate to those showing similar philosophy. There are not very many unfortunately.

BTW... I won't vote for Meeks or Greene for the Senate FL Primary. My vote will go to Ferre. So... time to run outta here folks...

[hfojvt]

249. I don't find that a satisfactory taxonomy

At least I don't consider myself to fall into any of those groups, except maybe #4, and I am not sure very many fall into #1 or #2 although that may be how the two groups characterize each other as either blind partisans or rabid attack dogs.

I think there is a huge current of agreement between group #1 and #2, that both want to move the country "to the left", but the 2nd group is more disappointed in Obama who has seemingly been fighting against the left, as a DLCer, instead of fighting for the left or fighting alongside the left. I understand their frustration, even though I often fight with them on DU.

My concern is about their tactics. Going back to #4, I would like to see them/us promote our issues more than we attack people like Obama or even teabaggers for opposing our issues. If we had threads here like "Obama should support X" or "Obama should oppose Y" which then explained the virtues of X or the foibles of Y, then those would be useful threads. Instead we seem to get threads more like "Obama is a horrible President for not supporting X" or "Obama is a corporate tool for not opposing Y" and then the thrice-daily "laundry list of disgust" that has been so common here. It goes like "I had HAD IT with Obama, first he didn't fight for X, then he didn't fight against Y, and then he said Z, ..., and now he is doing (or not doing) ABC, so I fart in his general direction and it is going to be all his fault when Democrats lose in 2010".

I just don't see how it moves the country to the left by having a site where people go to complain and read about how bad the Democratic Party is and how foolish it is to ever support them. Especially this close to an election. If Democrats lose in 2010, the media will promote the message that "the voters have rejected Obama and the Democrats for being too liberal".

[geek tragedy]

300. I see your point, but if their tactics are to trash the guy

at every occasion, they really can't be said to share a partisan, political agenda with the 80-90% of Democrats who support the President.

[Generic Other]

1571. Criticizing anything that happens in the US is taken as trashing Obama

Therein lies the problem. I have been posting all summer about the situation in the Gulf. People accuse me and the others who post of WANTING the disaster to be worse than it is to advance some Obama-hating agenda. That is how ridiculous it has become!

Same thing happened to those critical of the healthcare outcome. Or the progress of the war. Or the disregard for teachers and unions. These issues have become flashpoints for many. The issues are separate from the personalities. Yet anyone who offers any critique of policy decisions is trashed here at DU.

I remember the day when reading a thread at DU meant becoming informed. People posting multiple links to articles and research. Others following up on every thread. Massive amounts of information to mull over and discuss. Rarely just jumping in simply to be snarky (Nader threads perhaps being the one exception).

No one simply unreccing threads for the hell of it and then posting to brag about it like it was some great addition to the discourse. I have been on DU awhile. I used to post daily. I rarely do anymore. I still read threads though. I see the difference. It is not all related to not having Bush to kick around anymore. There is a new viciousness here that makes me feel unwelcome. No longer part of a tight community as I once felt.

In fact, I feel marginalized and unwanted. And to the person/s who plans to post after this to point me the way to the door, don't bother. I probably was here way before you and will maybe be here way after you are a distant memory.

And I will not shut up and go quietly into that good night.

[Iggo]

290. You left out a group.

People who think everyone falls neatly into one of those groups.

[geek tragedy]

303. There are two kinds of spurs in this world, my friend. nt

[Iggo]

LOL, exactly.

[Radical Activist]

668. And the push to label people into camps is part of the problem.

[proverbialwisdom]

381. I appreciate DU exactly as it is currently configured and

I'm with group #4. I read here everyday.

Thanks for the reminder to contribute.

[JDPriestly]

623. A lot of times people feel "attacked" when they read or hear

an argument that challenges them to change their mind. We usually don't like it when our dearly held ideas are shown to be false.

If someone attacks another DUer ad hominem, that attack should just be ignored.

If more people on DU got into the habit of acknowledging to critics when we are wrong and the critics are right, we would all learn a lot more. There would be fewer people complaining about hurt feelings.

I find that more than half the time when someone thinks they disagree with me, they don't. Very often, the problem is that I just haven't said what I was trying to say very clearly.

When we feel hurt, we need to take responsibility for our own conduct that causes us to feel hurt. We are never faultless.

[YOY]

1034. What a special little place you have in there!

n.t.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

1186. It's the incessant, non-stop nastiness of group 2 that is killing this place.

This site has always had in its rules to "be generally supportive of democrats". What I see around here is critical OP's outnumbering supportive ones, probably on the order of 3:2, maybe 2:1. Most of these threads either start or degenerate into Dems/Obama = Scoundrels. That's not generally supportive.

Mix in the PUMAs and freeper trolls with the crusaders and you have nice toxic soup.

[Go2Peace]

1451. It's a DISCUSSION board

And what exactly is everyone going to discuss? I know that some would like to talk about Republicans all day long, but since almost all agree about Republicans it's really not something that people are going to discuss and debate.

I will say this for the 372 time. The primary problem is not debates. People tend to want to bitch and moan when something they feel strongly about happens. That is just humanity. It can't be stopped. And this discussion is going to continue. I don't think we are at the apex.

[laughingliberal]

1381. I think your analysis is spot on. I'm a something of a 3 and a whole bunch of 4.

I was a member way back when. Didn't post much but read here all the time and felt a real connection. Huge work loads (I had a job way back) and a new marriage began to take up more of my time and I drifted away. Recent years have been taken up with matters of survival as our lives crashed with the economy and my husband battled cancer.

Last July, I came back here still joyful over Obama's election even though our life was still disastrous. I wanted to be here with a community I once felt close to as we began the HCR debate which had been one of the causes of my life. I fully expected we would see a major victory in this area and wanted to be here with people who would share my joy at this while we laughed in the faces of Republican obstructionists. Unable to remember my old screen name or password, I chose the username, "laughingliberal," believing most of my time here would be spent laughing at the anguish of the right wing as we kicked serious butt and put this country back in the hands of the people.

I became disillusioned as I watched the administration and the Senate move to the right and negotiate away most of the decent progressive ideas over HCR and other issues. I remember being disappointed over the stimulus package earlier but realized at that time we did not have 60 votes in the Senate. I knew I was not happy with a lot of President Obama's appointments but I was just naive enough to still be buying into that 'team of rivals' message. Of course, I was still naive enough to believe Clinton moved to the right only because he had to in order to get things accomplished after we lost the House and Senate. (You must understand, my work weeks as an RN in those days was typically 60+ hours so I wasn't able to dig very deep). I was shocked that we seemed to be in no better shape after Al Franken's win gave us our 60th vote in the Senate. I was appalled to watch the administration's efforts at party discipline all going in the direction of beating on the progressives to compromise and not in the direction of pushing the Blue Dogs to compromise.

In short, I find I am often fighting almost as much to achieve the goals I have had for our country now as I was under *. I actively look for issues on which to support the President because I really would like to support him and I still like him, personally, very much. This is painful. On the big ticket items, I have been very disappointed not to see more fight for the ideals I hold dear from a President of my party. Too often, I've seen him actively oppose policies based on those ideals.

The experience at DU, this time, has not been what I thought it would be. I find some of the policies I see people advocate for here shocking. I never thought I would be blasted on a Democratic website for opposing policies of Reagan or the Heritage foundation or the CATO institute. But I have been. I have been shocked and saddened to find an amazing lack of compassion for the poor and the workers. I am shocked to find a Democratic web site with many posters able to disparage the rights of our LGBT brothers and sisters and women. I am an old style liberal who grew up the daughter of civil rights activists and my life and the lives of my entire family were on the line from the time I was 12. I know the history of the labor wars and how many died for the rights of workers in this country. I watch many in the Democratic party bargain away gains for which people died for political expediency and I watch people here defend it endlessly and cheer them on. I watch the party I considered my home for my entire life and realize, with some notable exceptions, it no longer seems to stand for the ideals I hold dear. I find myself wondering what is this place where I see bashing of the poor, women, the sick, the disabled, those who have fallen on hard times, union workers, teachers, LGBT persons, senior citizens, baby boomers, and on and on.

I am not of group #2 but I find it does not matter. I am accused of being no matter how much I post on policy and why I do or do not support a certain policy. The opposition to what I have to say (and I am someone who studies very seriously and digs out as much information as I can to both determine what I think is going on and support my positions)is mean spirited and insulting. I refrain from the name calling and insults almost always but I am not answered in kind. The snark, the insults, the name calling, the passive aggressive call outs are all taking a toll on me. And for what? For believing in the same principles I have believed in for all these decades, for believing in the same principles I have worked to see in our party platform at party caucuses and conventions my whole life? I read rules that say it is not allowed to call people 'cheerleaders,' or 'apologists,' but find posts calling those of us on the left, 'purists,' 'haters,' 'leftbaggers,' remain, despite alerts, many times. People are able to accuse the poor and hungry and unemployed among us who ask for more work towards jobs and social programs of 'wanting a pony.' It is upside down world to me.

When I was a member years ago, I was a monthly donor. In fact, that continued for some years after I was no longer able to spend time here. I had standing contributions here and several other liberal websites. As our financial life fell apart, I had to drop them. The first donor drive after my return I posted about how sad I was I did not have any money to give. Someone donated in my name and I was humbled and grateful that someone did that for me. Once you become poor in this society, you become invisible to most people. In subsequent donor drives, we had a little work in the shop and I was able to make a meager donations, wishing it could be more. This time I have looked at our how tight our money is and know we are on the last job in the shop and don't know if any more will come in. I thought I could probably scrape another of my embarrassingly meager donations but I had to ask myself if I wanted to ask my family (me, my husband, our little dog) to sacrifice for a place that allows me to be treated so badly for trying to stand up for traditional Democratic values and the downtrodden and that I'm not sure still values my opinion or my ideals. Every day the donor board is up there I think about it. And I remain conflicted.

[sabrina 1]

1467. I am so sorry that you have had these battles, your husband

fighting cancer, loss of income etc. I truly hope he is better but understand why the HC debate was so important to you.

You are one of my favorite posters here and that is an incredibly honest and moving post. I hope many people read it because I think you speak for an awful lot people here.

I notice that many DUers I used to read, to look for, are gone and it makes me sad.

I'm glad you are still here ...

I first came here in 2004 and absolutely loved the spirit, humor and dedication and generosity of the people here. But it has changed, maybe because so many have left and have been replaced by a different kind of democrat.

[laughingliberal]

1551. Thank you, sabrina1

First, regarding my husband's cancer, we did manage to keep up the COBRA premiums until he was through the surgery and recommended treatments. His doctor was of the opinion that his chances for return of disease were very minute. We no longer have insurance and are not able to have his followup screenings but I have every reason to hope that particular concern over his health is resolved.

I have always been so impressed with your posts. Your grasp of the issues and knowledge of the history of many of the problems we face today is impressive. I notice you are always able to state your position clearly and with the facts to back them up. I see you maintain your calm and matter of fact demeanor even under attack from people of opposing viewpoints. You are one of my favorite posters here, also, and, I think, a true asset to this community.

I, too, miss seeing many of our former members who no longer seem to be around but am very glad you still are.

[sabrina 1]

1606. I am so glad that you were able to keep your coverage

and that your husband was treated and hopefully, cured. It is a disgrace though, that he cannot get screenings. What more can be said about the dismal state of our HC system?

Thank you for your kind remarks. It is a difficult period for everyone, I just happen to think that facing facts is the best way to change things while I understand the fears some have that by doing so we might be playing into the hands of Republicans. The differences, in most cases, are mostly to do with strategy. Just my opinion though, I am sure others would disagree

[BootinUp]

1500. This post is worth a read. nt

[myrna minx]

1527. Thank you so much for posting this.

[Generic Other]

1588. I appreciate your voice and am glad you raise it to remind us

what our core values used to be.

[Spheric]

1714. Excellent post. Explains the problem perfectly.

[PassingFair]

1729. +1000....I'm so glad read your whole post!

I feel exactly as you do.

[Hepburn]

12. I gave a little and hope to continue to give more...

...I love the DU and wish I could give more.

THE SCOTTIE <-------My Sticky...bet no one guessed, right?

[catgirl]

14. Thanks Skinner

I would love to see an Elections 2010 discussion group added. It would be friendlier
and hopefully inspiring (and is much needed).

[quinnox]

15. I'm unemployed otherwise I would donate

And I think DU is as great as it ever was, quite frankly. For awhile I thought DU was turning into an Obama sycophants only zone and it was not looking good, even some mods at the time seemed to be going that way in their moderation. But it changed back to the way it was and now its once again a free and open place for discussion about Obama, both pro and con. If it was up to me I wouldn't change a thing.

But if people are upset, then maybe they can have General Discussion - Politics be the place for a mostly pro-Obama slant, and the plain General Discussion forum be the place for the mostly critical of Obama slant. I don't know, maybe it is a bad idea, but its an idea. If this worked the mods would make it so each forum was moderated to be one thing or the other and then people could have a place they feel secure and pleased to be there, for example, the pro-Obama folks would not feel bad about having to see all those negative Obama articles posted in their forum and they could have a positive forum for Obama. And the folks who are not happy with Obama would not have to see the empty cheer leading threads and the posts such as "Look at this weeks Obama family photos!" that we have now.

Anyway, hope you guys get your donations to where you want them and I think its mostly the bad economy that is at fault, not that people are unhappy about DU. (though there probably is a bit of that as well)

[Skinner]

26. We are kicking around the idea of providing top-level "safe haven" forums for committed partisans.

But we are concerned about the possible unintended consequences. I think our biggest concern is that if we create two mutually-exclusive forums for two groups, then we are forcing people to declare a side, endorsing this idea that we are enemies, and encouraging polarization.

But many of us actually are polarized.

[quinnox]

40. Whatever you guys come up with I'm sure will be good

But like I said, I'm not sure if there is such a problem in the first place, or if its as serious a chasm as it might seem. To me, DU seems to be as good as it has been in the past.

[Tsiyu]

47. This came to mind as one solution

During **'s reign of terror, it was very refreshing to come here and know that we didn't have to waste time with right wing talking points. I can see that many would also like to freely discuss ideas, topics, issues without wasting time going over the same arguments again and again and again.


This could be somewhat like the gungeon or 911 forums but on a larger scale.

Not an ideal solution, but those who want to discuss Obama's policy without continual rancor could have a space, and those who want to critique the president without being called names could also have a space.

GD-Pro-Obama

GD-New Solutions


or some such...

[ChiciB1]

48. Being FORCED Into A "Side" Would Make ME Less Likely To Post

because THAT is not what I came to DU for! And I HAVE seen it change, even if some here don't see it that way! I've been here for a while and I can't say I've felt this way before!

JMHO!!

[LostinVA]

60. Bingo

[Skinner]

74. I should have put the word "forcing" in scare quotes.

We certainly would not force anyone to pick a side. But the existence of two safe-haven forums might lead people (who otherwise might not) to pick a side.

[LostinVA]

79. I still think it's an extremely bad idea

And will just reinforced what's bad instead of diffusing it. We already have an instance of that on this board, and it has done anything but help.

[Javaman]

298. I agree, it would limit the debate.

A healthy and open debate moves people to rethink positions, research their various assertions and may give pause to those who have opposing views.

[nashville_brook]

139. i don't understand the point in this -- can you explain what you mean by "lead

people to pick a side."?

[flying rabbit]

819. If you have those forums

make sure you keep an open one for possible discussion of issues. I think most of the problem is the economy.

[LostinVA]

58. That is about the worst idea I have ever heard sugegsted on here

Even worse than the "Nuclear Block" of a few years ago. The BOG redux.

[JVS]

95. Nuclear block was a stroke of genius. I want it back to keep disruptors off my threads!

[LostinVA]

110. It only lasted like three days

Trolls were putting all the gay posters, etc., on their list, so they wouldn't get called on their crap. The trolls at places like FR were actually coordinating it.

[JVS]

129. I used it to put Jpgray on block and then start an appreciation thread for him.

[Stinky The Clown]

81. Serious/no snark

Create a whole second DU. You have the best user interface. Clone it. Apply a catchy name, and let it go. One would be Pro Obama and one would be Pro Left Wing. (Not implying ANYTHING by that grouping).

[tavalon]

263. Twice the work, twice the fun?

While I think it's a great idea, I don't think it's fair to ask these three men to run both.

[bigtree]

552. so we can't be pro-'left wing' and pro-Obama?

That's news to me.

[Stinky The Clown]

564. You're the perfect example of my point. Did you miss the closing of what I said?

"(Not implying ANYTHING by that grouping)."

Ignore the point and go for the attack. How grownup of you.

Why do we have problems here in River City? You can't give it a fucking rest even for a moment. Shame on you.

[bigtree]

583. why do you insist on interpreting my view of what you said an attack?

I thought the qualifier you provided was insufficient for your suggestion. What in the world would be the point in dividing between the two views? I don't like the idea of dividing AT ALL. And, I certainly don't harbor ANY animosity toward you personally; not for your views or your responses. I'm just responding to the notion of the divide you suggest. I'm not for it. How that 'proves your point', I can't even begin to imagine.

[readmoreoften]

1123. Well, you'd have to redefine "left wing" to do both. Considering the administration

has called liberals "retards" and "the professional left" that speaks loads. #2: considering that the administration has not lead on DADT and Obama underscored his support that marriage was man+woman right after Prop 8 was rejected. #3: considering that the administration is union-busting and dismantling public education. #4: considering the administration is expanding "free trade" and not attacking NAFTA (contrary to campaign promises).

Yes, it's hard to support the administration the way you do and then go on and on about how "left" you are.

[bigtree]

1251. depends on the issue

. . . but we all see these issues (and measure the administration) through our own bias. Personally, I'm not anxious to align myself with or identify myself with any group other than Democrats and Americans. I'll leave it to others to construct their little ideological boxes - I'll construct my own, thank you. If pressed, I'd have to admit that most of my views are to the left of the considered political spectrum. Support for this administration and this President is based on the notion of our party as an organizing base to (hopefully) advance our initiatives and ideas into action or law. That's just not going to be the prefect ideological match with our own ambitions as we might like because we are not operating in some political vacuum.

I bring my 'liberalism' to the table and I work to have my ideals accepted by enough of a majority of legislators and the WH to advance them in our political system. That's why I strongly support this Democratic president. It's been a hard slog to get this far and I care enough about the issues I represent to keep pushing, given the elevation in our political system that our election of Barack Obama has allowed us, so far. I don't shed my own values as I support and defend the ground we've captured (the election and terms of our majority and Democratic president), despite the insistence of folks that I abandon support for my political vehicle (our party and our president).

[smiley_glad_hands]

1371. +1

My sentiments exactly.

[nashville_brook]

127. So, you're in favor of elevating the BOG to the premier DU forum?

[MineralMan]

167. I can't see where he said that at all...

In fact, he's just saying that he recognizes two distinct groups here.

[nashville_brook]

189. so, there would be TWO premier, top-level forums: BOG and ?? something else?

[nashville_brook]

190. so, there would be TWO premier, top-level forums: BOG and ?? something else?

[MineralMan]

I don't know, really.

My focus is on GD, and I don't post hardly at all in any other areas, except by accident. I follow DU via the Latest Posts page, so I do get pulled into other forums than GD from time to time, but that's not the norm for me at all.

I've visited the Barack Obama Group, and have posted there maybe twice, but GD is where I live on DU.

Frankly, I don't see much utility in one-sided areas. There's little discussion going on in them, and little controversy. It is the controversy and discussion that make a forum great. When it gets down to personal attacks, that's a different matter, though. Such attacks, whether on another poster or on a Democratic politician, are counter-productive, and destroy discussions.

[Renew Deal]

234. It's a bad idea

for the reasons you stated.

[Patsy Stone]

325. Noooooo.

Bad idea. My .02

[Little Star]

355. Have you given any thought to the fact that Obama will not

be president forever? What will happen if personality over principle is the choice you make?

To me it's a no-brainer, this place is called Democratic Underground and democratic principles should top any individual POL.

I think you need to look with-in and decide who you really are politically. I pray you will stand for democratic principles above all else.

I wish you and this very special board well.

[nightrain]

435. terrible idea. The BOG already exists.

[The Green Manalishi]

495. I find it interesting that the same schisms occurs on FR

True believers, ideology only matters versus the arguments that "Any D is better than any R, look at cloture, SCOTUS, speakership", etc.

Exactly the same arguments on both left and right. There were probably exactly the same percentage of conservatives who *HATED* president Bush (sorry, I find *any* diminution of names childish, hang the bastard, but idiocy of not calling people by their titles and parties by their chosen names is just stupid, IMHO). The arguments of pragmatism, getting and holding power even if it must be done with the aid of 'RINOs' or, in our case 'DINO's being at odds with those who are damn sick of holding their noses and voting and have decided that the party needs a wake up call even if it means losing the White House or congress.

Personally, I think those tensions derive from our two party system. If the only alternative to a DINO is a Republican- then, as much as I want to slap the crap out of someone who defends the President not ending DADT *NOW*, as disgusting as I found Gibb's tirade, and as unpleasant as the reality that much of the administration consists of the same Wall Street crooks and thieves that got us into the current mess, they have a point. The conservatives face the same conundrum, and in many ways are even more divided, fiscal VS social, Christian VS Darwinian, 'REalpolitik' VS Islamophobic.

No answers, just thanks for your hard work. Sonation forthcoming next payday.

[FSogol]

Your "idiocy of not calling people by their titles" theme might be stronger

if you remembered to capitalize the word "President."

[The Green Manalishi]

1294. DOH!

Thanks!

[EFerrari]

522. Instead of thinking of it as enemy camps, you could think of it as two ways to

approach a problem, through advocating for this presidency v. through advocating for social justice.

That isn't promoting polarization, really. That's letting people approach and discuss problems in the way that is more comfortable for them.

[truth2power]

678. Yes. Advocating for social justice....

Blind advocacy for this presidency can easily morph into a cult of personality. Then what?

I have many issues here. I don't feel that I'm allowed to voice them, though.

I have asked one question REPEATEDLY...if we ridiculed the Republicans for walking in lock-step with Bush, how is it different if we're expected to support Obama unequivocably. I've never received an answer.

That's just the tip of the iceberg.

[readmoreoften]

1093. +1

I agree. Sometimes I want to advocate for social justice and discuss things with the left DUers without having whatever I say become a referendum on Obama, who I personally don't find very important one way or the other.

[JDPriestly]

649. Many of us are confused in our feelings.

We would like to support our Party and our President, but we see what a mess is being made. How do we change things for the better?

I spoke to an absolute cynic last night who thinks that there is nothing anyone can ever do.

I agree and disagree. Not since the 17th century has the wealthy oligarchy had so much control over the lives of us Americans.

But then, I think about my American ancestors who fought in the War of 1812, who struggled against slavery when it was the norm, who joined the German revolution for democracy in 1848, who came here and fought in the Civil War on the Union side, who joined the Populist movement during the Gilded Age and who, during my lifetime, sided for Civil Rights for all and equality and who now support gay marriage.

We have changed things. We can change things, even when the oligarchy opposes us.

When I look back on my personal activist ancestry, I am not surprised that I sometimes disagree with people on DU, but I am comforted by the fact that in every struggle in the past, my ancestors have been on the side of moral strength, of love and compassion for mankind and for human progress, and I recognize that fighting for those values is my genetic destiny, no matter what.

I'm on DU because even when everyone disagrees with me, I know that my talent and therefore my duty is to make a difference through my thought, my voice, my writing in the struggle for progress.

As long as DU exists, I will be a member, however, limited my ability to contribute may be, and I will play my part.

Skinner, what is the DU budget? Where does the money go?

When my children were small, we really did not have enough to live on. I found that if when I did not have money for the basic necessities, what I needed to do was to keep very strict records of my expenditures and look around because what I really needed or something that would do as well was virtually always there if I just looked hard enough.

[defendandprotect]

697. "Safe haven" ... bury your head in the sand playground?

Just addressing this one specific idea and not the overall problem --

This is a view to escapeism, rather than encouraging people to actually look at

issues and wade thru debate.

Are Democrats so fragile these days that we can no longer debate one another?

Unfortunately, this isn't at all about the election of a Democratic president which

might have brought complacency about "fighting the right wing" --

Rather, it's about a president/administration, itself, which has been from the first

moments moving government further to the right --

and it is THAT which is causing, actually, much needed debate within the DU community.


Unfortunately, everyone has to decide whether they are also going to fight the

infiltration of the Democratic Party by the right wing/corporates/DLC -- or whether

they are going to ignore it because it's "our guy" doing it!

[Mithreal]

1118. +1

[defendandprotect]

1234. Love the way you express your political views--!!

Adorable -- !!

[truth2power]

718. I think the problem has to be fixed systemically. n/t

[readmoreoften]

1088. I'm very supportive of that idea.

I used to be a diehard progressive Democrat (for about 18 years) but the rightward shift of the party--culminating in not only its failure to fight the ongoing Bush Doctrine but its adoption of many aspects of the Bush Doctrine--has resulted in my becoming a leftist independent. There are many wonderful progressives who identify with the Democratic Party and I want to support them and be a part of their lives. There are Democratic politicians that I support--particularly local ones in my Red area. But I have to admit that the Right-Wing faction on DU has pushed me further away from the Democratic Party.

I do believe that there are some of them who really share some progressive values. But I also think that many of them don't. I think that there are many on the Party's right who are now pro-war, who are anti-union, who are anti-immigrant, and who are (although subtle because they know they'll get kicked off) are anti-LGBT. So I don't think that its necessarily true that we all agree on what we want we just see different ways of getting there. I think there is a difference in platform now. I think it was inevitable: the Democrats became a catch-all for a popular front against Bush. United against and united for are very different concepts.

I think the idea of a left DU and a right DU as very interesting and potentially productive. People in the middle could post in both forums as long as they were respectful. Those of us in either forum could organize amongst ourselves. Sometimes when I post things, I'm not talking to the right-wing Democrats. I already know what they think. I want to know what the left-wing Democrats think.

I personally think it would be more productive.

Sorry about not being able to donate.

[JJ]

Do you remember how that worked out last time?

The "Underground" forum, by invite only. That was a disaster, IIRC.

on edit:
Maybe I should say the "first" time, haven't been around much.

[Cleita]

1212. You already have that.

It's called GD and GDP. I don't think you need any more polarization. Actually, I would combine both forums into one. It would force a certain civility I hope that isn't present right now if you step into the wrong forum with an opinion not accepted within that forum.

[Go2Peace]

1456. What is a "partisan". Most here are "Partisans"?

The vast majority of us vote exclusivly Democratic? Doesn't that make most of us Partisans?

[CBR]

32. "Obama sycophants"... very constructive. nt

[LostinVA]

66. The poster is correct, though

There is a group like that, and it hasn't helped at all. As I said in a thread last week: MANY of us who fought in the primaries are fine with each other now. Some, like Creekdog, have become personal friends of mine. But, there are a small but vocal band who rail at any body who crosses a line they have, including many Obama Primary Warriors, who have let the Primary battles go. It has been rather interesting to see this all happen.

[Skinner]

77. Let's be fair here:

There are "small but vocal bands" on both sides who rail at anyone who crosses a line they have.

[LostinVA]

100. No, i think YOU aren't being fair by admitting this point is legit

The poster was talking about THIS group, no other group. This is what is happening, Skinner, and you just did it yourself. No one will discuss certain issues, just finger point. I am gay and a woman, you bet I won't put up with homophobic or sexist shit, and I never will. EVER. THAT isn't the same thing at all. There are Obama "Fans" on here, and posters who are Right Wingers who attack Obama. I do not consider criticism of Obama from Left posters as "attacks," because they want to make things better. And, those two groups do nothing but attack, they can't post an OP asking, as I did, what's the best approach to "moving on" from 9/11. EVER. And, being dismissive of this truth does upset and anger posters who don't mind tussling and debating, but who are sick of the swarms and personal attacks.

There are two extreme sides, but they are NOT Left and DLC/Moderate, and that's' what the problem is: they are being presented as such. The Left isn't the problem on here, and the Moderates aren't the problem. Even many of the Conservadems aren't. That's why I think the "safe haven" suggestion is not only misguided, but wouldn't help anyway.

[geek tragedy]

123. If you really believe that DEMOCRATIC Underground

has been ruined by the people who are partisan supporters of a Democratic President, you are probably equally part of the problem.

[librechik]

218. no, it's Democratic UNDERGROUND, i.e, for the left wing of the party.

Otherwise, just call it Democrats.com. Wait, there's already one of those.

that was my understanding in the beginning, and I've struggled to be tolerant of some of the non-progressive crap that gets slung around here so pompously. But I'm a DEMOCRAT, when I criticize Obama I'm doing it to make the party better, not to ruin it. And of course my vote goes to the Ds until something more effective comes along.

[geek tragedy]

311. While there's a Democrats.com there are also many

websites that cater to the Green/Nader viewpoint that the Democratic party is the problem, not a potential vehicle for solutions. And yet we have folks here who view the current president as the enemy.
It's a tension that is at some level ultimately unresolveable.

[TZ]

529. Have you read the MISSION statement here.

It says its for people who support DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES not "only the left wing of the democrats are allowed". The bigotry on this site for anyone who isn't left enough is something that reminds me of how the far right behaves with those they consider too moderate.
IMO, this site should be welcoming to ALL democrats..socialists, liberal, progressive, blue dog, centrist etc. To try to limit it to one wing of the party is agaisnt the BIG TENT philosophy of this party.

[SunsetDreams]

558. +1000

[librechik]

747. I'm not disputing what the mission is, that mission is embraced by leftwingers too

I'm taking about the "bigoty" displayed by certain centrists here who don't understand that while we welcome all (big tent) we have a slant to the left, unlike, say Democrats. com. Lately the lefties are getting crowded out by the groups you mention, and while I accept it, it's not, as Skinner says, the "OLD DU"--which was very left of center. I'd like my old DU back, yes, but if I have to accommodate others, so be it. I'm a liberal. I won't complain and ask to have you thrown off for your outlandish ideas, as you would do to us.

[cascadiance]

658. I think that "Democratic Underground" is more difficult now... Perhaps "Progressive Underground"?

The problem with "Democratic Underground" is that it used to work so well earlier when it described both our feelings of a need for more democracy, and a party out of power that was dissenting against a problematic Republican Party in charge that was trying to push it in to the ground. It allowed for a lot of unity there.

Now the name implies:
1) Democratic - as in big D Democratic Party identity (whether they are doing the right thing or no)
2) democratic - as in small d democratic principles that I think most of us want, but some of us don't necessarily apply to the Democratic Party.
3) Underground - implies a group that's working against those in power who are the problem... This kind of now fights with definition 1.

"Progressive Underground" wouldn't confuse item #1 as the operative part of the definition, though it wouldn't necessarily exclude Democrats that have progressive leanings (and what many would call traditional Democratic Party values).

Now by switching that, you are declaring more allegiance to those with progressive values as opposed to those for the Democratic Party. That's also where it gets tricky, as it is easy to see who's speaking for or against the Democratic Party, but what makes one individual speaking more progressively than another? That's trickier to measure. So I'm not completely sold on this name change either.

But I do think some thought here about any changes are made should be thinking about the name of the board, and how it can be changed so that it doesn't have an inherent confused message with the name, but is more of a unifying force to push for change. And perhaps make it more like what Tom Hartmann says isn't a circular firing squad, but a wind of pushing for change behind Obama and other party members' back who we might at times disagree with.

And perhaps the board should entertain more those that want other parties, but need to make sure they can justify those positions from progressive viewpoints, and hopefully not denigrating Democrats without being specific about what issues they feel that these other parties are more progressive/better for us than the Democratic Party entity is.

So this name confusion is one problem. I think two other problems facing DU now are the economy and how it affects all of us financially. As another person that's out of work, I still have routine periodic donations I contribute, small as they may be, but I really can ill afford to donate any more at this time, where if I were working, I'd feel a lot more comfortable to throw in some more to help with a goal like this, especially if I felt some unity towards a purpose that the board was seeking that we all felt unified to accomplish.

I think one other big problem is that this poor economy and people being out of work not only affects people financially, but also affects how they use their time. I think I can speak for myself and many here that simply have to focus more on job hunting and other life essentials now than working on separate activist projects in terms of priority. This is due to:

1) needing to get employment, address other financial issues that need various types of attention, which takes priority over most everything else.
2) not having time to really go deeply in to looking at an issue that needs attention and providing useful help to the DU community and other progressives in helping with it.
3) with the Dems in power, it is really hard to see which areas need deep activist work, that aren't going to have us butt heads against each other. The old ones like Valerie Plame, etc. that gives us unity of purpose and can have us scour the net for pieces of info, aren't clear any more. When you couple that with 2, it makes it really impossible for a lot of investigative work and corresponding rallying of activist groups harder.
4) there are so many other broader issues now, the banksters, the war, gulf oil spill, climate change, the economy, etc. that are all hitting us at once, it is hard to know where to focus our energy on too, even if we didn't have issue 3 of not being necessarily unified on which issues to go after too. By having so many, and so few of us able to do work now on activism, a lot of issues don't get near enough attention.

I think Skinner that you should also look at how both FSTV and LINK-TV are struggling heavily with their fund-raising as well (I hope neither of these two go under either) and I think have some of the similar variables that DU is facing now in terms of fund raising. This is more of a global problem for non-profits and those working "against the machine" now...

I think the board needs to decide whether to emphasize that it is a part of the Democratic Party, and that being progressive is secondary, or that it is a gathering point for progressives, and being a member of the Democratic Party is secondary. To try and heavily emphasize both is pushing us in to conflict. Personally I'd prefer the latter, and think that is the area which is more needed that "official" sites associated with the Democratic Party don't offer, and hoping that is where DU goes to. Hopefully that doesn't put you too much in the "professional left" category that has some in the Democratic Party establishment push us aside more. I really hope that the party at some point embraces more progressives, and would like to think that DU could help at some point achieve that goal as a voice of progressives.

[defendandprotect]

720. When that "partisan" support extends to trying to block criticism of

this administration's move to the right, then it is a problem.

[Sapphocrat]

828. I believe it's been ruined...

...by those who, just a few short years ago, would have been raging against a given policy/stance carried out under/taken by Bush, but who are perfectly OK with same policy/stance because now it's Obama doing it.

I could have articulated that more eloquently, but I'm sure you know what I mean. And I'm sure you'll disagree with it, but what the hell -- it has to be said.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

1314. That's my take on it.

They're a relatively small group, quite vocal and probably big $$$$ donors.

[Go2Peace]

1464. Absolutely.

[OhioBlue]

1383. Well, your truth is your perception I guess.

My perception is quite the opposite. I think DU is being ruined by posters that do nothing but attack the President. Especially when it is knee-jerk, petty stuff. The serious discussion would be welcome... but a lot of posts contain things that are not criticism, but vitriol and talking points.

[BootinUp]

1587. not exactly

its not petty stuff. Its difficult/slow to do stuff. And we want someone to blame for it.

[Joey Kidd]

1584. +1 n/t

[Lil Missy]

1737. Bingo

[rusty fender]

181. Totally agree--k&r!

I don't post much, but I like to read as many posts that I have time for, which is not much. I like DU just as it is: a free-for-all of ideas.

[Jackpine Radical]

338. I think of DU as just one big, incredibly dysfunctional family.

As Democrats, we naturally have immense problems handling the electoral successes of '06 and '08. I have been critical of Obama, and maybe sometimes too critical. I have also applauded what I consider to be his positive actions. I very much value the people around here who differ with me. I know that they essentially want the same things I want, namely, for the world to be a better place and for everyone to have adequate access to the necessities of life and the opportunity to develop and flourish. But we have immense arguments about how to get there. I submit that those arguments are valuable in themselves. I don't mind reading the comments of people who don't see things exactly as I do. Sometimes I change my opinion as a result of exposure to different viewpoints--and sometimes I don't. But in either case I believe my notions are improved, made more complex and sophisticated, and more reality-connected as a result of interactions with those who disagree with me.

All that said, I don't think it is useful or productive for our disagreements to get low and personal. Nobody here is stupid. (Well, maybe a few passing trolls excepted.) Nobody is mean-spirited. Nobody wants to see suffering. I hope that out of our various conflicts we can help to advance the great national debate, and can all grow as people. This process is itself often painful, but I think very valuable nevertheless. More comity and civility would be nice, but I think DU is serving its root functions quite well. I vote for no changes. And I do think that the economic hard times are the major cause of the fundraising problems.

[nightrain]

455. I see it similarly. I appreciate the ignore feature more than ever before!

I didn't want to use it before, but when the unfounded personal attacks reached a certain level, those folks' posts lost value for me.

[Go2Peace]

1465. True, it shouldn't be a surprise since our whole country is basically dysfunctional right now ;)

Part of what brought us here was that as a society we *didn't* have the debates we should have. So we *need* to have them.
We are in the midst of a national crisis. In a Democracy it would be normal to have strong debates and feelings.

[SunsetDreams]

562. It's only legit if you admit it works BOTH ways.

[LostinVA]

861. Which shows you didn't read my post at all

Because there IS NO "BOTH SIDES."

[SunsetDreams]

950. Your first post

was only talking about one side. You failed to mention that there is another side, or sides.
I read plenty, which is why you chose to jump on Skinner for saying that he sees it with both sides.

[LostinVA]

1268. Again, you are willfully misconstruing what I wrote and trying some strawmen in

All while badgering me and others in this thread. Quelle surprise.

Not.

[SunsetDreams]

1709. strawmen strawmen

Now, I guess if you really agreed with Skinner, then there was no need for what you posted to him.
"No YOU fail to admit this point is legit" when all he did was point out that it happens on both sides after you tried to only talk about one side.
There is no misconstrue about anything. Badgering you? Not hardly. You replied, I replied, that's what happens on a message board.

[CBR]

78. There are groups of individuals on this board

who band together on a variety of issues and bash anyone who disagrees. There are individuals who post on another site who band together to swarm threads and individual posters. There are alot of cliques on here but to single one out as the potential problem is the basis of the problem we are having -- everyone is convinced that they are the right and nobody else can possibly be. Personally, I have similar feelings, there is a group of posters who just cannot bring themselves to say anything positive about the President and who think they carry the banner of what "true liberalism" is.

[LostinVA]

105. The psoter was discussing this one group, so I discussed this one group

I am not a member of that board, and that is far from a liberal board. There is also a group that coordinates swarms against the "other groups."

And, you know what? If you are against GLBT rights or women's rights, or are for bigotry based on race or religion, you deserve to get called on it. that isn't bashing.

[CBR]

126. Now that you mention it. There is plenty of racism coming in the

form of dismissing concerns about race as "class issues" but it goes on constantly. We could not even agree on a liberal board that white privilege exists. IT seems like minorities are woefully underrepresented on this board and, seeing that they make up a large portion of the base, it is very disconcerting. It is because the issues of racial minorities are not taken seriously and dismissed under the auspices of classism IMO.

[boston bean]

213. I see your not a fan of Shirley Sherrod.

It's not racist to recognize class as a real problem.

[CBR]

411. Class is a problem but people on here ignore race

in favor of class. That is the problem. In threads about racism, people will say stupid shit like "divide and conquer" or we must unite on class. Well, I will tell you what, when working and middle class white people get off their racist stick, then come talk to me. It is not minorities who need to capitulate and bring a class together, it is whites.

[bobbolink]

546. .

I wanted to , but I will settle for

[CBR]

620. Thanks. It is important to know who think racism is not a problem on here.

It is quite clear.

[bobbolink]

634. You are very welcome, because I also like knowing who doesn't give a rip about poverty.

[CBR]

820. Try again. I was born to a 15 year old mother in rural WV.

Nice talking to you and your one-sided view of the world where only class matters.

[bobbolink]

835. And I very much appreciate your concentration on YOU and demanding that others do the same.

This is exactly why THEY are winning... because so many of you are cooperating with the divide-and-conquer strategery.

Congratulations. Job well done.

[superduperfarleft]

863. Wow, project much?

You of all people are actually berating someone for seemingly concentrating on their own situation at the expense of other issues?

[Violet_Crumble]

1389. +10000 n/t

[Go2Peace]

1468. You may not know it

I don't know if bobolink is still, but for years she was homeless and posting here from a library. So poverty tends to be on her mind.

[superduperfarleft]

1534. Holy shit, she's HOMELESS?

I had no idea!

[Hekate]

1665. It has been a secret known to few

(God forgive me for laughing out loud)

[SidDithers]

1574. Great observation...

Sid

[CBR]

1132. You insulting someone for talking about themselves is

laughable. That is all you do on here. Your response to every issue goes back to your personal experience. Seeing that I grew up as a rural working class white person and I am saying minority voices are left out, I think maybe it is not me who has an issue focusing constantly on my personal situation.

[bobbolink]

1166. Thank you for your fine personal attack. Do us both a favor and put me on ignore.

I would appreciate that very much.

So much, in fact, that I will lead the way.

Welcome to my ignore list. I hope it makes you feel sooooo much better.

[awoke_in_2003]

1326. you are wrong...

racisms is not ignored here. When it is identified it is smacked down good. Class, on the other hand, is not. Downthread you accused bb of thinking only class matters in this country- bb is right. The poor are the invisible in this country- they are not even acknowledged by politicians- they are too worried about getting the middle class vote so they can get in office and start raking in the money from the ruling class. This explains why we have one party with two different names.

[JonLP24]

1070. I see this both ways

While there are posters who don't agree with anythiing the President does, there are others that will defend any issue, no matter how bad it is.

Issues are what should be important. If it is a good thing say so, if it is a bad thing say so.

[Sheepshank]

215. So, Obama supporters are sychophants?

name calling is constructive? Denigrating those with a difference of opinions is constructive? Worried about the political position of others that they are not a collective registry of a personal opinion. Wow, clever *not*. Post #15 was sort of lost on me after that one liner.

[Jakes Progress]

543. Please stop that.

There are a number of Obama supporters. And there are a number of Obama sychophants. It is easy to tell the difference. The sychophant never - never ever - finds any thing that the administration does is wrong or even less than the perfect thing to do. They approve of anything done if Obama does it. They would not approve of it if a republican did it and would question it's wisdom if some other Democrat did it. Plus they brook no discussion that might question an administrative action.

I have no problem with that. I have my knee-jerk issues - racism, sexism, glbt attacks. Their knee jerk issue is not an issue, it is the president.

If you can disagree with the president on some issues, then you aren't a sychophant. But there is no perfect person and to never find fault is a conscious decision to ignore reality.

Personally, I believe some of the most devout defenders are not who they say they are. If I wanted to foment discord among republicans on a site, I wouldn't be able to do that by attacking mccain or palin. But I could alienate and piss off whole groups of serious people (yeah like republicans are serious about anything other than cutting taxes) by attacking people on the site as not being good enough or pure enough. I would tell them that palin and gingrich hate them and want them to go away if they don't like it. I don't have time to do that kind of stuff, but I think it would be effective.

[Sheepshank]

743. There is no way to tell...so why bring up the label?

Disagreeing with Obama will never necessarily mean those people will speak up. To be called a sychopant because a person hasn't submitted a negative post, is simply wrong, abusive and little more that playground bullying. So if anyone should stop it's those that insist on name calling when they have limited information on which to base erronous judgements.

As mentioned on this thread, there are plenty here that are not in 100% agreement with Obama's processes etc. But to mention anything along those lines here at this time seems to do nothing less that provide fuel for a negative feeding frenzy. I personally would rather not fuel that extreme toxicity.

[Jakes Progress]

771. So stop bringing it up.

If you must comment on something then you have to know that it will keep bumping that something up. You have your say. Someone has theirs. You again. Them again. If you don't think something should be discussed, then just let it sink. But don't make a comment about a post and tsk tsk when others comment on yours.

[Sheepshank]

803. you're telling me to stop, to shut up?

interesting, and a true example of what I've been talking about

[Jakes Progress]

953. Interesting. You just did it again.

Are you trying to prove Skinner's premise that DU is busted. You knew all along that the first post you responded to didn't say that all Obama supporters were sycophants. But you implied it did and suggested that he shouldn't post that - that he should in effect shut up.

And here you accuse me of telling you to shut up when you know that wasn't what I did. That is a very dishonest way of discussing. Perhaps Skinner is right about the low level of discourse to which DU has sunk.

And your posts are indeed a perfect example. To quote Joseph Welch: "You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency"

[Sheepshank]

1089. oh, telling me to stop talking is so very different than shut up?

you are being disingenious and the level of discourse plummeted the moment you tried to dissuade me (or anyone) from making a statement that you personlly didn't like. If you wanted a discussion, perhaps the thing to do would have been to discuss rather than attempt to shut down with a rather arrogant assumption that your words carried any weight with me.

[Jakes Progress]

1316. You are shameless.

Show me where I told you to shut up. If you truly believe that was what I wrote, then you are comprehension impaired.

I didn't think you are really that obtuse, but you do seem capable of saying anything and making things up rather than admitting error.

So go ahead and quote me telling you to shut up. I never tried to shut you up. You whined that you didn't like people saying something (implying that they should shut up) and I said if you don't like the subject being brought up the best way to get it off the board was to let it sink. Then you went into drama mode, screaming about being told to shut up.

Dense or dishonest. I honestly can't guess which now. I had given you credit for thinking but not honor, but now I don't know.

[LostinVA]

865. Of course you can tell -- there's no way NOT to tell

[Sheepshank]

1092. bull

[LostinVA]

1271. THERE IS NO WAY NOT TO TELL

They do stick out like sore thumbs.

[niceypoo]

1031. Actually, they stick out like sore thumbs

Particularly in the GDP forum. Some people are followers, just gotta accept that fact and move on.

[Sheepshank]

1125. not true

the claim that there are sychophants here, is made merely because a poster may not have posted a word of dissention regarding Obama. The premis is false. No one can tell if someone is a sychopant or not because of their posting history. No one.

There are things I don't agree with regarding Obama's policy process and choices....I will never delineate them on this bb. I am not the only one who refrains from such posts. I presume to get involved in other ways to affectuate or at least try to affectuate change.

So how do you know who all those presumed sychophants are? Of course you can't "know".

[LostinVA]

1277. Totally true

Saying there aren't is being willfully ignorant or terribly naive. Although I will say some may be ConservativeCave or FR disruptors, trying to make Obama supporters look bad.

[Go2Peace]

1470. "because a person hasn't submitted a negative post"

No, they don't "simply" "not post negative". They post and then determinedly argue any point and purpously distort and misrepresent anyone who makes a reply that does not agree 100%. There is a difference.

[LostinVA]

864. Not one poster on here has EVER said that -- EVER

[SunsetDreams]

YOU responded "The poster is correct though"

"Obama sycophants"... very constructive

You responded to the person, who replied to the post that said "Obama sycophants"
It's still there. Did you mean to reply to something else?

"Not one poster has ever said that here EVER"

[LostinVA]

No one has EVER said Obama supporters are sycophants, ever

Some Obama "supporters" aren't supporters, but sycophants, just like any other politician. I Haven't said anything un constructive, but you sure are trying to make it appear I did.

And, I didn't realize you were in charge of whom I may or may not respond to. Mea culpa.

[SunsetDreams]

Again you say it, YOU agreed with post 15 which does in fact say that

and you still say "No one has EVER said Obama supporters are sycophants, ever"

Are you kidding me? "that poster is correct though" Did you just read right over the part where that poster said that?

[LostinVA]

1275. No one has ever said that, including that poster

EVER.

You can't find one post that ahs ever said that, unless it was by some five-post troll whom was TSed ASAP.

[SunsetDreams]

1570. ahh but it does say that

[BootinUp]

1582. kinda concerning no?

[yurbud]

1629. if they are honest about the nature of deals made, who was served, who was pressured and who

was stroked, I don't have a problem with it.

When someone says he got the best deal possible when he didn't really even try for the best deal, that's something else.

[Joe Fields]

401. I, for one don't like talking into an echo chamber.

I think that is a moderately bad idea.

[True_Blue]

1578. I am too but .....

I decided to donate $5 anyway At this point, $5 isn't going to break me much more than I am already.

[jeanpalmer]

1744. Excellent suggestion

Separate forums for each viewpoint. But a forum also for those who are willing to mix it up. Just redesignate a couple of the forums.

[nc4bo]

18. I can't give more until after the drive is over....

I borrowed a few $$ to participate in this one.

The economy is soooooooooo bad, we're managing to keep our heads over the waterline as it is but I really do love DU even with its divisions.

I can manage to do a bit more but I need more time.

[knitter4democracy]

138. Same here.

I don't start getting paid again for at least another three weeks.

[BeFree]

19. Thanks, Skinner

We all knew bush was bad, and have a distrust of government because of his administration. That distrust carries over into the Obama administration.

Distrust shows critical thinking, and DU, if nothing else is a place to have discussions about critical thoughts concerning the government's activities.

I love all that. It has enriched me beyond all expectations.

What does bug me is that, for some unknown reason to me, some of the best critics have been forcibly removed from our discussions.

Kinda like judge, jury and executioner in one feel swoop.

It is a problem you recognize. Maybe a solution should be we get to vote? To be sort of a jury of peers, when someone is to be excommunicated?

Ah, don't mind me, I'm just a 'twoofer'.

[kentuck]

20. DU should be a political Party.

We should make endorsements to those liberals that espouse our values. We would not be a big tent Party. We would be progressives.

[AsahinaKimi]

21. Guess I was lucky to

be able to help out..with some donations. I love the sticky board, just as I loved the Valentines..I Hope it all helps. I hope to be here for a long time!

[Fumesucker]

22. I think it has at least as much to do with the economy..

I've been a donor to DU for quite a while, it's still one of the best places I've found on the web to discuss politics and current events with people who are for the most part intelligent, informed and thoughtful.

But a lot us are running on empty, I've been doing it for so long that it's become the new normal for me, in fact my screen name has to do with the fact that I'm in financially desperate straits, I'm sucking financial fumes.

I still like coming here and I for one actually enjoy seeing and arguing with different points of view, I'm not interested in being part of a total echo chamber, I know what I think and don't need constant reinforcement like so many who listen to right wing talk radio. I'm also willing to be persuaded to change my opinion, indeed I have changed my opinions, maybe not often but it has happened.

Don't blame yourself or what you are doing Skinner, there are still a lot of us out here who appreciate the resource that is DU.

[MattBaggins]

24. It's because you dont care about us yellow spotted blue dog dems.

All you care about are the blue spotted yellow dogs.

And you won't of rid of the recommend button for everyone else but me.

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. I've been, quite frankly, shocked by some of the vile charges made against you, personally

And trumpeted on other blogs. They've been clearly false and incredibly irresponsible, and I wish people would see a person on the other side of the dispute they're in before they make such despicable accusations.

Honestly. If I were you, I would have shut this whole thing down when all that happened. Incredible.

[tallahasseedem]

31. I had no idea that this was going on...

that sucks.

[msanthrope]

147. Oh yeah, there's a hardcore bunch who post here

and then at other sites....

They spend a great deal of time trying to figure out Skinner's connection to the DLC, the Bilderburgers, and the Tri-Lateral Commisssion...

It would be comical, if it weren't so frackin' sad.

[Solly Mack]

27. I honestly was waiting because I couldn't decide what I wanted on my stickies.

I like to donate and do the stickies at the same time...instead of donating and then just holding off until I decide. Alas...since you've written such a thoughtful post...I'll vex myself with a decision still left unmade and go ahead and donate.

[liberalmike27]

28. None offer Critical Solutions So Far

I think the thing that has sent me off packing a few times is that it seems like you've rejected the most left of the left here. Like it or not, the professional left, the Green Party have no home if not here. Embrace us, if we're crazy, or if we're sane, we're part of the Democratic Party for the most part. There was a lot of scolding and demonizing during that Green Party campaign. I think a little more informing, and guiding those in states more important to vote for democrats would have been wiser.

And generally I don't mind the axing of clearly right-wingers. This isn't their place. By all means take the freepers away. But from time to time it seems like you guys are a little radical in the pursuit of this small, very boxed version of what democrats are. Being in the mold of an older Democrat, and wanting Democrats to fight back with more vim and vigor, rather than being so milquetoast, I don't really care for being scolded. This is a war of ideas. If we're trying to hold the line, when we do get pulled to the right a bit, there we are trying to hold the line again, and we're never going to get back to the left.

As an example, Thom Hartmann rather than just railing against Social Security repeal that republicans push, has been pushing for lowering the age to 55, and doubling the amount paid as a stimulus both to employment and the demand side. He wants to pay for it by raising the cap, or eliminating it. See, that's creative push-back. That represents Democrats really making progress, pulling to the left in that imaginary tug-of-war, rather than teetering on the edge of the mud in the middle, trying to hold our own on bad footing.

We say in the game of chess, if you play for a draw, you are likely to lose. If I had to pick a problem with the democratic party, and what little media we've had over the years, it'd be giving ground, rather than standing firm, making the case, and suggesting ideas that are even more radically left.

All of this would require less work by you too, having to take less posts off, be a little more relaxed about imposing your own version of everything, your own mores, you own boxed up ideas on the rest of us by your censorship. Your post reeks of you actually describing the very thing you seem to see as the problem, your own deleting of posts. Relax a little. We're all adults here, we can take a bit of abuse from others, we can argue amongst ourselves. Let it happen, as it fires us up, and if there is one thing we democrats all need is to be fired up a bit.

[liberalmike27]

52. I should add though

That this is a classic example of why net-neutrality is such a direct slash at more liberal sites who depend on contributions. If you can barely keep afloat, imagine if you were retired to a really slow tier of the Internet, because you could not pay.

Destroying Net Neutrality is exactly the taming of the Wild-Wild-West of the Internet, that they've done to television. They attack it daily, touting "the danger of the Internet, watch your kids wild predators abound, they have crazy leftish ideas there on the Internet we've gleaned from our sensible coverage," they say.

[woo me with science]

693. good post, too. nt

[Poboy]

182. Good post.

"Democratic Underground". The name suggests THIS is the mindset the site should exemplify. New ideas and commentary on how to persue progressive ideas. I'm fairly new, but I am a long time lurker/reader. This place used to be much more liberal/left/progressive.

I donated. Second time with a nice sized donation in as many months actually. Just decided to join because in the past 6 months I saw how the left was slowly being cut out, banned, censored, etc.

I thought I'd join to help in stopping the 'establishment' from completely taking this place over.

Member of the amateur left.

[woo me with science]

691. I agree with this.

Just relax, step back, and let us talk.

I personally am bothered by nothing on this board except attempts to control speech. The range of opinions here just makes DU richer.

To me, the vibrant discussions here among Democrats of all stripes are what makes DU feel like home.

[Mimosa]

1260. Thom has posted here and that is so COOL! n/t

[Tsiyu]

29. Times are tough

I hate that DU is struggling.

It's still the best place on the nets.

But people are confused and tired.



I would definitely participate in any surveys.

Hang in there, Skinner and Admins......

[Skinner]

39. To be clear, DU can survive a slow fund drive. I'm not concerned about our finances.

At least not yet.

I'm concerned about what the slow fund drive says about DU.

[annabanana]

56. I really think the economy is a bigger factor than factions are.

There is an overreaching general agreement on issues here with occasional elbows thrown on the means to the end... I don't think we're as divided as we appear.

[Tsiyu]

71. This community appreciates that

and also appreciates your willingness to listen.

[Hissyspit]

82. I was wondering why we didn't have the stickie specials?

$10 seems like a lot of money all if a sudden nowadays.

[nc4bo]

93. $5 half stickies would be cool w/me. Wouldn't mind sharing :)

$10 IS alot when there's only $30 in the pocket.

[tavalon]

276. I left for the first time early this summer

but it wasn't other people on the site, it was that I was so damn angry and depressed and found myself lashing out in unproductive ways. It has gotten harder here but I'm back because there isn't another place on the tubes with as many wonderful, cantankerous, caring, passionate, infuriating but highly informed people, bar none.

[Joanne98]

282. It saz the economy sux. Everybody's broke. Why don't you try an auction for the poor people.

There's a lot of talented crafts people on this forum. The starving artists. If we could donate something we made to an auction we could contribute more.

I don't think the infighting has anything to do with the slow fund drive. I think it's just that everybody's so broke. I know I am. It's not just DU. Other progessive sites have been having the same problem. Opednews was just complaining about the same thing. They only got 200 donations.

We need a new donation model. Let us donation handmade items so more people can contribute.

[enlightenment]

597. Thank you for being clear on that, Skinner.

It's hard to accept the 'won't make our goal' argument when the 'goal' is never defined. Some folks may have an idea of what you need to run this site, but I suspect most of us don't - so the 'goal' is a big mystery.

I'm very glad you realize that DU is suffering. Personally (purely personal and I don't think I have ever posted the thoughts until now), I think part of the problem began with the ridiculous, grade-school level 'rec/unrec' and the 'Greatest' category. It has created an atmosphere that allows people to click and run - and taken on a level of importance that often outweighs the subject introduced. It fosters divisiveness, because people react to that tiny number at the bottom of the box, rather than the content of the post.

This place shouldn't be a popularity contest, but that's what it feels like it has become. Low posters are still considered extremely suspect, often regardless of what they write, while high posters are still often considered 'wise' simply because they have racked up a very high number - regardless of how they reached that vaunted height. (I remember when you removed actual post count and replaced it with 1000+ - perhaps it would be worthwhile to evaluate post count as a visible feature?)

[Caliman73]

606. I wouldn't weigh the bickering too heavily as a factor in the slow drive.

I agree with those who think the economy and life in general are larger factors. Things are very strange and difficult right now as we witness the wealthy flexing their muscles despite the hope that many people felt at the election of an articulate, seemingly understanding president who wanted to change course. Many of us are struggling economically and emotionally trying to get our bearings and I think feeling very small in light of the media coverage of events and creating stories and information rather than reporting or analyzing what is out there.

[defendandprotect]

734. Can DU continue to survive this economy? That's the question?

Maybe you have to pick a side re jobs/employment/stimulus?

New Deal . . . or more Wall Street Deals?

[PassingFair]

1730. It says you've allowed 25 posters to run off half of your "base".

I hope you're being well compensated.

[Better Believe It]

I think the main problem is the economic crisis including joblessness and pay cuts.

And it's getting worse, not better.

But, DU will survive so stay strong.

Perhaps other ways of generating additional revenue to DU can be used.

Any ideas along those lines?

[defendandprotect]

738. Economic crisis will not be solved by right wing/corporate "remedies" ...!!

Nor Obama attacking Social Security and Medicare --

This ship of state has to be turned around otherwise things are going

to get much worse!

[derby378]

33. I'm really happy to be here

And I know all of us have strong disagreements with each other on a lot of issues, but I saw it as separating the wheat from the chaff so that we'd emerge stronger and more cohesive than ever before. Sadly, this has not happened.

Maybe we all need to get back to basics, myself included. What do we want for this nation? For our party? For our President? For Congress? For the next Democratic President? The answers don't have to be that deep, but they do have to be meaningful.

Thank you, Skinner, EarlG, and Elad, for putting up with us as much as you have and still seeing something in our community worth fighting for.

[uncommon]

34. Just bc the POTUS is a Dem, doesn't mean he can fix the world overnight.

He is making progress - and he and the rest of the Dems still need our support.

[seabeyond]

37. well, now, isn't your post kinda the way of the world and an example of exactly what obama faces

you do very good exploring the issues and problems du faces. you articulate them well. you clearly see how others feel. you are able to state how you feel clearly and still....

there is no easy answer. you can not create the utopia we are all demanding

i find your post really interesting. i can also appreciate what you are saying. and i agree with you absolutely. and i thank you for the time in saying this

and see, even with that, i too have no answers, but i can hear where you are coming from

and wouldn't it be nice if we could have people that could look at the whole, and even the specifics and sit there, without the answer and

without the accusations, insistence of right, demand our way... knowing

it is not that easy.

life

[Whisp]

46. good post, sea.. ;)

[Skinner]

69. I think you are right.

As a matter of fact, I think being the admin of DU makes me feel somewhat sympathetic to President Obama.

[tavalon]

292. LOL

I can't imagine why! Having met two out of the three of you in person and having looked into your eyes (creepy throwback to Putin-Bushy) I know you are good people who are being demonized for no good reason and likely can't find a happy medium.

[Javaman]

306. Herding cats. lol nt

[Sapphocrat]

994. I'm sure it does.

But (and you knew there was a "but" coming), you have an advantage over Obama: You've been doing this for nearly ten years. What that indicates to me, I'll keep to myself, as I'm not ready to be TS'd -- but I will risk this much: The one thing you definitely have in common with the President is that you both asked for the job.

Oh, the hell with worrying about it -- this may be my final post (that's up to you), but here goes:

Look, David, I'm not entirely unsympathetic -- I've tried to herd cats myself -- but you've fallen into a very common trap: You've spent the past couple of years (since the primaries) trying to quash every little problem with another rule here, another rule there -- some of them astonishingly pointless and utterly ridiculous (e.g., calling Obama "Barry" = punishable offense), and others -- many unspoken -- unbelievably dictatorial (e.g., banning people for posting a certain number, or asking a question about that certain number).

It's gotten to the point that DU is completely hamstrung. You've got myriad, often incomprehensible, rules that do little to advance any solutions, and you've got at least half this board too afraid of being axed to say anything of value any longer. Does it surprise you that those you haven't tombstoned already have just given up and walked away?

And what is the point of rules that intimate anyone into silence? You may as well tombstone half the board; you are going to silence people either out of fear or out of force. What's the difference, when the end result is the same -- silence?

The "old" DU -- yeah, I miss it too, a lot. The old DU was about issues and principles -- it wasn't a damned fan club. Now it is; what other excuse could there be for censoring valid criticism of Obama's positions and policies when so many are the very same positions and policies we were all railing against under Bush?

The real problem, David? You've lost sight of your own mission statement:

"Who We Are: Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office. Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates."

The board is not being "generally supportive of progressive ideals" when those who criticize Obama for failing to support progressive ideals himself end up muted and/or banned.

Whatever happened to the DU I remember, where if we agreed on nothing else on a given day, we all never failed to agree that "dissent is patriotic"?

At the same time, you overlook that the furthest left of us still "support Democratic candidates for political office" -- as best we can. What more can you ask? That we sign a loyalty oath? That we produce copies of our ballots to prove we voted a straight Democratic ticket? That we lie and promise to vote for the homophobic, anti-choice candidate just because he or she has a D after his or her name?

Well, if that's what you want, David, then you've already chosen a side.

As as far DU not being affiliated with the Democratic Party, who (besides your lawyers) cares if it is or not? For all intents and purposes, it functions as an arm of the party.

You want my advice? Probably not, but I'll give it to you anyway.

What I would do if I were you:

Kill the mountains of rules. Go back to "no personal attacks," no assassination jokes, and no explicit sex threads, and start over from there. And let people say "Fuck you" and "STFU, asshole." You let us get away with that much in the good old days, and the world didn't end -- and I never once saw you not meet your fundraising goal (whatever that was or is).

Jesus Christ, David, we're all supposed to be adults here -- let us hash it out amongst ourselves. Stop playing Daddy. You're not Daddy -- and no amount of rulemaking is going to give you a handle on this. It just pisses people off and makes them go away (whether voluntarily or not).

Remember: People either live up to or down to the expectations you have of them. If you're going to treat people like children, they're going to act like children. If you demonstrate that you trust adults to act like adults, they usually do.

Finally, apologize to and invite back all the LGBTers banned in the purge no one is supposed to talk about. Some people who have been warned, suspended repeatedly, and banned suddenly resurface out of nowhere and are welcomed back like the Prodigal Son. Others, whose "offenses" (e.g., posting that certain number) are "disappeared" forever. Do you see the mixed message you're sending? Do you see why it appears you play favorites, and just hope no one notices?

Now, seriously, David: Do you really wonder why some people don't want to pay for that?

I guess now I'll probably be the first of the next purge for saying all this -- but if I am, at least I'll go to bed tonight with a clear conscience.

And if I don't get the chance again, I want to thank you for a wonderful experience overall -- the first six years were damned good. The last few, not so much.

[Mithreal]

1019. Very well said.

[Prism]

1024. +7

[NMMNG]

1040. +7

I loved this place when we could actually discuss things.

Now it's a matter of strict message control. If I wanted to pay someone to tell me what to say I'd join a church or a fan club.


Obama is not the Democratic Party. He will not be in office forever. If we are to be censured and even purged simply for disagreeing (even vehemently) with a single Democratic politician, how can this be called a discussion forum?


Furthermore, as a member of the LGBT community, I can't fathom donating to a board that's openly hostile to me and mine, and to our concerns which are constantly dismissed as petty, paltry, trivial, "wedge issues" and otherwise of no consequence to anybody here except when it comes time to ask for money/votes or to blame someone because the Dems lost another one.

[jannyk]

1057. Beautiful Post!

[nashville_brook]

1062. the fact that this poster knows that speaking freely is a punishable offense, sums up the problem

better than any other post here. you can't have a "discussion" board where *this degree* of fear of speech is common. it's oxymoronic.

without freedom to speak, you don't have a discussion, and you've lost the reason to have a discussion board.

[seabeyond]

1068. but this is where i have the problem. all the years on du, no, i dont see that the poster has a

reason to be worried about tombstoning. as a matter of fact thought his/her post good EXCEPT all the "probably get tombstoned". i think that is so off base. i havent been easy. i dont concern self with tombstoning. and i certainly dont continually welcome it in my post

is it a legit concern? or a fabricated one?

and i mean it RESPECTFULLY just not in agreement.

[nashville_brook]

1183. it's something that's easy not to see b/c someone is gone...they're gone

[seabeyond]

1313. i have followed a lot of people gone.

not some of them so i can't speak for that. but good people that are gone. and they did something that got them kicked out, or kick me out... tyoe posts or whatever. i havent seen where just differing opinion means gone. i have had differing opinion so much. so many people have. and i dont see gone with that.

now, saying, i dont particpate in gdp cause there is so much fighting without listening. and there is another situation i hear about that i dont know cause wasnt there.

but i do watch a lot of the gone.

[AngryOldDem]

1267. And DU wonders why it's having trouble raising money.

Who wants to pay for the "privilege" of one's own self-censorship? When you are afraid to post your own opinions on a site supposedly set up for that very activity, that pretty much makes said site worthless.

[Catherina]

1436. What you just said needs to be in big BOLD letters.

Who wants to pay for the "privilege" of one's own self-censorship? When you are afraid to post your own opinions on a site supposedly set up for that very activity, that pretty much makes said site worthless.

[flyarm]

1561. +1 while a select group is allowed to break all the rules , tag team others and be disrespectful in

every way, and have an ugly arrogance , because they know there will be no accountability for their own behavior.

We all know who some of those people are, who seem to have a privilege others don't.

It is abundantly obvious!

I lose my generosity when I see bullies get away with bullying and actually smearing it in others faces!

I can not and will not contribute to anything or any place that allows that behavior and that is obviously allowed, and perpetrated against a majority.

[AngryOldDem]

1617. Here's why I'm not donating.

1) Obvious reason: Funds are tight.

2) I find DU exhausting anymore. I can't keep up with all the drama, battle lines, ad hominems in lieu of civil discussion, differing opinions called out as disruptions and those same opinions suddenly flushed down the memory hole because they don't fit the groupthink. (And, more often than not, their authors quickly follow them.)

I find with maybe the exception of one of the subforums, I don't post much anymore. I have better ways to spend my time, and given that I'm not one of the heavy hitters here anyway, my presence and pittance of a donation most likely won't be missed. Oh well. I'll live.

3) The bias and favoritism here that often flies in the face of the stated rules, as developed and then enforced by the administrators and moderators. (As you note.) What tore it for me was the readmission of a poster who threatened violence against another member. I saw those posts, and I was stunned at both the vitriol and the arrogant presumption that he was untouchable: If anyone deserved a permanent ban, it was that poster. But, the next thing I saw, the poster was back -- and with a hero's welcome, no less.

The only thing I can think of is that this poster is part of the DU "in-crowd," a big fish in a small Internet pond, someone who this site (for whatever reason) apparently decided it could not do without, rules be damned. I think his reinstatement was a huge slap in the face not only to the threatened member, but to this community as well. The admins' backtracking spoke volumes. Sure, they, and by extension their mods, can do what they want, how they want, when they want -- and that is also a part of the problem here. But some things should be non-negotiable if a site like DU is to have any integrity both within its community and outside it. DU has just about compromised itself beyond recognition, with this incident being the most egregious example. But what is perhaps the saddest thing, I was not the least bit surprised.

[Lorien]

1269. Excellent point. nt

[jgraz]

1081. .

dup

[jgraz]

1082. Rarely do I see a post where I completely agree with every word.

This is one of those rare times.

Every. Goddamn. Word.

[havocmom]

1086. About says it for me too. Thank you

Throw in the points Ignis has made about bullies getting away with rule violations demonstrating the uneven application of all those rules and all I can add is this: Message control only works in fantasy land. It the real world, it will always fail to varying degrees.

[seabeyond]

1115. how do you allow the fuck you and shut the fuck up (which i love and remember) yet

eliminate the bully. dont you have to say no to the fuck you, to stop the bullying.

i say this cause isnt this like the contradicitive demands made by posters that we are seeing thru out this thread

which i find more interesting, lol than original subject, because these type threads interest me.

[havocmom]

1144. swearing is swearing. Bullying is not the same

I have seen bullies continually try to apply labels which are repugnant to most here to posters in an attempt to bully them into silence. No swearing involved.

The tag team crap and rovian framing to try to make a poster feel they are somehow like a republican is bullying. No swearing involved.

Sorry, but it's bogus and some of us just won't put up with others being treated badly just to shut them up.

[seabeyond]

1154. people are talking about how hard it is in discussing.

so on some posts i have tried to discuss. and it is not going so well. let me ask, do you really see it only those that have issue with obama being the ones shut down? do you not equally see posts, when seeing something obama has done, that those people are being shut down, too.

i dont have a toe in this fight. i have chosen not to say a god damn thing on policy threads, because i see it as a lose, regardless of the position.

so i shut the fuck up, .... because of both sides.

dont i get to be pissed and not gonna take it, too? but, how i see it is both have reasonable arguments, so, i stay out of it.

[havocmom]

1274. Ask me anything you want

But I see no point in answering.

[seabeyond]

1315. really? wow. hm.

how have i become the enemy. cause i never thought you and i had issue. and i certainly havent become that thru the obama issue, cause i stay out of them, for the most part.

[BootinUp]

1242. lol me too. nt

[Go2Peace]

1472. I agree it was a great post but that is the one thing I would rather not see

I can see saying "fuck that shit" which would be a reference to the ideas, but "Fuck you" is just not going to work as for most people that is an extremely aggressive insult.

[Starry Messenger]

1096. +7

I'm glad I opened this thread again. A gem of a post Sapphocrat.

[Spheric]

1128. +7

[unapatriciated]

1139. ..

That is the DU Lame54 made a vid for long ago (unfortunately youtube censored it because of a song in the background). We should be able to speak our minds and explain why we hold certain views without fear of a cold pizza. Separate groups does nothing to change the direction of our party and is just an echo chamber.

[Raster]

1152. Thank you, Sapphocrat!!!

Word!

[Stinky The Clown]

I totally agree with you

I would love it if our banished gay brothers and sisters would be invited back and given back their names and post counts, too.

[Mimosa]

1270. I didn't even know about that...

I am part of the LGBT community but have seldom posted in that forum. I don't know that there was ever a 'purge' here. Somebody PM me.

[tishaLA]

1173. +7

[kiva]

1203. Brilliant. +1 n/t

[Bluebear]

1230. +7

[BootinUp]

1244. -7

[girl gone mad]

1346. +14

[BootinUp]

1511. lol nt

[Duncan Grant]

1248. +7

Finally, apologize to and invite back all the LGBTers banned in the purge no one is supposed to talk about. Some people who have been warned, suspended repeatedly, and banned suddenly resurface out of nowhere and are welcomed back like the Prodigal Son. Others, whose "offenses" (e.g., posting that certain number) are "disappeared" forever. Do you see the mixed message you're sending? Do you see why it appears you play favorites, and just hope no one notices?

Ab-so-freakin-lutely.

[Lorien]

1262. Agreed. And I do wish that we COULD agree to disagree and that dissent

was still considered the highest form of patriotism. I fall into the "principles over individual politicians" group; I'll never be a DLC New Democrat (old Republican), I'll always be anti-war, anti-bigotry, pro-environment, pro-education, pro-worker, pro-single payer, etc. etc. I believe that we Traditional Democrats still remain a strong majority here at DU, though often we are treated as traitors to the party and many of us have been banned or have left DU because we refuse to move to the Right and support the very things that we fought against since 2000. Just as in the mainstream media; the bullies to our Right are the loudest and they insist that everyone fall in line with their demands. That's just not going to happen. Either we agree to disagree or go our separate ways. As Sapphocrat said; we're all supposed to be adults here -- let us hash it out amongst ourselves. Let's kill the mountains of rules.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

1288. *blinks*

*Stands and applauds in affirmation*

Nothing more to say.

[Political_Junkie]

1305. I agree with this wholeheartedly.

That's it right there. How can we discuss anything when we're all walking on egg shells wondering if we'll be the next to go? Especially those of us in the LGBT community, should we be afraid to stand up for ourselves? Maybe at a teaparty rally, but not here.
I've tried to avoid all the bullshit here lately, but in doing so, I feel like a traitor to my own ideals. "There comes a time when silence is betrayal.", by not sticking up for those who are feeling thrown under the bus I'm allowing it to happen.
I like coming here to DU, but I don't love it anymore. However, I do still love the members of this dysfunctional family. The thread last week when we worked to help out Rocky reminded me of the old DU. It's what we do, when we're allowed to do, but lately there seems to be more not allowed, than allowed. Seriously, when someone's acting like an asshole, the only answer they deserve is, "STFU, Asshole!" It doesn't necessarily mean you don't love the asshole, we all need a smack down once in awhile.
Anyway, for what it's worth I prefer a big tent, with lots of rowdy customers, that's why I'm here.

[inna]

1318. Great post. Thank you, this had to be said. nt

[Jakes Progress]

1321. + a lot. This sums it up. This is a long thread and

somewhere above someone pointed out that the progressive, very left make up the majority of DU members. It is easy to see in the posts that make it most often to the greatest list, not just from the recs but from the number of positive responses vs. negative responses to posts that urge Obama (sometimes with much feeling) to get his act together and start being progressive. If, like the DLC, DU wants to turn on its base, then it will have the same problems the DLC has but without the mega money from the corporate world.

[leftyclimber]

1350. +7

[LoZoccolo]

1352. More "gay purge" accusations without explanation of why there would even be

a gay purge at all, or why more gay and lesbian DUers remain than were tombstones. Maybe if you're feeling so bold tonight you could explain these things plainly rather than implying there's some agenda that wouldn't even make sense if it was really happening.

[flvegan]

1362. Sigh.

Poor, clueless woodchuck.

[LoZoccolo]

1366. It's not like you can just say that to make it look like there's a reason or something.

No one ever uses arrogance as a mask for disingenuousness or anything.

[flvegan]

1369. When something is mentioned

a dozen times by different people in one thread, and each one is given a positive response (suggesting it was witnessed/experienced by them), one would have to somehow allow that maybe there's substance (unless one is an idiot). Such a thing *might* lead one to do...oh, I don't know, a Google search.

Go enlighten yourself.

[LoZoccolo]

1386. There are a lot of people questioning Obama's birth certificate too.

I'm not an idiot for not checking that out myself, or for being skeptical based on even my cursory knowledge of it which has yielded enough information for me to assume that the conspiracy theory is junk.

I've read a lot about this "purge". I went to Old Elm Tree even before it was cool and read about it in a place where people could say anything they want. I've never heard a motive, and I've never heard a reason why it would be conducted in such an ineffective manner if there was any intention to get rid of gay and lesbian members. It certainly didn't get rid of the person who does a search of my threads like every day (I know this because the responses come long after the thread has passed off of the front page) and personally attacks me.

[flvegan]

1387. Enjoy those blinders, little woodchuck. n/t

[LoZoccolo]

1388. The "truthers" like to use that one too. n/t

[donco6]

1553. Here's a list of the dead:

Solon
Yardwork
Vanje
Runcible Spoon (previously known as FarceofNature)
Marrah G
Sundog
TechBear Seattle
Zuiderelle (previously known as PelosiFan)
Dbackjon
Maven (previously known as HarveyKorman)
Sheets of Easter
Haruka
Sniffa
KitchenWitch

We're not supposed to talk of the disappeared, but you did ask, after all.

[LoZoccolo]

1567. I did not ask for the list of the dead; I've seen it before.

[Jamastiene]

1610. Forgot one...

Midlo, a strong GLBT ally who was TSed for no good reason.

[lost-in-nj]

1680. +11's

thanks for the list....

and we both know there are more gone that are not on here......
if I mention the dead this will get deleted


it's a case of you reap what you sow......


lost

[alcibiades_mystery]

1734. All well-deserved

Good riddance.

It's a pretty simple ethical rule: you don't go into somebody's house and shit the rug. Whatever delusional excuses you make up beyond that, I'll leave to you. Each of those posters left fairly massive stains on the carpets.

[SoxFan]

1359. There was no "purge"

Some DUers acted like jerks and got what they had coming to them. Their sexuality had nothing to do with it.

Stop it.

[kiva]

1446. If acting like a jerk caused people to be automatically

tombstoned, this thread wouldn't be nearly this long...in fact, it may not have been needed at all.

[LWolf]

1648. Good point.

As a matter of fact, if acting like a jerk caused an automatic tombstone, you wouldn't have needed to explain. There would have been no one to explain to.

[Shining Jack]

1691. Lol !

Well said.

[Brickbat]

1696. It was just being jerks? Then I'm looking forward to seeing them around here again soon. Because

as near as I can tell, when a jerk is tombstoned, he can be reinstated. Eventually.

[swimboy]

1372. I'm bewildered by my own current discomfort.

But I think you've given voice to its core. There have been so many people here that I have loved and been loyal to, probably outweighing the love/loyalty offered me, but I tend to be prodigal with both once I trust someone. Oh, and I've enjoyed some infrequent and rollicking fights as well.

Now, I don't understand why I just don't feel like jumping in, even in the rare case I see someone for whom I care. I just don't know why I'm no longer comfortable. It's not fear but it does feel like caution.

There was a wonderful corps of LGBTers and amazing straight allies who had each others support and spoke out when issues arose (such as the weird Superbowl Snickers controversy)--strongly to our antagonists and more gently to people who honestly did not understand, but were hoping to get a clearer understanding by discussing it with folks on the front line.

So many are gone. I think they should have the option of returning but the train may have left the station.

This was the site of my joyous "internet adolescence". I was reckless, unguarded and honest and I had a ball. And I just don't understand my current hesitation to interact.

[shireen]

1392. thanks!

[leftstreet]

1400. +1

Very well said

[laughingliberal]

1411. Excellent post! nt

[Catherina]

1434. Who are you and where did you come from? Excellent, honest post.

Thank you for your courage. I hope your post helps DU understand without any rancor.

[Jamastiene]

1443. +7

It needed to be said and you said it much better than I could. GLBT is has turned into one of those ghost land forums where only one or two people post OPs and those OPs seem to echo into the darkness, because most GLBT people on DU have either been TSed, left out of disgust, or have been silenced into oblivion for fear of being TSed.

[woo me with science]

1505. BEST POST ON THE THREAD....+1000000000

This is exactly the problem. Thank you for stating it so powerfully.

[John Agar]

1512. Thank you for posting this.

I am still new, but this tells me all I need to know and answers a lot of my questions about this forum.

Also, this has to be the best written, most eloquent thing I have ever had the pleasure of reading on the internet.

The fact that someone like yourself feels this alienated, well it speaks volumes to me about what has gone on here.

Thanks again.

John.

[Scurrilous]

1620. I loved John Agar

Esp. in "Big Jake."

[flyarm]

1560. Excellent post, Excellent points! That should be listened to if this place is to survive! eom

[Generic Other]

1600. I want to know what people think

I oppose censoring opinions. Being bullied into silence is the worst form of censorship. I would rather be told I am stupid for what I am thinking than told to STFU.

Thanks Sapphocat for being brave enough to voice one of the very real issues DU faces.

[racaulk]

1622. +7

Fan-damn-TASTIC post!!! Thank you for posting this, and I agree wholeheartedly with every single word.

I would love to see Skinner reply to this, but I doubt he will.

Thank you, Sapphocrat!

[LWolf]

1649. Thanks.

[RainDog]

1659. +7

there's a lot of stuff that went on here that I never knew about.

then I went back and read actual threads.

If Will Pitt is allowed back on this site after the threats that he made, there is NO REASON for KitchenWitch or Midlo, for instance, to be banned from this site. Probably plenty of others, too.

The current lounge league that gets its panties in a wad over Wilford Brimley? That whole thing is an embarrassment to this site. Someone went off because he was embarrassed by something he had posted early that bothered someone. He then attacked someone else for posting a silly DANCE MIX that used the word "diabetes" because the word, "beat," was part of that word... it was about dance mixes and the juxtaposition of this old guy saying "beat, beat."

Someone took offense at this as tho it were somehow attacking people with diabetes. You have to be humorless or intentionally looking for a reason to find offense (to cover your own embarrassment?) if you do not understand that a dance mix with Brimley has absolutely nothing to do with people with diabetes. Others joined this person and pretended that compassion was the same thing as "I don't like your humor."

I can provide links to these threads for people who want to read them and see how utterly ridiculous this moment was.

Yet, people here pretend there is some sort of "bullying" when someone posts anything that has to do with Brimley - tho the reason it is posted is because the entire situation was about nothing other than someone's DESIRE TO TAKE OFFENSE. It's not bullying to say that you are ridiculous if you make a dance mix with Wilford Brimley a "cause for offense in defense" of those with illnesses.

...Especially when a trained psychologist on the thread, for instance, talked about the ways that people deal with their problems in different ways... the whole idea of humor as a way to gain strength in the face of some difficulty is valid.

Yet not in the lounge.

However, in spite of noting that this sort of idiocy is something moderators must deal with, I do think that a big, big reason that contributions are down is because people are hurting in this economy.

I bet that if steps were taken to improve the economy - the sorts of things the govt needs to do to deal with a depression (or, the biggest, longest most painful recession of all time since we can't call it a depression) people would be able to contribute more and they would have more emotional resources to deal with one another.

[lost-in-nj]

1688. Silence......

I believe that is the key word.....good choice.........


I think that is the problem ...... some if us were not loud enough...
while others had nothing better to do than yell and alert ... if i go amy further this post will be deleted....


lost

[RetroLounge]

1712. +7

RL

[in_cog_ni_to]

1758. I agree with every word! n/t

[MessiahRp]

1458. Here's the difference..

No matter how hard each faction pulls on you over issues you at least are listening to your liberal critics... we have a serious spot at the table here.

And EarlG isn't going around calling us "fucking retards".

FWIW, it's not the warring that has prevented me from donating, it's my finances. You'll see a donation when I receive my 9/16 paycheck my friend. I need to get a new DU sticker as well, my old one faded to the point of being unreadable.

Rp

[Kadie]

274. Well said seabeyond.

Very well said.

[EnlightenedOne]

302. You've nailed it Seabeyond

Excellent.

[flamingdem]

674. Civil discussion is underrated here and out there nt

[readmoreoften]

1377. Yeah, it's also what Bush faced. It's what every president faces.

And at some point they have to stand for something. And you have to accept that if you abandon a segment of your party platform in order to go bipartisan and embrace the values of your opposition, then a chunk of your own party are going to leave you because they're going to see you as the face of the opposition you chose to embrace.

The other path involves having principles and risking your own personal position of power to try to make real change.

If you play it by the numbers--by "how many voters can I appeal to by watering down my platform"--you might get voters in the short-term, but in the long term you get mud.

[Boojatta]

38. Your diagnosis suggests a solution...

Split General Discussion into two forums:

1. GD for people who think that President Obama is performing well

2. GD for people who think that President Obama is performing badly

******

You should also consider revising the rec/ unrec system. Here's my attempt to describe the problem:

Blind Taste Test Results: 42% dislike taste of Pepsi. Only 17% dislike taste of Coke.

Does Pepsi win?

What if more than 42 percent dislike the taste of Pepsi and fewer than 17 percent dislike the taste of Coke?

Pepsi thread on DU:
20 recs
15 unrecs
15/35 dislike the taste of the thread
15/35 happens to be more than 42%

Coke thread on DU:
5 recs
1 unrec
1/6 dislike the taste of the thread
1/6 happens to be less than 17%

Does that description of the problem suggest a solution to you?

[WI_DEM]

57. and what of a third option for people who think Obama is right on some issues and wrong on others--I

doubt that is the solution.

[Boojatta]

68. If you don't fall into either of the two opposed sides...

then you can select the GD forum to post in on a case-by-case basis, depending on the content of each specific message that you decide to post.

[SoCalDem]

85. Deep six the whole rec-unrec thing.. It's not necessary

View count shows that at least people read what you wrote. If the thread is worthy, replying keeps it alive.. If not, it sinks.. that worked well for many years .. The whole junior high aspect of "I like you, so I'll rec..but if I don't like you, I'll unrec just 'cuz" is annoying beyond belief.

I have seen long posts made and as soon as they show up, there are unrec before anyone could have even had time to read the damned thing. If someone does not like the topic, there is no requirement that they read it, but to unrec something (or rec, for that matter) without commenting on or reading it is childish, and makes this place less fun.

There used to be real discussions going on, without personal attacks, but in the past few years it's not that common anymore.

Apparently there are some here who are avid "scorekeepers" and who hold grudges.

I hope this whole thing can get sorted out.. DU used to be a lot more productive & there was a camaraderie that's missing now.

[Matariki]

370. That's not really true

OPs with high post counts are usually flame wars dragging out sometimes for days. While good, informative posts often sink because apart from saying 'good post' there's no controversy to keep it afloat.

[iris27]

922. So keep the recs but ditch unrecs.

We had recommendations around for quite a while before the unrec option was added.

[DirkGently]

721. Yep. Unrec favors the ill-tempered

[geek tragedy]

91. How would that work, though?

People would still argue and point out inaccuracies in those forums.

Rec system works pretty well right now I think.

[Boojatta]

96. We want people to point out inaccuracies.

The difference between a slanderous accusation and an unpleasant truth is that slander isn't true.

[geek tragedy]

114. There is no agreement on what is truth around here. nt

[Boojatta]

210. Moderators have to agree with each other to arrive at a consensus.

[backscatter712]

230. Add a third forum: the Thunderdome!

We all know that there WILL be flame wars. So the simplest thing to do is take ANY thread that degenerates into a flame fest and dump it into the Thunderdome forum. Those who want to fight can slug it out there, and keep the other forums unpolluted.

[NightWatcher]

41. As I see the "2 sides" of the new DU...

I don't know the percentage of the split in the two main factions, but I see the split between (in the broadest terms):

Side A: Obama is the President and a Democrat, therefore we'll (here on DU) give him the benefit of the doubt, believe his intentions to be true, and support MOST everything he and his Administration does without question.

Side B: Obama is the President and a Democrat, BUT his actions do not go far enough for us (more Progressive-leaning Side B'ers). We will criticize and hold his feet to the fire until we feel that he is acting more like a true Progressive, even if he ran as a moderate Democrat.

I'm a "Side B'er" and feel that often when legit criticism is leveled against the President or against any "Side A'ers", the criticism is treated like "bashing" or name calling, and often becomes "message deleted" and we become "name removed". I dont have much money to spare in these horrible economic times, so I have to think hard if I want to use it to support a place where it feels sometimes that I am not wanted and regarded the same as some freeper troll, as I am not. I worked for Georgian's for Change and Floridians for Change going back well before Super Tuesday. I cant stand being treated as a freeper by many because I level criticism and fail to fall lock step behind our Leader. It can always be better, and in times like these, Much Better, so I'm going to work for that, even if it falls outside of support for "official" DLC and DCCC policies and blind loyalty.

When the balance is restored, I think DU will become the DU of old that we keep hearing of, where peace and Progressivism rule.

[KittyWampus]

49. I see it- those of us who are liberal and see the Good AND Bad. And those who only see the bad

and think they define what being a liberal is.

[seabeyond]

it is obvious you are a B'er from your perception and description of the A'er, which is one of the

problems. that is not an accurate way of seeing the A'er but it is a way to not listen to them or not respect them. being the B'er, you have created a less than desirable A'er for your own justification of being a B'er, lol

and i say that in respect and appreciation, lol. i agree with you often

[NightWatcher]

80. I hate that it has turned into factions. I used to disagree with some on some points and agree

on others, now it's become "you people" this and that on both sides.

The reason we've not hit a fundraising goal.........half of us feel unwanted and alienated. No, I'm not going to donate where I'm not wanted.

[seabeyond]

109. you are right. i haev been listening to totally smart people who we use to be in agreement

often state that. but the other side feel exactly. the. same. way.

i dont get into the political threads much at all anymore, because, lol lol.... i see what everyone is saying and disagree with how everyone is saying it. so on du, i jump into non political threads, mostly.

[liberalmike27]

84. I Have to Agree

Nothing pisses me off more than getting a little message scolding me for expressing my more left, than this, opinions on DU.

Like I said earlier, how does one expect we'll pull back to the left, without actually trying.

Instead, we've been trying to hold the line, and over the last 30 years, and getting pulled steadily to the right. Let us argue and realize that most people who are on the left are just the type of people who don't want someone to govern every word we say, and delete our posts.

There are tens of thousands of message boards out there, and if you think you're ideas will be rejected, a lot of us will go there. That said, I do like to stop by from time to time. I like finding a bit on Keith that I missed, or that I want to show someone else that might have missed it.

[girl gone mad]

228. I just got tired of being bashed..

for having principles.

Who knew that all of that stuff we relentlessly opposed back when Bush was president would turn out to be really super awesome when Obama did it?

[defendandprotect]

745. Attacks on criticism of Obama are fine -- we can handle it -- HOWEVER, where it

goes over the line is when those trying to protect Obama/admnistration move

DU/Skinner to ridiculous "New Rules" --

Btw, anyone seen the how ridiculous those New Rules look when someone like Thom Hartmann

puts them up on his website?

[laughingliberal]

1412. +1 nt

[flyarm]

1568. Absolutely! 100% correct!!!

[tavalon]

301. LOL

Peace at DU is a long wished for state and is about as rare as a unicorn.

[jeff47]

918. The fallacy is that nobody is always in one of those two camps

Any thinking individual will move between your "group A" and "group B" depending on what is being discussed. Heck, within a complex enough topic, like HCR, one can be both an A and B depending on which part is being discussed.

My problem with DU is the loss of critical thinking. Take a look at your definitions of the two groups, and how absolute they are. Group A supports Obama "without question". Group B always thinks Obama doesn't go far enough, ever. There's no analysis of what he's actually _DOING_ on the relevant topic.

It's an immediate leap to "Obama never, ever, ever, ever, ever does enough so I'm going to complain even when he does something good". Or "Obama can't get _____ through the Senate, so he's off the hook for everything he doesn't accomplish".

Sometimes he lets us down. Sometimes he does good. Sometimes he's blocked by morons in the Senate. Sometimes he leans on Senators to get stuff done.

Absolute positions are fine when talking about policy. They are terrible when talking about politicians.

[KittyWampus]

42. People who are CONSTANTLY negative are just that- Negative.

It's not the criticism of Democrats and Obama. It's the same posters who are relentlessly negative and NEVER acknowledge the positive.

It isn't about choosing sides. So frankly I think you've avoided the issue.

I don't mind the criticism if it comes from a poster who is even-handed and honest enough to give credit and deal in reality.

Posters who are here to do absolutely nothing but find fault are legion. And they are the reason I refuse to donate anymore. I don't come here that often anymore.

I am not a "cheerleader". Check my Journal. But negativity and cynicism just for the sake of it are a waste of time.

[Bobbie Jo]

63. +1000

I only have a second, but I couldn't agree more.

[liberalmike27]

90. Negative

is far too often used instead of the proper word, disagree. If someone disagrees with you, or Obama, it isn't negative, it's just disagreement. Let's use the more accurate word, then you'll see why it makes people mad when they disagree, and their posts are deleted.

I think a lot of center-democrats fail to see that when you put a centrist in any position, then the compromise will end up far to the right. Put a liberal in, and you'll end up with something more to the center, as well as a person who actually expresses a more viable, leftish idea.

[KittyWampus]

99. Sorry, it isn't 'disagree'. There are plenty of things that Obama/Democrats do that I don't like

so I actually AGREE with quite a bit of the criticism or can relate to the core displeasure.

However, I also am capable of looking at the big picture and seeing why a certain course is being pursued- even if it doesn't go directly to my preferred goal.

I am also capable of appreciating the positive which is something a huge number of DU'ers absolutely refuse to do.

They have their narrative and stick to it.

[liberalmike27]

130. What Exactly are You Speaking of

Which positive things? The Lilly Ledbetter act was good.

Some of us just don't like the role of cheer-leader.

[tomp]

280. your implication is that you have a monopoly on what the big picture is.

you don't, i do.

pessimism is a necessary counterbalance to optimism.

the literature on pessimism/optimism shows that optimists tend to be happy and successful while pessimists tend to have a more accurate view of the world.

based on this relatively "scientific" fact, those who are unable to find anything good about obama are more likely to be right than those who cannot find fault with him.

[readmoreoften]

1114. Apparently you have your narrative and you stick to it as well.

You silence your agreements with the left because you believe you are capable of seeing "the big picture." Maybe others are capable of seeing the big picture too, and it is a thoroughly different big picture than yours. Maybe those people get their "big picture" from actual study of the facts and the situations on the ground as opposed to blind faith in the goodness of a political figure within a quite obviously corrupt system.

[Mariana]

716. There are people here who are relentlessly negative

no matter what the topic is. A few go so far as to grossly exaggerate or even outright lie about the content of the posts of the people they're arguing with, when the actual posts aren't offensive. That isn't simply disagreement.

[laughingliberal]

1417. There are people on here who are hungry and sleeping in their cars.

They are relentlessly negative about current economic policy and further attacks on our social safety net. They are told they are relentlessly negative when they bring these issues up.

People who are in better circumstances can't seem to see they are trying to affect some change before those who criticize them get to find out firsthand what all the negativity is about.

[jeff47]

940. I'm not the OP

But here would be an example.

Our last "combat troops" withdrew from Iraq ahead of schedule. A thread starts to celebrate this particular event.

Someone who disagrees with Iraq policy would say something like "Great! Good job getting those troops out like you said you would. Now get the rest out!"

Someone who is negative will say something like "Obama the warmonger just loves wars and is identical to Bush. Why are you all celebrating the deaths of millions of innocents?! You should all be ashamed!".

The latter isn't disagreement on policy. It's just bashing.

"I think a lot of center-democrats fail to see that when you put a centrist in any position, then the compromise will end up far to the right."

This, IMO, is an artifact of our current members of Congress and not a rule. An actual centrist would compromise with both sides. The cowards currently serving in Congress who label themselves "centrist" aren't. They're just obsessed with hanging on to their seats, and foolishly believe the R's are giving them good advice on how to do so. They also operate under the delusion that the R's won't attack them if they just go along with what the R's want, thus ensuring their continued place in Congress.

Fortunately, it's a plan that fails spectacularly. So such people are gradually being replaced. Unfortunately, that word "gradually" is in my previous sentence.

[malaise]

104. Good post

[Stinky The Clown]

116. A lot of what manifests as criticsim of Obama is actually a dislike for the other poster

We can't call each other names so we call that which each other supports names.

[Renew Deal]

239. Which also brings up the Unrec feature which is a negative feature.

You're "unreccing" someones thread and dealing with the aftermath of seemingly innocent threads being unrecced for no obvious reason. It's doubly bad and should be eliminated.

[DirkGently]

737. Agreed. This seems to be emerging as a theme ...

[Greyhound]

549. So I checked your journal and find not one entry that is in any way critical of this

administration's policies. Re-posted articles with no commentary is not criticism, it is simply cut & paste.

[Subdivisions]

575. So, you're saying he negative nellies need to go? TSed all negativity? n/t

[shireen]

1396. + many

.... and some people are determined to see black or white, while 'reality' is shades of grey.

[The Green Manalishi]

1429. Does the validity of criticism have any correlation with the percentage

of their positive/negative statements/analysis/other comments? Just because a person might post 10 things in a year, and everyone of those posts busts the chops of President Obama and/or the DLC, does not mean that their critiques are de facto less valid than the comment of an enraptured President Obama fan.
FWIW, the argument applies just as much WRT any political orientation, or even art criticism in general.

BTW you can see that I support the President when he's right and express my dismay when he's wrong, it's the POLICY, not the person, that matters IMHO.

[VioletLake]

45. The problem is...

The fight is against an empire, not a political party. Perhaps that wasn't clear enough a few years ago, but it is now.

[JanMichael]

89. Agreed

nt

[roxiejules]

180. Well said...

I think violetlake is correct

[EmeraldCityGrl]

+10

[southmost]

839. yep

+a brazillion

[ThomCat]

862. Within the discussion about the party, that is absolutely

100% true. Our party has become the agents of the empire, corrupted by corporations and corporate money.

The problems here aren't just what we discuss. A lot of the problems are internal to DU.

[readmoreoften]

1169. + 1000000000

Thank you :hugs:

[VioletLake]

1263. hugs back :) nt

[shireen]

1397. +1 good point. nt

[Catherina]

1454. You hit the nail on the head there. Rec'd. n/t

[SoCalDem]

50. I do not envy you your position..

As an almost "charter-member", I feel the angst too. I look forward to your survey, and hope this all can be "fixed".

[Blecht]

51. I am one of the lurkers you mention

I used to donate regularly. And I stopped donating because of the sharp turn to the right that has occurred here. I made a conscious decision to stop sending money to a place where union busting, teacher bashing and law-enforcement fellating are so prominently displayed by so many of its members.

But I keep coming back, not to enter into debates with people who have no intention of actually debating anything anyway, but to read. There are so many great writers here whose work we would never see if it weren't for the existence of DU. Skinner's words here have made me think about what we would be losing if DU went away or changed significantly.

I have decided to become a donor again. I urge other lurkers to do the same.

[seabeyond]

70. one can also talk about the pearl clutching bashing, christian bashing....

see the point.

[Blecht]

76. What is pearl clutching bashing?

I have no idea what that means.

[seabeyond]

103. the point is, the bashing is all over. i agree with you there is all that bashing

but it is not necessarily a right bashing. it is a bashing as a whole.

[Ryano42]

54. Donated my usual. Hang in there...

It's my fervent hope that is just "the crazy season of Summer" and with the leaves falling our ranks will quit fighting each other (while continuing to debate respectfully) and close our ranks when the time comes. Remember last Summer? The one before???

Remember: This is EXACTLY what the enemy wants. Diversion. Division. Despair.

We are better than they are...we are better than that.

THANK YOU SKINNER

THANK YOU FOR DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND.

[AC_Mem]

55. I just donated

And I look forward to taking the survey. I hope you will share some of the results so we can see who we are as well.

Thank you for your hard work, I really enjoy this site.

Annette
Patient Democrat

[MadHound]

61. Skinner, it isn't just what is going on here at DU that is effecting donations,

It is what is effecting every non-profit and charity organization in the country; people simply don't have the money. When you're out of work, or in over your head on a mortgage, or picking up the slack for a partner out of work, you have less money to spend elsewhere. Thus, you make your spending priorities, and little "luxuries" like donating to DU go to the wayside.

I'm just saying, it isn't all on you, it isn't all on what is going on here at DU. The real world is taking its toll.

Like so many others, when I get a job, you get some money.

Thanks.

[seabeyond]

72. back to school, economy, escalation of expense of living, stagnent wage, BACK TO SCHOOL, lol

i hear ya.

that is my reason

i. cannot. let. go. of. any. more money.

[deutsey]

106. KPFA, the progressive radio station that started listener-supported radio back in '49,

is also struggling financially.

As you say, it's a sign of the times, unfortunately.

[saltpoint]

64. Skinner, this is the best site out there. On the survey

you plan for next week, be sure to include one segment asking for us to rate this site against other sites on the web. I predict a very strong residual affection and respect for DU among its members.

Also a question or two could focus on how much each of us learns from other members... not just about politics but also books, films, and music. There are Du members who are even more zealous about one or all those three things than about politics.

There's no site like this, and no site looks this good or is as approachable to navigate technically. It's handsome. It's top-drawer.

If you signal us a couple days ahead of the survey I think most of us will be on the watch for it and will respond in kind.

[Monique1]

146. Skinner, I love DU the best place ever.

My money has dwindled within the last 4 yrs. I am retired and was retired comfortably but a stop is on any increase in my SS and Pension plan so any increases are frozen. I know that I my savings have dwindled also because of all the increase in electricity, gas, food, insurance etc., I do plan to donate this weekend for two but the amount will not be the amount I want it to be.

I do have a problem with one thing though - when new people (I believe we call them newbies, my most disliked word) come here they get slammed immediately.
If they have an opinion they are told they are trolls, a person with talking points or totally wrong. We want new people but we need to accept new people and give them a chance. I do believe the moderators do a great job and there is one especially who speaks out for the new people. When that person spoke out for the new person, the moderator was slammed. That is where I have a problem.

I do learn from DU more than you think. KUDOS to DU.

I agree, you should extend the fund raising time at least for another week.

[LynneSin]

65. Perhaps if you had a GD where it's a free for all and one forthose who stay civilized

Although sometimes I have gone there especially since, like you said, we have all the control in DC and lost our focal point of the old republican majority, we no longer are on the same team. And I knew ages ago that if Democrats would ever get control that it would get really rough here in DU because of that.

Homestly, I'm here to support democrats and it pisses me off when I see people suggest that we not vote democrat by either voting independant or god forbid, not voting. But I do recognize that there are plenty of progressives out there do want to have their voice even if they aren't voting democrat for elections.

Why not allow them to have a voice here in DU. Create a forum that is for all progressives where people are welcome to promote 3rd party candidates. Limit it to progressive candidates only - we still should not ever EVER suggest voting republican or not voting. Allow the forum but set it up like the lounge where the greatest stuff can't make the DU home page - there has to be some limits out there.

And honestly, I think some people want agressive debating of the issues - just as long as it doesnt' get violent (ie - you better agree with me or I'll track you down and hurt you) or offensive (ie - you're such a (homophobic/racist/asshole comment here) for not agreeing with me). Let people have their fun again.

As for the recommendation system - I do like it, in fact I love it. Before that system was created, I would see a small group of people who would write anti-democrat threads and then unite together to try and get one of those on the DU home page. Some of those threads were a bit offensive to the rest of us and really didn't reflect the community as a whole. Personally I think the Greatest Page has vastly improved since the new system and I think sometimes people get overdramatic because yes - one or 2 people will from time to time troll in DU and negative rec a great thread. But lets face it - if the post is amazing it will get to the DU home page.

I wish I could give more to DU but since buying my house times are tough. But I did make a donation to help out this fundraiser.

Good luck!

[Boojatta]

117. That's a good idea: "a GD where it's a free for all and one for those who stay civilized"

Of course, even in the free-for-all GD there would be some rules, such as against copyright violations. However, there would be only the most basic rules in the free-for-all GD.

If your idea were implemented, then the workload for the moderators would go down.

[LaurenG]

247. Like a GD =General Discussion and a GDP =General Discussion Pleasant only

humm, that might work, like the old meeting room.

[Subdivisions]

586. SEGREGATE the Progressives???? Are you kidding me?

Let me see if I have this right... Progressives are uncivilized, espouse third-party candidates, and need to be shuffled off to their own room, away from the civilized people? And, to top it all off, you want to eliminate Progressives from having their posts recced, like in the DU 9/11 dungeon?

I'm appalled.

[LynneSin]

1074. Segregate those who want to get nasty and battle it all out

and those who want to keep it civil.

And then perhaps create a group for those who support non-democrat progressive candidates.

[Lilith Velkor]

895. Power concedes nothing without a THREAT.

Voting 3rd party - or not voting - is the way to threaten the party in power if they choose to get all, "Fuck you, your issues are not important, but you better vote for me because you have no other choice."

You'd think the Democratic Party would have fucking learned that by now.

[havocmom]

1378. amusing considering some posts pointing out Crist support here got disappeared

Honest to pete, when posts pointing out clear violation of the DU Prime Directive disappear while those advocating for Crist over the DEMs stayed told me something about how DU operates now that I wish I had never learned.

[BootinUp]

1482. +1

[WI_DEM]

67. I don't mind criticism of the president, but I do see certain people who seem to get away

here with daily assaults on Obama from dubious sources--and who give him credit for nothing and they have done it from day one. They are not constructive--they are not offering constructive criticism because they have intense dislike for Obama--and yet they do it day after day--yes, sometimes their threads or comments are removed but then give it an hour or a day and they are back with the same old thing.

[defendandprotect]

756. Think this is an example of taking posts too personally -- try "ignore" ...

[Jakes Progress]

75. What is wrong with disagreement?

I can't bring myself to go to those nut-job neo-con sites, but I know that one doesn't grow without confronting some disagreement and having to clarify your position and hone a statement if you wish to make a point. Back in the olden days, Democrats argued with each other all the time. Since, as you say, they have the same goals, it is easier to agree on anchor points which makes it possible to discuss methods and finer points of ideology. You can't argue with someone who believes god hates gays or that one race is superior to another; there is no anchoring point to use as an argument.

With the internet and access to millions of sites, people tend to gravitate to sites that reinforce their personal feelings. We just bask in shared self congratulation. Feels good, but doesn't serve any real purpose. I only lurked on DU back in the bush years. What was the need of my voice joining in the taunting and jeering. (I never was a big pep rally fan.)

DU can serve as the half-way house. We can examine our beliefs and positions by testing them against people who, down deep, want the same things for the country but see those things coming another way. We can avoid the drooling idiots and lying assholes from the right wing but still have a place for reflection.

Of course there are the non-reflectors, the Obama-is-evil posters who see no gray and the Obama-is-god posters who brook no disagreement. These posters OP boiler plate flame bait so that they can tit for tat with their enemies who play along. Or they snark about on substantive posts deflecting the point of a well reasoned OP with irrelevant points and off topic wanderings. Just let those time-wasters get the scorn from the body DU that they get. Let the sub threads play out. No one reads them past the first two.

Some may see DU as a vent. I have read many posts that have informed me and helped to shape my thoughts. I have seen posts that ask genuine questions and enjoyed the responses.

Perhaps a nice feature would be a time-out. Once someone replies to a post, there would be a time period - hour or so -before it could be posted. You would have to write the reply, wait an hour, and then re-read your post before you could click to have it posted. It might stop some knee-jerking and it might cut down on the snarks because it would be a pain to come back an hour later to post something that you vented long ago. But it also might make for more careful and considered writing.

If you want new rules, try requiring people to answer for their statements or just stop posting in the thread. A poster could be called on just posting crap without any support. You could have a forum for unsupported drivel where people could vent - call it "The Vent". Thinkers wouldn't go there.

All that said. I'll be sending a check at the end of the month. Pay for say.

[boston bean]

83. The place becomes a complete BORE on days when it's Obama Central.

I think it's great that so many have such a high level of kiss assery, but I do not.

I have been a dem since forever and I'm not going to give up on the principles.

I don't give a shit if Obama's in charge or if Jesus Christ himself was in charge.

Many Many Many more people who are critical of Obama have been tombstoned than the other way around.

An environment has been created where you have to watch what you say.

And it SUCKS.

You wanted honesty, there is some honesty for you.

[geek tragedy]

113. Well, it is a Democratic website. So, on substance one

should be more likely to get banned for posting anti-Democrat stuff than for posting pro-Democrat stuff. Personal attacks etc should be dealt with neutrally.

[boston bean]

125. What is anti democratic about want single payer. What is anti democratic about wanting to

protect social security?

Is it anti democratic because obama is president?

You ought to think about what that means buddy.

And you and all your little friends swarming threads, telling people to shut up, ganging up, alerting, screaming yelling and kicking because someone points out how UN democratic the Democratic Party and the Admin is, is nothing but a JOKE! It is what is killing DU.

I care more about the DEMOCRATIC ISSUES.

[geek tragedy]

131. Are you really suggesting people have been banned for

expressing a policy preference for single payer?

[boston bean]

136. I'll express whatever the hell i want.

YES, people who believed strongly in single payer have been banned.

[BzaDem]

143. Way to avoid the question.

The question was not whether people who happened to support single payer have been banned (for other reasons).

The question was, has anyone ever been banned FOR supporting single payer. I.e., was their support for single payer the REASON for being banned?

[boston bean]

150. People like you got them banned by saying they were anti Obama.

and alerting, and kicking and screaming and ganging up.

So Yes, they were banned for wanting single payer.

A bit disingenuous you, huh?

[BzaDem]

174. I have never tried to get anyone banned.

Heck, I rarely alert any posts.

And I have never seen anyone banned because they wanted single payer. The vast majority of the board wants single payer.

[boston bean]

220. Good then. What's your problem with me then?

We agree.

[BzaDem]

227. I don't have a problem with you. I simply pointed out that people are not banned for supporting

single payer.

[boston bean]

235. YaY!

because i never said it either. read more carefully......

[WI_DEM]

179. Why are you trying to pick fights in this thread?

but don't go around saying that Obama supporters have gotten people banned from here or that this place is "boring" when it's "Obama Central" which it very rarely is.

[boston bean]

225. it is boring to sit and read how wonderful it is under obama, when I think a lot of it sucks!

And yes, I have been ganged up upon and told to shut up.

I'll take you at your word for it, but just cause you aren't alerting doesn't mean it isn't happening.

There have been way too many tombstones to try and deny it.

[Gman]

353. Then I think you need to go somewhere else where you'll be happier

[Subdivisions]

Fuck that shit! Who the fuck are you to tell someone they'll be happier

somewhere else? You're part of the fucking problem! Why don't YOU leave?

[Gman]

637. Sorry... I was here first!

The lady sounds pretty unhappy. She'd probably be happier elsewhere.