I don't know that I have ever seen DU this rancorous or divided

[Jackpine Radical]

and I've been here since the beginning.

I think the divisions reflect some very real issues, and I have certainly contributed my share of...shall we say controversial...posts and threads. I expect I will continue to do so. But, in the midst of all this turmoil, I want to stop for a moment and say to everyone that I don't see anyone on this board as an enemy. I believe I have treated people with respect when disagreeing with them--I certainly hope I have, and sincerely apologize to anyone who feels that I have not. I think we, just about everyone here, ultimately seek the same ends: peace, a world in which people are able to live productive and happy lives with adequate access to necessities, a world nurtured by sustainable economies, and so on. We are now engaged in a bitter feud over the best route to those goals. Let us by all means continue with our debate with full passion and intelligence, but let us also remember that we are people of good will, brought into interaction with each other by a love and concern for humanity, that we have much more in common than we do separating us, and that the time will come when we once again make common cause with each other. I love you, and it would sadden me beyond measure if we were to allow our ephemeral disagreements give rise to any sort of long-lasting animosities.

Thank you.

Let us now return to our previously scheduled bickering.

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. It's a definite mess isn't it? *hugs*

[Jennicut]

2. Kerry vs Dean? Clinton vs Obama? DU is always going through this.

It is to be expected. But I have people on DU I really, really like that I disagree with. I try not to take it personally. My father is a diehard conservative. Somehow, we seem to be able to get along. And we are at extreme opposites.

[UrbScotty]

9. Yeah, it's part of DU, for better or for worse.

Of course, reasoned discourse is something we should all embrace - even if we disagree on what is/isn't 'reasoned.'

The aftermath of the 2002 and 2004 elections were also quite hectic around here.

[The Unknown Derelict]

17. Kerry vs Dean

Ah, brings back memories of DU.

I wish Dr. Dean would have won the primary back in 2004.

[Forkboy]

29. This split has been festering since the mid 90's, at least.

I blame Nader.

[hfojvt]

38. I sorta thought Clark vs. Dean was more rancorous

heck, there were never more than a handful of Kerry supporters here. Whereas there were hundreds of Clark and Dean supporters vying for supremacy of DU.

[Jackpine Radical]

40. In 2004, the Koochers were also out in force;

to support anyone else was treason to the cause of progressivism, and not just on DU. Wow, talk about ideological purity! I remember when I wore a Dean T shirt to Wisconsin's annual Fightin' Bob Fest (named for Fightin' Bob LaFollette) and thought I was gonna get excommunicated from the Left for it.

[Kalun D]

3. K and R

agree

[babylonsister]

4. No way if intelligence is involved. Or opinions. And yes,

you are a part of it all. :spank:

[Monique1]

5. Thank you

that was good

[havocmom]

6. If a little group would stop attacking those doing what Obama invited, we would be calmer

But some seem to have missed his several calls for us to hold him responsible, make him do the right thing, let him know when he makes 'mis-steps'.

And I love you too, man. Hope this place returns to some constructive discussions instead of all the 'you want President Palin' crap.

[hfojvt]

21. yes, those poor abused members of the woodchuck coalition

why, the centrists have even adopted an icon just to mock them. Er, or is that the other way around?

And it's so unfair to say that somebody wants President Palin or Speaker of the House Boehner just because they declare that they hate Democrats and are not gonna support them any more. If only the centrists would get on board with trashing Democrats and calling for a 3rd party, we would have peace on DU. And all the threads would be like "Obama is the worst President ever" followed by "knr" and "+ 10,000"

[havocmom]

49. I have lost count of the # of time someone accused me of wanting Palin

No, I do not hate Democrats. No, I have not been at war with Democrats. I have been critical of policy, appointments, agendas, and in Congress's case, lack of spine dealing with the gop.

There is a big difference between critical thinking and hating. But is it is a difference too many around here do not recognize.

[hfojvt]

50. I think most people can recognize the difference

maybe you are one of the few who does not cross the line, but people are just gonna lump you in with all the others they read who do cross the line, and there are plenty who cross the line, in spite of the blanket denials.

[havocmom]

55. No, there are a gaggle who attack anyone who criticizes the slightest bit

And it is pathetic they think Obama is so fragile and threatened that they feel compelled to be so knee jerk nanny

[LoZoccolo]

7. It's odd, considering I can think of only one, maybe two, members of the "professional left" here.

I wonder why the rest of the people think they were being targeted.

[Jackpine Radical]

8. I think the Gibbs thing has become a symbol for a lot of people.

Quite a few, rightly or wrongly, feel ignored, belittled and devalued.

[Vinnie From Indy]

10. Which is really bizarre actually

That is because it appears to me that there are only a handful of people that routinely attack progressives that dare to criticize this President here on DU. I guess my interpretation of events is exactly the opposite of yours.

[PassingFair]

25. It really is only a handful. Not a great "division".

Just a few people with unlimited time and chutzpa.

The "message control" is not working though, because
the "professional left" are rank and file democrats.

[SwampG8r]

34. what is really bizzare is

this is a progressive board..so why do centerists have any sway at all?

[pscot]

26. Gibbs wasn't referring to a few disaffected

liberal pundits. He meant it as a pejorative. Professional leftists are poseurs, dilletants for whom political disaffection is a life-style choice, a personal signature. It was gratuitously insulting and damned dumb.

[Forkboy]

30. Details, girlfriend!

[LoZoccolo]

35. William Pitt is a professional writer, and there's one other who I think might be union staff. n/t

[bvar22]

43. Yes. Only a few people here want Canadian Style Healthcare.

Fail.
.
.
.
.
.
"And you want to be my Latex Salesman."

credit "Seinfeld"

[Renew Deal]

45. I think the "professional left" includes the full time whiners and malcontents.

And there are plenty of those. Professional doesn't necessarily mean salaried.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. Silly season is on

:hi:

[nemo137]

24. Silly season is like Christmas.

Seems to come earlier every year, and get louder and louder.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Absolutely

points to how divided we are.

[Canuckistanian]

12. Oh, I don't know

The early stages of the PUMA kerfuffle was more rancorous to me. There were a LOT of bodies left on that battlefield.

[JI7]

13. you must have missed the primary in 04 and 08

[OffWithTheirHeads]

14. Uhmmn! since you have been here since "The Beginning" Two words

Ralph Nader.

Those two words almost destroyed DU when it was just getting started.

Been there, done that, and this ain't kaka.

[madmax]

16. Not to be picky but,

it's caca.

Just trying to stay in the spirit of things. :rofl:

[pipi_k]

41. But then again, if we want to get all high-falutin' about it...

it's

Kha-kha


:7

[madmax]

15. It's the heat

:toast: Let's have a beer.

[hfojvt]

37. I cannot stand alcohol

How do YOU feel about the Eagles?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzG7n2Er0ic&feature=related

[AsahinaKimi]

18. Then there was that time we all had that

fight with


It was brutal...but it was fun, yes...wait a moment!:grr:

[Beacool]

19. Were you here during the primaries?

The fur was flying in every direction.

:D

Maybe Obama should have us all at the WH for another beer summit.

:7

[Jennicut]

20. Dems clearly have not healed yet from those battles.

I guess we either split and go the way of the older defunct parties or we work it out. Beer might do the trick. }(

[Beacool]

22. Nope, the wound is festering and won't heal.

Personally, I don't feel anymore an obligation to vote for a Democrat just because they have a "D" after their name. I did at one point, but I no longer feel that way. If I don't like the candidate, I won't vote for him/her.

:shrug:

Nice seeing you!!!

:hi:

[Jennicut]

23. I feel pretty lucky in CT in that I liked almost all the Dem candidates that ran.

I have a good rep, I like Blumenthal, I voted for Lamont but am satisfied with Malloy winning. I feel like a need to create some anger here or something. I will just take it out on Lieberman in 2012.

[Beacool]

28. Oh yeah, Lieberman..........

:(


:hi:

[hfojvt]

36. I never did feel that obligation

For example, I never voted for Big Bill Clinton, and perhaps foolishly, also voted for the supposed moderate Republican for the House in 1994 and 1996 (but at the same time I also helped to elect Russ Feingold, although I cannot remember if I voted for him in the primary or not.) But at this time, it seems pretty obvious to me that even a supposed moderate Republican is gonna endorse the "Roadmap to hell" and, as such, it is imperative that they be defeated even if their democratic opponent is not all that likeable. Heck, this fall, I will get to vote for somebody who defeated me, and that stings just a little (or more than a little)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=153x9552

[LostinVA]

46. I don't agree with that at all

The HUGE majority of people disagreeing with Gibbs but agreeing with one another were Primary enemies. They are also in many other threads agreeing. I'm including myself in this.

[haele]

27. Just a different flavor of rancor than usual -

A bit more pungent than normal, because it's Mr. Gibbs, instead of Mr. Emmanuel or Mr. Axelrod, but as long as DC politics keeps being played out as if it were points to be won on a football field, the frustration of those of us who actually want and need some sort of progress will continue to grow.
I remember the politics and politicians of the late 70's through the 80's. Progress always seemed to be one step forward, 3/4 of a step back, and people were desperate and hurting badly then, too. Government and politicians were always betraying their constituency on policy and for "negotiating purposes". If the internet were around at that time, I'd suspect we'd see much of the same passionate arguments.

Not to downplay Gibb's gaffe as just "DC business as usual" - but that's what his comment was- and honestly, I agree with with Rep. Ellison. He should resign. Gibbs is rather weak presence at best; more than a bit condescending, a bit tone deaf to his audience, seems to have poor timing, and shows an aggressive, easily triggered temper that he can't seem to keep under very good control.
He also seems to forget that he's a press secretary, and seems to still act a bit more like a campaign spokesperson; his job is no longer to "make points" against an opponent, but to sell the administration policy to a diverse audience. And I have a sneaking suspicion he forgot that part of his job description when he said what he did.

I understand what you're talking about; I enjoy debate, and I enjoy opining. And even though I'm not going to berate people as "asking for too much" or being hysterical when the debate starts turning into an argument or accusations, I'm not going to continue when there's nothing more constructive that could be said - on any side.

Peace. This will blow over, and progress will lurch on. And then a new outrage will happen, or a new political shortcoming will come to light, and we'll start this stew up all over again. Just with a slightly different flavor mix, and a few less people and puppets.
The most important politics are local anyway - that's where all these DC critters come from. The trick is to try to overcome the moneyed interests that own the current US body politic and manage to send someone that is both progressive and re-electable on their own merits. That's just as important as recognizing the flaws in our current politicians and policies.

Haele

[Hydra]

32. This suddenly wide and deep chasm is overdue

And it was only put off this long because the Left gave President Obama and his team the time they and everyone supporting them asked for.

Gibbs comment simply brought it all into sharp focus in a way no one can ignore. Rahm's comments, though even worse, can be explained away as his opinion, and not shared by Obama...but this? No. This is WH policy from the top.

I suspect the damage is done, and cannot be undone, except by a complete reversal of policies...and it won't happen.

It's not every day you see the final end of what might have been the most amazing, historic and world changing Presidency in 28 years.

[anAustralianobserver]

39. That's how I read it too. Compare Obama's Netroots Nation prerecorded speech

to some of the truly connected moments in his campaign. He's out of touch now and he knows it; and he knows what decisions and obfuscations led him to this point.

In his campaign he was winking at the left and anyone who could see it, effectively saying, "I have to speak ambiguously now to win, but trust me, 'I got this'". I think he meant it sincerely. But he made deals for Party support as Hillary dropped out, and the top-down Washington establishment got to him bit by bit, just as it got to the Clintons.

He is still a force for openness and responsible government though, even if it's too-often now in spite of himself. But public awareness of politics will only increase.

[leftstreet]

33. I disagree

Just glance through all the Gibbs presser threads.

DUers are very much in solidarity!

[carolinayellowdog]

42. The rancor is proportional to the solidarity

I don't really mind that there is a small minority of vocal relentless apologists for the administration. That is only to be expected. What is disgusting is that this minority is extremely aggressive to DUers and destructive to DU, posting 24/7 vilifying "the Left" or "progressives" or "you people." But there is probably a cause/effect relationship there. The more united the majority here becomes in criticizing the administration, the more furiously antagonistic its defenders become.

[LostinVA]

47. +1!!!

[Ignis]

51. Good point.

It's difficult to get DUers to agree on anything, but 550 Recs in 24 hours?

That's unity! :grouphug:

[Renew Deal]

44. Whatever

Every other days someone posts how divided we are. It's typically RW bullshit.

[SargeUNN]

48. I agree we don't seem to be able to debate

but instead we smear, insult and degrade. I think we act more like regressives at times than progressive and instead of trying to make things better we just gripe because they aren't perfect. I hope these negative people are just trolls but I fear they are people who seem to have forgotten the words of Ted Kennedy when he said of his brother he saw wrong and tried to right. Today we have too many who see wrong and gripe that it is there but don't try to right it, and that is why our real enemy is growing again. We are feeding the beast.

[felix_numinous]

52. The New Deal has been a symbol of pride for many Democrats

so to sit by and watch for 8+years while it has been systematically dismantled has been deeply demoralizing. At least this is my take on it. The only people who seem to notice and have become vocal about it have been labeled the Far Left.

I think most of us voted for Barack Obama in order to see the New Deal reinstated somehow. That apparently is a monumentous task and if it is going to happen it sure is being kept a secret.

Not only that but the Far Left have historically been labeled as wacky and out of touch, and dismissed as being druggies. When demonstrating dismissed as a focus group. So you can imagine this old stuff coming up again-in such a lethal way.

Mr Gibbs has just lit a match when things have become very volatile. I do not think it's too much of a mystery.

[apocalypsehow]

53. I've never seen a time here where people *reflexively* run into the arms of Lady Logical Fallacy at

the slightest hint of disagreement.

I've seen the mildest of opinions/statements subjected to instantaneous flames, personal attacks, base distortions, etc., etc without justification on such a widespread scale that it's hard to believe. Worse than the primaries, even. Just my observation.

[felix_numinous]

57. Exactly

it is an emotional reaction, it hit a nerve. Emotions are based on something real. Anger boils up before you even know what is happening. The trick is to then calm yourself and figure out what caused the reaction. And I think many of us have done that, we have each in our own way processed the emotions and will deal with it.

I would like to see people support each other more around here, wish that were possible.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

54. Has UNRECOMMEND contributed to the upending of DU? Has a group of

antiprogressives coordinated efforts to rate DOWN the kinds of thought-provoking progressive threads we ised to see all the time here, and rate UP the divisive anti-ununion antiWhiteHouse antiGovernment threads that seem pervasive now?

Does DU keep a record of who rates down or up what, and analyze patterns of group up-rating and down-rating of individual threads?

Would it help to ditch UNRECOMMEND for a trial period of, say, three months, and see whether things return to what we thought was normal before UNRECOMMEND?

[apocalypsehow]

56. Haaaahaaa! I love "UnRec" *precisely* for all the misplaced angst it brings to the surface. I have

never in my life, since my first days on the internet, seen so much misplaced ire at a minor technical feature on a website as I have with DU and the mighty UnRec.

All hail UnRec!!! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[Curmudgeoness]

58. Thanks for saying this, and in a very decent way.

We are eating our young.