Why doesn't OUR President get respect?

[pkz]

I just finished reading yet another teabagger thread about a bullet with his name on it....for Gawd's sake..PATRIOTS
REAL PATRIOTS honor the office not the man. He deserves the very same respect that all that came before deserved.
I think we played pretty nice during W's reign, I know I did not like the man, and hated his DarthVader sidekick, but bullets never, ever entered my mind.

Oh yeah, we can make all make the excuses in the world for those nuts...racist, antiDEM or any other adjective that we can think of, but honestly they hate America whilst throwing around how patriotic THEY are. AZZHOLES that incite.
THEY are, or possibly will be domestic terrorists.

Shove their slogan right back at them.."WE are Americans, you are either with us or against us"

[gateley]

1. He's black. That overrides patriotism. They seem to think it's UNpatriotic that

we don't have a White guy in the White house.

[Diamonique]

18. Bingo! nt

[butterfly77]

20. Exactly....

[rury]

46. That's it....racism dies HARD, if at all

I am sooo goddamn angry at the way my president is treated because of his skin color.
I have his back and I always will!

[underpants]

2. When was the last time you saw a positive headline about him?

all of the corporate media are doing their best to undermine what their buddies in the country club locker room want

[Windy]

5. despite his statement at the G20 that continuing the bush tax cuts for the wealthy is not feasible

the media continued to drone on about how he will have to extend them, etc....

I can't watch cable news anymore. I can barely read DU Kos or other sites. I stick to print media, but stay off of the opinion pages.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

17. I'm betting he will.

It's called a trial balloon.

[gateley]

30. Yeah, we have to remember that they do put some stuff out there

to see how it's received. That's what I think the Axelrod HuffPo piece was, which is why immediately they scaled back, and hopefully, nixed the idea of any extension.

[rury]

45. And unfortunately, the talking heads on the left

just jump right the fuck in and help them!!

[ampad]

3. Have you taken a good look

Around here lately?

[pnwmom]

8. +1000. n/t

[Skittles]

41. NOT the same

teabaggers are RACIST; that's completely different from not approving of job performance / policies

[stray cat]

4. The left doesn't respect him either

[Kltpzyxm]

6. Does he respect

the left?

[pnwmom]

7. Yes. He doesn't impugn the integrity of those he disagrees with.

Unlike the way many who disagree with him -- either from the right or the left -- impugn his.

[Better Today]

9. No but he sure lets his appointees do it for him and he doesn't

seem to disagree or with them either, nor attempt to suggest they are wrong in anyway.

[pnwmom]

10. Examples? I've never seen anything comparable,

even from his subordinates.

[muffin1]

12. delete

[Better Today]

14. Then you've had your head in the sand.

Once you've pulled your head out, try google, I'm sure it can give you a reasonable review of remarks made by Rahm, and others.

[jonnyblitz]

22. they really don't want links or examples when they say that.

it's a form of intimidation directed at critics of Obama. They all do it. I doubt they even read the links when provided. nothing would ever change their minds if what is obviously right in front of them doesn't.

[pnwmom]

44. If you have a link, then show it. Otherwise, it's just another baseless claim.

When has one of Obama's subordinates impugned the integrity of other Democrats? Rather than just disagreeing with them?

[ampad]

51. You don't know what people want

You got a board full of Obama critics. Yet you want to go after anyone who questions your criticism my claiming they are trying to intimidate you. Hey why don't you stop playing the victim, intimidation card?.

GD is practically a freaking echo chamber and it looks like GDP is sinking as well. Every few days I see people leaving so soon enough you critics will have what you want. You don't want anything but an echo chamber because as another poster stated let someone try to criticize a beloved democrat here other than Obama. You point to proof that we do not read your links. You are the one that made that broad brush stupid statement. As if you would know.

[pnwmom]

42. Rahm doesn't impugn the integrity of other Democrats.

And that's why you can't give me an example. I'm not going to go on a wild goose chase just because you make these unsupported accusations. If you're going to make these claims, it's up to you to support them.

[Fruittree]

25. Yes.

[mkultra]

16. thats because almost half of the left lost teh primary

and they haven't been happy about it since. Nothing Obama has done has been any worse than any democratic president and his performance has in fact been better in totality. It just irrational outrage from the bitter losers. we all know it.

[CTLawGuy]

24. right on

NT

[dionysus]

39. ding ding ding ding ding

[SidDithers]

53. K&R...nt

Sid

[ProudDad]

87. Uh, it was the blue-dogs that lost...

"bitter losers"?

[impik]

63. The left is full with racists. They would never dare speak like that to Bill Clinton

[old mark]

11. The media used up all their respect on that putz Bush, but they will find more

it our next president is a republican...


mark

[impik]

13. The left treat him almost as bad

Both sides don't deserve him and both sides deserves whatever Palin they'll get on 2012.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. They are frightened of what he might do to them

[Top Cat]

19. Because he's a BLACK MAN...

[political_Dem]

48. [phone]

[impik]

21. Did you see his skin color lately?

[Roma]

23. You were expecting respect from a teabagger thread?

Face it, they're not like us. While we didn't agree with anything that the Chimpenfurer, CimpyMcflightsuit, idiot son and his Darth Cheney and KKKKarl Rove, turd blossom sidekicks did at least the left wing blogs always respected them.

[Pisces]

26. Look on our own board. We allow disrespect. Another thread calls Obama an experiment

what is that code for???? I didn't see anyone call out this fucking poster as insinuating some racist bullshit. He is a democratically elected president, yet someone on this board is allowed to call it
an experiment. In addition we have other posters agreeing that it was not a good result??????

How is this sanctioned on a democratic, progressive board????

[pkz]

27. now that is a GOOD question

He does not get the respect that the office should allow, from either side,
and lots of the time it is evident right here on this board

[ampad]

33. WTF I just saw that

You know what it is code for. Totally and completely disgusting. Well I guess my post will get deleted because I asked the OP if the experiment was electing the first AA president. I really did not need the ask the question. I know what it means. Something tells me that the OP will not come back and answer the question. Partly because my post will probably be deleted.

[impik]

64. Where is this thread?

[Pisces]

66. It was locked, but here is the link. Look how many agreed with the thread

and look how long it took before someone questioned the intention of the thread. Hours to lock, minutes to delete my post questioning the racist intention.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9551768

[Number23]

78. Thank you for continuing to point this out. When others do so (particularly those of us with melanin

our posts are deleted and our alerts ignored.

Yeah, we're all just supposed to keep ignoring the vast amount of racism coming from the left towards this President from people who can't scream loud enough "I'm not a racist! I voted for Jesse!!!" :eyes:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

50. That poster has more issues than National Geographic.

[impik]

62. And yet

If you try to suggest that there's a lot of racism on the left, your message will be deleted in a second. Truth hurts, I guess.

[firedupdem]

69. Yup, I mentioned 'black tax' to a poster I was agreeing with and

it was deleted. Yet everybody and their mama is a homophobe and that's okay.

[political_Dem]

77. +1000000

[Pisces]

28. The respect should be on our own board. Yet DU allows blatant disrespect to the point of

racism and nothing is done.

[CakeGrrl]

29. The condescension here runs thick. Wonder why? n/t

[political_Dem]

49. [phone]

[Lisa D]

36. +1

[Starbucks Anarchist]

47. And he's the only Dem/lefty allowed to be attacked that much.

Try saying something negative about KO, Rachel, Kucinich, etc., and DU goes apeshit, but refer to the president in illogical, over-the-top terms (I'm not referring to legitimate criticism here) and most of DU doesn't bat an eye.

[ProudDad]

56. What makes you think Obama's a "leftie"?

What possible evidence do you have for that claim?

Unless the entire spectrum of political thought has drifted sooooo far to the right that Herbert Hoover would be considered a "leftie" in 2010... :shrug:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

57. He is on the left, just not as far as you would like him to be.

I've seen your posts, so I know your standard for "lefty" is one that couldn't get elected. I'm talking about realistic standards here.

[ProudDad]

59. Your knowledge of the "left" now and then is obviously faulty...

And even Obama doesn't call himself a "lefty"...

One must accord the guy some degree of honesty about that...

And since when is "couldn't get elected" a pejorative? It's a badge of Honor if one can't get elected to a corrupt body in a corrupt, dead-end system!

So, I say again, WTF makes you think he's "left" even in the bizarre 2010 version of the term?

MY Standard for a "leftie" is someone whose overriding concern is with working and poor people. As someone whose overriding concern is social and economic Justice. As someone who would not lift a finger to help out banksters and corporate leeches.

I'm afraid that, yes, Obama does not qualify...

[Starbucks Anarchist]

73. It's a badge of honor to not be elected?

So are all these unelectable geniuses effective at enacting positive change? Considering they don't have presidential influence (or anything near it), what exactly have they achieved? I'd take incremental positive change from someone like Obama rather than the pie-in-the-sky dreams of people who will never achieve any degree of influence.

And if it's such a corrupt, dead-end system, what are you doing about it besides complaining? Do you think a message board is going to change the world? Or is your nihilism the only thing you have left and you're determined to drag everyone down with you? If this is really your outlook, I truly feel sorry for you.

[ProudDad]

82. Now that I'm "retired"...

I work full-time hours organizing my local community for long-term survival... (www.transitionus.org)

The bankrupt system you support, the one that couldn't produce "positive change" of any significance even when "Democrats" had absolute control of the "levers of power" is irrelevant to the task of preparing my community for survival during the Long Emergency...

The world WILL change whether you want it to or not...

Resources will be harder to get and more expensive... (Peak Oil is here!)

Catastrophic Global Climate Destabilization will cause massive dislocation and decreased resource availability...

The laughable corporate capitalist Ponzi scheme mislabeled an "economy" will continue to collapse...

While it's collapsing, the profit takers will continue to pollute the Earth, water, air and land for their short-term gain, aided and abetted by tools such as Obama and the Congress whose "incremental changes" can't keep up with reality...


You are the nihilist if you think that circle jerk in Washington, D.C. is going to have any positive effect on the environmental disaster that the human race is bringing on itself and its fellow creatures on this planet...

There will be NO Peace and Justice on a dead planet...except in little pockets of survival where people heeded the warning and worked locally to prepare.


"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." Margaret Mead


I'm only on this silly board to warn you sheeple, I'm the canary in the coal mine...

You can heed the warning or you can continue to be titillated and distracted by the amusing spectacles and shiny objects your corporate capitalist masters dangle in front of your eyes on the tv and internet tubes and in Washington, DC and your local State House.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

84. Oh, you're one of those.

:rofl:

Never mind. :rofl:

[ProudDad]

88. Oh, you're one of these...

:rofl:

Never mind... :rofl:

[Number23]

79. + a bazillion

[Obamanaut]

31. People have been critical of whatever president was in office as far back as

I can recall, and probably long before that. I think it is the nature of the beast.

As for "...we played pretty nice during W's reign..." phrases such as 'intellectually incurious', 'President AWOL', 'Idiot Son', and so on somehow seem at odds with the playing nice statement. If we don't like who is in office, we tend to criticize and name-call.

[Exilednight]

34. Let's not forget such gems as, shrub, dubya, clueless, clueless geroge, ...............

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[nessa]

35. Chimpy McCokespoon was always one of my favorites. (nt)

'

[Chan790]

32. Respect is earned, not given.

I never respected Obama's predecessor; I viewed him then and now as blemish upon the office. To argue that an office deserve respect pro-forma is to argue not only that Bush's presidency was legitimate but ultimately to argue for an obligated respect throughout history for any number of deviants...Pope Alexander VI, for example.

Seriously, go read about Pope Alex6. Between the illegitimate children, sex on altars, courtesans, rampant political assassinations, public lewdness, excessive drunkenness, pederasty, orgies, instigation of wars for political and personal gain and winking statements of profound faith, it's pretty clear who GWB's role model in life was...too bad he couldn't even live up to that.

[Igel]

37. It's not hard to distinguish between civility, admiration, and honor.

It's quite easy, in fact, even if a lot of Americans have trouble because "respect" can cover all of those in any proportions.

One can be civil towards *, honor the office by treating its occupant with dignity even while expressing disgust and extreme disaffection for the occupant's actions and the occupant himself.

In fact, it's not hard for me to have a rather lengthy discussion about the policies and actions about a president I loath or admire and not have my interlocutor have the first clue as to where I loath or admire him. Stay on topic and don't engage in irrelevancies and you're 99.9% of the way there.

That said, Americans have traditionally been of numerous subcultures, some of which are public with respect and private with disrespect, some of which focus on public disrespect. A lot of the difference in American political discourse from the 1790s through to 2010 can probably be accounted by social mobility, mainstreaming formerly marginalized subcultures, and changing standards of what can be said publicly (without altering in the least what was said privately). A lot of rapid language change can be accounted for in the same way: Accepted standards usually require that public discourse reflect older norms, social change allows tacit, formerly banned norms to surface and become the new established standards.

Confirmation bias and screening out unpleasantness accounts for the perceived differences in reception between "our" presidents and "their" presidents.

[Igel]

38. Partly because we refer to him as "our"--not "the"--president.

If he's "our" president then they have no obligation to respect him, now do they? After all, he's not "their" president. He's an interloper, a foreigner, somebody imposed--somebody that they don't acknowledge as lawfully in charge of the US' executive branch and therefore somebody from which the government must be seized back.

Some on the right believe this. That's their problem, their idiocy. It's not shared by most of them.

Similarly, to say * or Bush I or Reagan was "their" president is to essentially say that "their" president was most emphatically not "our" president.

Of course, "our" and "their" here sets up a contrast. It's possible to refer to Reagan and Obama as "our" presidents to simply affirm that they were the presidents of the United States and therefore of all Americans. Then "our" isn't contrastive but is usually unstressed.

Referring to Reagan as "their" president is showing open disrespect for Reagan--but saying Obama is "our" president *also* shows open disrespect for Obama. It's to say he's not the President of the United States. No, it's to say that he's the President of the Democratic Party and of Democrat and Progressives--but not of the United States.

Don't diss the man publicly. If you can't say "our president" wrt all of them, then just say "the" President. That'll do.

[DemocraticPilgrim]

40. I don't get it as the other side wish us dead even most of their own voters he deserves respect, for

that alone. As anyting that leads to supporting the other side is mass suicide.

[craigmatic]

43. Because he's too pragmatic and won't fight if he thinks it's a lost cause going in.

[polichick]

52. The right doesn't respect anyone - they only use patriotic language to manipulate fools...

The best thing this or any other Dem president can do is to stand tough for progressive values and policies - anyone who appears weak in the eyes of bullies will be bullied more.

[moondust]

54. The "right" is teemng with destructive people.

And the GOP has a history of exploiting their hatred and greed for political and financial gain.

President Clinton was a target as well so it's not entirely about race.

[ProudDad]

55. I have NO respect for the USAmerikan Empire

so whoever is the current spokesmodel for the Empire isn't likely to get much "respect" from me either...

I think it's time to think about ending the Empire...

[Milo_Bloom]

58. It was the SAME under bush.

There were plenty of wackos who made similar idiotic comments about bush. I remember stumbling across a website once (I think it was www.dumbya.com or something like that) that had an image of bush with a gun shot to the head and it played some music in the background about solving the problem.

The main difference I see is that WE are willing to shout down the idiots who suggest "second amendment remedies" and condemn them for their statements, where the other side is less willing to condemn idiocy, but instead fans the flames of anger that cause statements like that to be made.

I remember having many many arguments with people about how I should show respect to the office of the president and I would tell them the office itself deserves NONE of my respect. Respect has to be earned and it is earned through actions. I didn't respect bush or the office when he held it, but there is a world of difference between RESPECT and threatening violence!

[impik]

61. Bush got respect from the Right. Obama gets nothing but insults from the Left

And that's the difference.

[Milo_Bloom]

65. Bull.

Obama gets too much respect from the left, which is part of the problem.

He gets consistently enabled for doing the wrong thing and then those who speak up get scolded for doing so.

bush, on the other hand, got reinforced by his base, even when what they wanted him to do wasn't popular. bush didn't capitulate every time the dems made noise, so the base stuck with him more.

[Pisces]

68. What crap, it is very popular to criticize or denigrate the President right now.

Attacking the admin is what the left has been doing. Posting something positive will get you nothing but snarky comments.

I listened when Obama said he would reach across and listen to good ideas regardless where they come from. When he said on the night he won that he would be the President for everyone not just
the democrats. I knew he would be in the middle. Don't know why so many were surprised.

Only history will tell what Obama has accomplished, because right now most cant see the forest for the trees.

[Exilednight]

70. What crap, Obama has embraced Republican ideas, but none of them have been good. n/t

[Milo_Bloom]

71. There is a difference between "the middle" and capitulation.

What "good ideas" has Obama listened to and adopted? What has the right "given up".

That is the sad joke in all of this. They gave up nothing, got what they wanted and even managed to campaign against their own ideas and win (you know, how the health care plan is the same plan that Bob Dole ran on!)

I already know what is history going to tell. Obama squandered the best opportunity for real reform in decades and managed to take the teeth out of any meaningful legislation.

[Tx4obama]

75. Actually it's getting even worse than snarky comments...

I posted a thread of Obama's LGBT 'accomplishments' and it got locked.
I never thought that posting a positive thread about what Obama has done would get locked on a democratic website, but it did.
I'm feeling like the world has turned upside down :(

[Tx4obama]

76. Bull. President Obama rarely even gets any positive coverage on MSNBC any more.

It's a shame that the supporters that he depended on have turned on him in such a short period of time.
If I were Obama I'd be fed up with all the BS coming from 'all' sides and move back to Hawaii where it's peaceful - and tell America a few choice words on the way out the door ;)

[Milo_Bloom]

80. Riiiight.. his SUPPORTERS turned on HIM.

That's exactly how it happened.

[LittleBlue]

60. Because he doesn't assert himself

He looks like a boat with no sail at times.

[laughingliberal]

67. I do hope you notified the proper authorities. nt

[GSLevel9]

72. you don't GET respect, your EARN respect.

push a single payer/public option or abolish DADT with the swipe of a pen NOW, THAT'S respect.

[boppers]

74. He pushed for a public option, and he's not a king.

Whoever tells you that he can abolish DADT with a pen stroke is lying to you, or has a funny definition of "abolish".

Of course, I may be wrong, what can Obama do today that prevents a future president from enforcing existing federal laws?

[ProudDad]

83. He could have ordered non-complience on the first day

just as Harry Truman did...

Then it would have been up to the impotent Dem Congress to override his decision in some way...

Then after it was obvious that the sky didn't fall and the world didn't end, Congress could be persuaded to repeal that discriminatory abomination...

But that would have taken courage and cajones... :shrug:

[boppers]

85. Just as Harry Truman did?

What are you referring to, because it sure as heck wasn't desegregation, that took years and years of meetings, surveys, committees, push back from the military, etc. (Sound familiar?)

Here's a time line:
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/desegregation/large/index.php?action=chronology

edit: missing word

[BlueGirlRedState]

81. Billboard on I-35 south of Waco

This stuff just makes me fume.

Billboard on Interstate 35, just south of Waco, says

SOCIALIST
BY ACTIONS

And of course, a photo of the president scowling.

Sometimes I just hate living here.

[ProudDad]

86. Well, as I am a citizen of Mother Earth...

and don't consider myself a "citizen" of the Empire...

And he's the latest spokesmodel for the Empire...

I don't feel that I can respect that sort of flacking performance...

[ClassWarrior]

89. Report that thread to the FBI. Now.

NGU.