I just PM'd a 'newbie' as a greeting.

[Julien Sorel]

I didn't do this because I'm a great guy (I'm not); I didn't do it because I feel I owe loyalty to this place (I don't); I did it to warn him.

It seems this person is a Clark fan, and for some who post here, being a 'newbie' and a Clark fan makes one a pincushion for their own bitterness, frustration, arrogance, and desire to bully. So I warned the guy about the kind of treatment he might receive. Personally, I hope he never has a negative experience; I hope he ends up thinking I'm some kind of paranoid crackpot. Somehow, given the current atmosphere here, I kind of doubt it will work out that way.

[Democrats unite]

1. He will learn.

Hey pass me another Clark bar.

[madmax]

3. My husband took Clark bars to work and

passed them out. :)

[Kool Kitty]

11. That's because your husband is cool.

;-) :hi:

[madmax]

17. Hi Kitty

:toast: :hi:

[oasis]

2. Clark, Bill and Hillary are the "Axis of Evil" according to some DUers.

:tinfoilhat:

[fla nocount]

57. Naw, just business as usual. The house on the hill, ya know. n/t

*

[alfredo]

4. I just read the Clark Critique on MSNBC

and it strengthened my support for Clark.

If we or our candidate(s) cannot handle the sniping here, we shouldn't be in the political arena.

[madmax]

8. The sniping here is pretty mild compared to the first

message board I signed onto 3 years ago. Talk about attacked, I posted my first message in defense of Gore and cried for days from the savage abuse.

[madmax]

5. You're a good man BillyBunter

:toast:

[cally]

6. Oh, please

This type of stuff just alienates all potential Clark supporters and and new posters. Yep, I've seen a cadre of anti-Clark posters, anti-Dean posters, anti-Kerry posters and big time anti-Lieberman posters. I appreciate your passion and commitment to your candidate, but it defeats all of us if we alienate each other. Only one of the 10 will be the Dem Presidential candidate. Just lose the thin skin and see that all the front runners have faced a similar bashing. Remember, we will all have to unite soon.

BTW, I am not anti-Clark. I like him and respect him. I just really am dismayed by the tendency to split the democrats.

[PDriscoll]

7. While wondering what your point is...

I'm still confused. Are you arguing that newbies and Clark supporters should not be heard? Confused by this. Also, if you introduce the term "one," you can't switch to their. It should be one's bitterness, etc.

[Wonk]

14. Billy's point for starting this thread? My guess looks something like this

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame68.html

"Poor Clark supporters, always being attacked by those mean DUers! Whaaaa!"

Stick around and pay attention. Billy gives as good as he gets. He's just a little thin skinned.

[PDriscoll]

19. I don't mean to be contrary...

but I love this language. Kudos to Billy and all others who desire a debate that addresses the cleavages within our party. However, I don't subscribe to a point of view (thanks Sting) that advocates a "who was here first" mentality. As you all know, Cruise Jammin' Bill Clinton was not a popular, or believable, choice early on. My boy is Kucinich, not only for his amazing coolness on the Daily Show, but his frank opinions about dealing with, or not being able to deal with, this Administration.

[juajen]

69. Welcome to DU, PDriscoll

I'm also a Kucinich supporter. He's a true patriot with amazing and unusual talents Firstly, he writes his own speeches, which are wonderful, takes absolutely no corporate money, has a wicked sweet heart and lastly, the unusual talent of honesty. I also like his supporters. They rarely bash other candidates or are unkind to anyone. Must take after their candidate.

BTW, I also like Clark, Kerry and Dean, in that order. Marvelous candidates this election season. Dems should all be so proud!!!!

:hi:

[Julien Sorel]

20. LOL

I should hope I give a lot better than I get :-) But you miss the point: I'm not new, and I also don't pick on people who are new. The more people who come here, the better as far as I'm concerned -- but it isn't that way for everyone. We just had a 'newbie' intentionally get themselves banned because they couldn't stand the atmosphere here, and in the same thread, another person immediately posted a vicious little tirade against 'newbie ignorant Clarkies,' or something like that. It was disgusting -- and no one said a word.

[PDriscoll]

21. Just wanting to be welcomed.

This is important. I applaud all of the opinions I've read. Thanks for letting me be a part of something I care about.

[PDriscoll]

27. Billy.

We just had a newbie intentionally get "themselves" banned. How does a newbie become plural?

[bearfartinthewoods]

75. maybe lighten-up on the grammar cop posts?

we don't post to be critiqued on form, but on substance.

[Pastiche423]

52. The newbie that got banned

got banned for not abiding by DU rules. It had nothing to do w/how many posts h/she had.

If you break DU rules, you're gone. It is as simple as that.

[juajen]

71. Hey BillyB:

I certainly would have spoken up if I had been there. Don't remember that thread at all. Have taken a couple of long naps today. Regards.

[Bread and Circus]

23. BillyBunter is an AssKicker....

He should change his name to BillyJack!

You go, Billy!

[DoveTurnedHawk]

35. Hell Yes He Is!

Take it from someone who's been both across the table and on the same side of the table as BB.

It is much better (and much more fun) to be on the same side of the table as BB. :-)

DTH

[Julien Sorel]

26. I'm certainly no grammarian, but I believe 'their'

can be used in the third person singular.

[PDriscoll]

28. From singular to plural...

When you reference a singular third-person non-entity, you cannot revert to a plural.

[Julien Sorel]

29. Thanks. However, it's a message board, and it saves me the

trouble of repeatedly typing 'him or her,' so expect to see it a lot :-)

[PDriscoll]

32. Done and done.

The real question is this. Who can win? We all posit the same goal...getting rid of the ultimate welfare candidate. And as many have noted, welfare is far more prevalent among the rich. When's the last time a celeb paid for dinner?

[Julien Sorel]

31. Upon re-reading, the agreement

should be between 'some' (plural) and 'their,' (plural or singular):

It seems this person is a Clark fan, and for some who post here, being a 'newbie' and a Clark fan makes one a pincushion for their own bitterness

So 'one' should be 'a person' to avoid all confusion -- however, it doesn't seem that difficult an error to overcome.

[PDriscoll]

30. You're wrong...

but I don't want to argue about this. Their implies plurality. Even when Michael Irvin refers to himself in the third person, he's not talking about the Cowboys.

[Julien Sorel]

34. WOW

I have no problem with being wrong; however it seems an odd subject to make a big deal out of. Out of curiosity, do you plan on grammar checking everyone's posts?

[PDriscoll]

38. no

sorry for being a schmuck.

[PDriscoll]

44. Hey Billy.

We probably agree on most things. Let's work with that.

[REP]

63. It Would Take Forever!

I applaud the poster standing up for proper grammar, but if s/he tried to correct every post, s/he'd quickly go insane and/or develop carpal tunnel syndrome.

And I would not be safe!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

9. Being a Clark fan is rough.

2 whole days!

Meanwhile, 9 other candidates have been getting the shit kicked out of them for months. Pardon me if I don't shed a tear.

[Bread and Circus]

24. That is funny....

man, I bet that is so true.:toast:

[Bread and Circus]

25. Here's a question for you 1000+ 'ers

It seems like Clark was tore down even when
he was not really on the radar screen.....

Was this true of Dean when he was still the underdog?

This is an honest question, for reals....

I came here in the beginning of the summer. What was
it like in January, for instance?

[juajen]

72. Except for a few people who touted his possible candidancy,

he was ignored. He is a threat to all of the individual candidate's supporters who regularly post here, but the main dissent is from "Deanies" and "Kerryites". BTW, I respect their undying support for their candidates, just don't like them bashing Clark. Of course, it was said on here many times, that as soon as he announced, everyone would be after him. The reason some of the low tier candidates aren't attacked is because they are not a threat. But, Clark is a HUGE threat. I understand how they feel. He is taking a lot of people's thunder. However, in the great scheme of things, we should all wish him well.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

79. That's a pretty fair analysis.

I don't know enough about Clark to bash him. Time will tell. I also believe that the "Clark threat" is more imagined than real and more a creation of the media than of informed support. But, once again, time will tell.

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

10. Damn...

Clark isn't my main man, but Jesus, everyone has a right to be here, to express their admiration for their particular candidate, and not have to catch a whole bunch of shit for it. We should be aiming our ire at Bush, not each other.

I'm a Dean supporter, and I have to concede that I've noticed that some of us have, unfortunately, engaged in that sort of thing, which is totally counterproductive to say the very least. I hope you don't hold it against all of us.

[boxster]

12. Yeah, well, I'm a newbie, too,

but I've been lurking for a while, so I know what I'm in for. :D

Seriously, it's the nature of politics, especially on the web. I really like Clark, Dean, and Kerry, probably in that order, and frankly, I can't quite understand the incredible animosity it seems that a few Dean folks seem to have for Mr. Clark.

Somebody needs to beat Bush. That's the bottom line here. Any of several Dems have the potential to kick Bush's lazy, privileged butt out of the White House. Recent events have given me a little hope that Bush is really heading out the door.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

15. You'll do just fine.

If you understand the nature of the beast, you won't get eaten. Sounds like you understand.


Welcome to DU, you lurking bastard! :evilgrin:

[boxster]

18. Hehe.

Oh, yeah. If I could live through some of the forums I was on during Gore/Bush in '00, I can stand being around here. One guy banned my IP address, because he couldn't be bothered to actually provide accurate counters to my arguments.

Re: the lurking thing - the problem is that I knew that if I signed up, I'd be living in here at least through the primaries. I frankly don't have the time, but I did it anyway!! So much for self-control.

:eyes:

[juajen]

73. Welcome to DU

May you live long and prosper!


:hi:

[bearfartinthewoods]

76. for insight, read this post by CWebster

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=390039#390305

You know what, I don't like your man and I don't like the way the red carpet is being rolled out for him like he is some royal political pop star. I didn't start out disliking him, in fact months ago I commented that he was "easy on the eyes", but I have learned to hate him and all he represents--the militarism of our culture, the exploitation of pop icons and consumerism. He is on the latest cover of Newsweek before he is even familiar with his own positions on the issues(that is if he has any sincere positions), while the other candidates have spent their entire careers studying the issues and working for the American people and they can't get anyone to listen. And then in walks this slick interloper, with cable news recognition and everyone abandons the issues and races to coronate the next priviliged Insider 'cause he can beat bush. Almost all of them has the potential to beat Bush as the day draws nearer, so why should we buy this bill of goods that doesn't offer a real Democratic hope for our country--just another centrist front.

I resent it, yes, but that doesn't mean that I encourage you to leave. Don't worry, I can take what you throw at me, my only problem is my work isn't getting done and I have a tight deadline this week.

end quote

bush is going down.

we don't need a hail mary pass

we have excellant choices, dems with proven records from whom to choose. we don't need a panic button or a knight in blinding armor to "save us" from the boogie man.

[southpaw]

85. boxster... like the porsche?

welcome :hi:

[CMT]

13. well I'm not sure your post really added anything to the atmosphere

I don't really think that the General gets any more negative treatment than many of the other candidates including Howard Dean. Both Dean and Clark are lightning rods to some people who have to tear them down. Yet both also have scores of passionate defenders here on DU.

[Julien Sorel]

22. Fine, but why lash out at 'newbies' just because of the

candidate they support? The fact that Dean and Clark have been able to get new people to come here speaks volumes about them, and should also be a boon to this place -- and should be looked on as such.

[jonnyblitz]

16. SOME of the biggest practictioners of the behavior you describe

HAVE been Clark supporters. GEESH. :crazy:

[DoveTurnedHawk]

40. Please Show Me Where Clark Supporters Have Jumped on Any Newbies

For being newbies. I've not seen it. In contrast, I've seen tons of newbies supporting Clark be demonized as everything from Freepers to secret Clark operatives.

DTH

[jonnyblitz]

77. ok, i was vague ...

I meant CLark supporters attacking people in general...not newbies. Clark supporters arent the only ones being attacked . Everybody is getting attacked from all sides. It's not a unique thing just to Clark supporters. I don't really like being called anti-military (i am a vet) and a fringe leftist from people who are supposedly on the left, sorry if i appear thin skinned at times and less tolerant of your fellow supporters. I will try to work on that.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

33. Good for You!

The newbie-bashing here has gotten to be completely absurd. It is disgusting to watch a bunch of so-called liberals destroy the notion of the big tent with paranoid, xenophobic rants.

DTH

[JanMichael]

36. What a wonderful whine.

I hope his cheese is gouda.

Do y'all ever quite bitching or is that the Clark way?

[juajen]

74. Hi, JanMichael

That was rich!!!!

:bounce:

[JanMichael]

37. Does your sort of rote bullshit count as spam?

If not... it ought to.

Old, that it, it's getting old.


PS~ I LIKE CLARK DAMMIT!!!!! <just not his du supporters tactics>

[DoveTurnedHawk]

39. JanMichael, I Like Your Posts

But please don't tell me you haven't noticed the blatant newbie bashing when it comes to supporting Clark. I can't count the number of times someone has implied (or outright stated) there is some bizarre Clark Conspiracy to flood this message board with fake Democrats.

It's ridiculous, and it's BS. And it's certainly counterproductive to the goal of growing DU.

DTH

[JanMichael]

41. BOTH ARE!!!! It hits both ways.

Both the asinine anti-Clark attacks AS WELL as the over-bearing Pro-Clark/Bitching threads.

I'm truly, honestly, sick of both.

He's not the spawn of Stan (Satan) nor the second coming of Christ.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

43. I'm Talking Specifically About Slamming Newbies

I haven't seen Clark supporters do that. That's the issue, here, as I see it, not the tit-for-tat pro-Clark/anti-Clark stuff.

DTH

[JanMichael]

45. I've seen "newbie(s)" post critical threads about Clark.

They get blasted.

It's a two way street.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

46. Ahh, But Here's the Difference

I agree that newbies who post anti-Clark stuff can get blasted, but they aren't treated any differently than the veterans who post anti-Clark stuff. I haven't seen any pro-Clark people say, "What is this, some kind of RW or pro-Dean conspiracy?" Never seen it. I've seen it tons of times the other way, though.

I don't think we should pick on newbies by virtue of their status. Picking on them for the content of their views, however, is fair game.

DTH

[JanMichael]

47. Either way I think this thread sucks. It's whiney be it right or wrong.

K'?:-)

[DoveTurnedHawk]

48. LOL!

It's all good, JM. Peace!

DTH

[JanMichael]

49. Cool.

I blame it on too many beers but damn...I'm just turned off by the whole thing.

Later.

Sleep calls me.....................................................................................

[Julien Sorel]

50. Which is my point exactly.

There is nothing wrong with being a 'newbie' in and of itself, regardless of which candidate the 'newbie' supports -- or doesn't support.

[RichM]

42. Typical mindless self-pitying bullshit. What are you proposing that

should be "discussed" here -- how difficult life is, for fans of a Pentagon-insider Reagan/Nixon-voting pseudo-Democrat? Awww. Poor baby. Tskk tsk tsk. What a fascinating topic.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

51. Newbie popcorn

Dearest newbie, welcome here
these are threads you need not fear
no one harms you behind your screen
with messages you've never seen

YOu will find it very dark
should you dare question general clark
so here is hoping you find him hot
whether you support him or not

and should your enthusiasm for the general pass
then shove this welcome up your ass

Love,

a Clark enthusiast

[RichM]

53. **** applause ***** -- I always appreciate fine verse!

[Julien Sorel]

54. Cute.

But you have it backwards:


Dearest newbie, welcome here.
these are threads you soon will fear.
you think you're safe behind your screen,
But there are barbs you've not yet seen.


Do not as if upon a lark,
express your like of General Clark.
for there are those, of twisted heart,
of bitter mind, by pretense smart,
who will with venom and haughty sneer
strangle the enthusiasm that brought you here.

[Pastiche423]

55. Only clark

can strangle the enthusiasm of a supporter.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

56. Oh no wait

Dearest newbie no matter your gender
the poster above is the worst offender


You get what you give Billy. If you want your guy to get some respect then how about showing some to the other candidates?

[Julien Sorel]

58. Like whom?

Expand here. I'm curious now. The person above is on ignore, so I have no idea, nor am I likely to be interested in, what they said; you however have proven yourself to be rational, so let's rumble. :-)

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

59. Come on ...you and I have no ax to grind, I am not against Clark

but all you need to do is read this thread to get a sense of the impression you've made on people which is that if they don't like your candidate, they are going to get smacked down.

Are you going to tell me that if a new Dean supporter or WORSE YET a Sharpton supporter showed up at Du you would warn them of impending doom?

Honestly, if I had to judge Clark based on MANY who have arrived with the influx of enthusiasm for this maverick and if I were one to base my impressions on associations...I would hate the guy...much like I hated Dean before Clark entered the race.

It's kind of like Jesus...the guy is great but a few of his followers can ruin him for ya. ;-)

Battery is NOT enthusiasm.

[Julien Sorel]

60. Errrr...

Point me to where in this thread I said anything about 'smacking down' someone who doesn't like 'my candidate,' or could reasonably be interpreted as even close.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

61. I didn't say you said it, I said you do it

but it appears you are unwilling to acknowledge that you might just possibly be guilty of doing it so I will drop it...not because I CAN'T prove my point...but because I don't wish to create acrimony.

(of course if forced to I would simply because I love a challenge but frankly I am too tired to research something I shouldn't have to)

[Julien Sorel]

62. Ahhh, I think I misread your original post.

So you're saying that I will 'smack down' people who attack Clark, and I have that reputation. Perhaps -- I don't know. I certainly think the term 'smack down' is a little bit extreme -- but I will defend Clark against some of the crazy attacks I've seen, and I'm not going to spend a lot of time using nice words doing it, since I doubt the attacks were motivated by anything but spite, and the people doing the attacking usually use some pretty inflammatory language themselves. Anyone who posts some of the crazy stuff some of these people have should expect to run into a spirited defence -- if I posted that kind of crap, I certainly would.

The person who posted above is on ignore; in order to get there, they had to be a conspiracy theorist -- that's it for my ignore list, with the exception of one person who only makes right-wing posts but hasn't been banned. Those conspiracy theory attacks were vicious, ugly, and mean-spirited, and universally referred to Clark's supporters using some pretty nasty language themselves -- 'little boys,' and stuff like that. Ring a bell? They expected people to grin and bear it? They knew what they were up to -- you know that as well as I do.

Look at the rational attacks on Clark. I seldom even post in those, unless the attacks start getting way out of hand, or are totally disingenuous to the point where I get disgusted. So I think this perception, if it exists, is the result of a discrete behavior that has been blown out of proportion. Unless, that is, you can find evidence to the contrary.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

64. I think you know I am hardly conspiracy central and I never wear

tinfoil..in fact..it's an integrity issue for me to wear anything but real gold ;-)

However, those threads and posters who question his support, votes for and fundraiser appearances for Republican causes are legitimate issues.

I find you advocacy admirable and since I am not exactly a shrinking violet when the situation arises, I understand it and even support it.

There are a couple times, however (including our exchange on the Medea Benjamin thread last night) where you tend to take anyone that is not a white bread Dem and alienate them with broad strokes...

OK..I'm backing of now..like I said...we don't have any crap between us..I am glad your on my party's side.

[Julien Sorel]

66. Hold on a minute, 'cuz now I'm a little peeved.

There are a couple times, however (including our exchange on the Medea Benjamin thread last night) where you tend to take anyone that is not a white bread Dem and alienate them with broad strokes...

I'm a black man, born and raised in the blackest neighborhood in the state of California. The stuff about 'white bread dems' ticks me off -- I made a point about the Pink Power (or whatever) group's presentation of themselves, which is valid. Personally, I don't care how Medea Benjamin dresses or what she calls the organization she's a part of -- but lots of other people do, and it has a big impact on the effectiveness of her work. That's the point I made, and someone else agreed with me, if I recall; moreover, it seems like common sense. If, say, Tom DeLay dressed and acted like a sterotypical cracker, you think it wouldn't have an affect on his work? You think people wouldn't point it out? Why should the left be given an exemption?

[Julien Sorel]

65. I just read this further.

'Other candidates'? I finally attacked Dean out of disgust for the attacks Deanies were making against Clark -- and even then, the 'attack' wasn't a 'bash' -- it was a problem I had, and have, with his economic platform. I've made some comments about Dean's electability -- again, a valid point, but I seriously doubt the comments were excessive. Please show me these examples that make me the 'worst offender.'

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

67. You just proved my point...the DEANIES

and regardless of your blackness you do seem to refer to others on this board with names...something one would imagine you would be a bit more sensitive to.

I am not saying you don't use logic, but you use logic based on false premises such as YOUR INTERPRETATION of anyone else.


It's like Will said...how many Nascar dads are watching PBS?

[Julien Sorel]

70. 'The Deanies' is a perjorative? What do they prefer being

called? If that's your standard of proof, I can only hope you never end up on my jury :-)

And I must have missed out on the rest of that thread. But I do recall pointing out that I used the term 'Nascar dad' as a demographic placeholder. I know a whole lot of people who are moderate, but would be dismissive towards a group called 'Pink Power' that takes an anti-war stance. Maybe you did in the other thread, but here you haven't even attempted to contest that point -- and it was my only point with regards to that issue. As I said, I don't care what they name themselves, how they dress, or if they spend their off-hours getting drunk and running down the street naked yelling 'communism rules;' the simple fact is, other people do, and their opinions count in a democracy.

I also don't see how this makes me the 'the most guilty' or whatever, of the candidate bashers -- you're dragging in another issue and using it to 'convict me,' if you will, of an unrelated crime.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Atlant]

78. One more for the "ignore" list. (NT)

[CWebster]

80. Poor little babies

We all took the hits with minimal whining before y'all climbed aboard expecting us all to climb aboard.

[Julien Sorel]

83. Sure you did.

In particular, the 'minimal whining' part is easy to believe, considering how mature some of "y'all" are behaving now.

[CWebster]

84. Well gee

don't think we were intent on having each other banned off the starting block.

[JNelson6563]

81. How pathetic!

Look at this thread! It's a mile long and what is about? DU/Duers.

This is pathetic. It reminds my of the media covering the media. I've never seen so much whine in my life, not to mention self-importance.

Julie

[Cocoa]

82. it could be due to some Clark supporters' behavior

for example, I think your Clark banners are obnoxious and unsettling. , so I react to you with some hostility.

Other Clark supporters have come here, seemingly not to discuss politics, but just to sell Wesley Clark, and some of them have been very aggressive and negative about it. At least one of them, "VoteClark", ended up getting banned.

So, maybe think about why the Clark supporters are getting treated that way.

[Julien Sorel]

87. Really? And what's 'obnoxious' about them?

You also have the option of seeing this board without seeing graphic attachments, and then there is always the ignore function.

'At least one of them.' That was two months ago, and that's the only example you can come up with to justify attacking all 'newbie Clarkies'? It seems that if there was this massive influx of 'newbie Clarkies,' people would be able to find more than the exact same example.

[Skinner]

86. I'm locking this thread.

I think it is a terrible idea for us to start senting private messages to newbies in order to initiate them into our stupid grudges.

Come on, people! This type of behavior is not helping!

Skinner
DU Admin

[Dhalgren]

88. Some people here believe

(and I have no idea whether they are correct in their beliefs) that this forum is used as a crucible, of sorts. A candidate or group within the party or group outside the party, will float comments in order to test reactions from an infromed and engaged population. I could come on here, for instance, and say that one of the candidates has a spouse who is a drunk. Then I sit back and watch who gets irate and who picks up the accusation as ammunition. Also, these "agents" are seen as fomenting discord. This is at least one idea I have read that is part of the "attitude" some of the "older" posters have towards the "newbies".

One thing we could all do is simply not become insensible if a poster makes an accusation against the candidate we happen to support. A studied, calm response is all that is needed. If the "attacker" happens to be a "newbie", well, show them that debate and reasoned dicourse is what we are about, not shrill diatribes and holocausts of "message deleted's".