Saying anything that might question DU gets the thread locked. I am done.

[SouthernDem2004]

Delete my account. Do not use me in your number count of members of DU. If you are going to lock a thread questioning the calls for violence on DU and certain types of posting then I want no part of it.


I wish everyone the best. Good luck and remember to be active in '06 and '08. We need people on the streets and helping with campaigns. Now is our chance do not let it pass.

Peace,

SouthernDem2004

[Don Claybrook]

1. I must have missed a good one

Good luck, take care.

[chefgirl]

2. ok

bye bye!!

-chef-

[prescole]

3. Right again, SouthernDem. No place is perfect. nt

[Catherine Vincent]

4. ...

:eyes:

[MadisonProgressive]

5. LOOK AT ME!! LOOK AT ME!! I'M A MARTYR!!

Buh-bye

[NMDemDist2]

6. that was a pretty broad brush you used SD n/t

[stepnw1f]

7. Who's calling for violence...? Let me at em! (nt)

[AuntPatsy]

13. lol

[spacelady]

8. Don't let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya!

[KyndCulture]

9. yawn... pass the butter somebody.

[triguy46]

76. Here....

:popcorn: (Chew, chew, swallow, drink, gulp) What's this all about?

[New Earth]

10. the point is that you lumped the entire site into one

implying "DU supports violence". no, SOME members on DU may imply it individually in their posts but it doesn't reflect the entire forum or the owners.

that is just BS.


c ya

[Catherine Vincent]

14. And the poster he was referring to didn't support violence against anyone

[AspenRose]

20. Even if they did, it could very well have been a TROLL

Oh well.

Aren't "farewell" threads against the rules, anyway? :shrug:

[AuntPatsy]

11. For a policeman you sure have a problem with following the rule of law

And though I couldn't respond to you on that other thread, which by the way I am glad it got locked, you did use that word in describing durs, shame on you for using such a broad stroke, not that it is the first time you have done so...

But I will be an adult here and wish you well and good luck as well, I will also add, peace to you, which by the way I wish for all human kind...

[Batgirl]

12. "my heart will go on" n/t

[buff2]

15. ***Yawn***

:boring:

[triguy46]

97. Much drama...

[Mz Pip]

16. 80,000 members on this site

They can't all be perfect.

The "ignore" function can be quite helpful

Mz Pip
:dem:

[Arugula Latte]

17. Carry on in the way that is best for you!

Good luck. Keep working for change. Sorry DU didn't work out for you.

[qanda]

18. I most certainly have NEVER advocated violence against anyone

I'm actually a pretty middle of the road Independent, Christian Liberal and if I have a problem with any thread on DU, I hit alert. I don't think it's fair for you to lump all DUers together because you have a problem with where one or two threads are heading.

Good luck in your journey.

[FreedomAngel82]

74. Hear hear

Each person is responsible for his/her own actions. Not the moderators themselves. They can only moderate the site. To lump all of DU is purely ridiculous and unfair.

[bahrbearian]

19. I'm really afraid of what this country has become.. when the

POLICE are so thin-skined as they seem to be showing themselfs,, If they are so easily angered , I can only hope they Turn in their Badges if not their Guns...

[leftchick]

55. yes indeed and an excellent point!

What will they do when called upon to quell the resistors? Now that is a scary thought!

[alarimer]

89. We have as much to fear from the police

as we do from our "dear leader". They will take marching orders from them.

[HardWorkingDem]

110. I think this was the sort of post that SD was talking about...

Like every other occupation out there, there are good and bad people in each of these occupations.

Think of cops and normal citizens: who else runs toward gunshots when others run away? who else goes to the broken and battered bodies of our fellow citizens without worry about what it might do their own sanity later on? who else guards the doors of a civilized society more than anyone else?

Your post was offensive and you should edit it. This type of post is one of the reasons why those in law enforcement are leery of Democrats (which is really odd because those in law enforcement have received so much benefit from Democratic ideals and practices).

[alarimer]

118. I won't edit it

Most of the police I know are redneck right-wing assholes who get off on beating up some criminal JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN. Some people get a charge out of having a little power. Fuck them. I fear the police; they will not ever be on our side.

I don't really care why that guy left.

[Individualist]

21. Bye now. Don't hurry back!

[William769]

22. Why let some get under your skin?

I don't know what happened but, I wish you the best.

[bridgit]

23. bye...

:hi:

[Horse with no Name]

24. You have supported the use of TASER's

on "perps".
I guess it is "tit for tat".
I find that pretty offensive as well.
:hi:

[Media_Lies_Daily]

41. Didn't he also claim that there was no proof that tasers had....

...caused a number of deaths?

I also noticed that he had very little to say when Taser, Inc. admitted they had some problems with their devices.

[shanti]

79. ok....

one of the police apologists for the tazers. that's enough for me. i thought i had 'em all on ignore, but it's a moot point now.

[HardWorkingDem]

91. If you want to debate....

can't you do it without flippant responses?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

117. I thought the poster was stating a personal choice about those that....

...the poster wishes NOT to engage in discussion about tasers. Why do you consider that to be a "flippant" response? That is the purpose of the "Ignore" button, is it not?

[HardWorkingDem]

52. What's wrong with tasers when properly used?

I wish people who complain about things like Tasers would do more research. In the long run, Tasers will end up saving more lives and prevent more injuries than any other tool.

And don't bother citing studies because most studies are flawed one way or another. Even though I am a long time member of Amnesty Int'l, their study uses bad methodology in its examination of Tasers. Sorry, but it is true.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

58. I guess we can all ignore those 70+ deaths. Is that what you're saying?

[HardWorkingDem]

72. Not at all......however......

what can YOU tell any of us about the particulars of the seventy cases?

For a proper evaluation of Taser deaths, EACH and EVERY individual incident needs to be throughly examined. The mere adding up of numbers does not do this. To get a fair examination of the deaths we must be able to determine how many of these deaths are caused by the misuse of the Taser versus the proper use of it.

Also, how many successful uses of the Taser have there been? Take that number and contrast that with any other use of force method and you are probably going to find out that the seventy deaths are much lower than other use of force methods.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

98. You're missing the point...a supposed "non-lethal" weapon should,,,

...be exactly that, don't you agree?

There have also been many reports nationwide of the inappropriate use of the taser:

*AFTER suspects had been handcuffed and had stopped resisting.
*On minor children.
*On prisoners in prison cells.

I wonder how all of those incidents would affect your ratio? How many incidents have never been reported by people that have been too intimidated to report them?

[bbinacan]

61. I'd rather see a Taser

used rather than a damned gun.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

64. Too bad the deceased victims of tasers no longer have a vote.

[bbinacan]

86. True that

[shanti]

84. tazer or gun

they're DEAD, in the cases that were profiled.

[shanti]

81. you obviously

missed the tazer discussions. :eyes:

[HardWorkingDem]

88. No, I've been around them and around them and around them....

and fall back on the old axiom of how anyone can tell any thing they want with stats....

And I can probably guarantee you that I've more first hand knowledge of these things than most people....

[Media_Lies_Daily]

103. For a "non-lethal" weapon system, ONE death is way too many, IMHO.

[FreedomAngel82]

113. I just don't like electric shock

It makes me feel uncomfortable and I know I wouldn't want some police guy (even if he was a hunk) using it on me.

[supernova]

25. Um. It's a partisan political board

what exactly did you expect?

None of us are here to mollycoddle the administration.

As of the violence, have you seen the Gungeon recently? Those threads you point to are blowing off steam. People are frustrated and I don't blame them.

[HardWorkingDem]

33. Yes, it is, but supposedly a board loyal to the 1st Amendment...nt

nt

[supernova]

37. We are the very embodiment

of the First Amendement. :-)

Best of all, Unca Dick and little W hate us.

[GirlinContempt]

26. YAWN

:boring:

in before lock

[Lerkfish]

27. I have no idea what this is about...

but I think this will prolly get locked, too.

but I have also missed any calls for violence.

so.... :shrug:

[seabeyond]

28. you are a lovely man sd i am sure

i can feel that you are in your many posts. but i really want to know why you would resort to saying you would be the one murdering us, taking a very violent position, when reality is, dems are not violent.

and then lecture us on violence

why it is so easy for you to resort to that

because you wear a badge?

i would really appreciate you reflecting on your own post

i would really appreciate that. being one that could have the police, use violence on me

i would like a police man to seriously reflect on resorting so quickly to voilence yourself

[TahitiNut]

29. The moderator was MORE than clear about the reasons for locking that !!

Sheesh! Read much??

Buh-bye! :hi:

[Media_Lies_Daily]

30. How sad. NOT.

[bahrbearian]

31. You wouldn't be related to Vets-Wife ?

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

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

[Rowdyboy]

34. You'll be missed

Sorry it didn't work out for you

[sufrommich]

35. I'm with you Southern Dem

I notice more and more on this board a real effort to shout down anyone who behaves and thinks moderately .I hear less and less "adults" talking,it sounds too much like high school posturing.This board is not reflective of the average Democrat and even with a sign up of 80,000,I see the same posters over and over again.I think people just eventually give up.Please delete my account also.

[Catherine Vincent]

39. Bye to you too!

:eyes:

[Media_Lies_Daily]

42. Buh-bye!!

[GirlinContempt]

45. uh huh

[bowens43]

47. bye

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[asthmaticeog]

51. Right. Because "moderate" isn't an obfuscation word for "appeaser."

Buh bye. Say hi to some "average democrats" on your way out. And when you hit the dustbin with the rest of the DLC assjacks, I'll cry. Really.

[tx_dem41]

90. Wow....you must love living in an echo chamber.

The brain atrophies inside of a mental one. You do know that, don't you?

[asthmaticeog]

106. I've given the moderates' viewpoints a fair hearing & found them repellent

I don't think one of them leaving DU is going to damn me to existence in an echo-chamber of one. I like your poetic phrasing, though.

[UTUSN]

36. I Had Just Finished This When Your Thread Locked and Wouldn't Post

Actually, the wingnuts are CONSTANTLY sniping and inciting, while the NOBLE LIBERALS have bent over and TAKEN it. And whenever the Libs show the SLIGHTEST spine, the wingnuts unleash their talking point: How DARE Libs think of FIGHTING BACK?---They are supposed to be LOVING AND GIVING!!!

I predict this (previous) thread will be recognized as flamebait. It used to be against the rules to attack DU with this broad brush. Individual threads that are problems can be alerted on.

---------END OF previous un-post.

[AuntPatsy]

38. exactly, whenever the dems come out fighting, we get those on here

crying about how mean du is, like I said earlier, same ole, same ole.

[salinen]

40. Maybe policemanning

isn't where your heart lies. You sound like someone who could be a great social worker or in the peace corps.

[spacelady]

43. Police officers who are paranoid about the public they are sworn to

serve and protect are the bane of civilization. They themselves become hair-trigger revolutionaries in the name of protecting themselves.

[bowens43]

44. Later dude.....

[kliljedahl]

46. What'd I miss

Just askin'

[Media_Lies_Daily]

56. Not much, really....very similar to someone having....

...gas in a crowded elevator. Smells bad for a few seconds and then disappears.

[AspenRose]

60. here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5408060

[bahrbearian]

62. Southern Dem Posted that the DU condoned violence by

the tone of some recent post, "Boiling Point" and a couple others that were not condoning violence .Reminding us that he is a police officer and would have to take-out such trouble makers.

[HardWorkingDem]

65. Now, I read in his reply that....

if there was a revolt then he would be one who would be forced to take action against the revolters. He didn't say he'd be simply taking people out.....

[chefgirl]

70. Hmm...

Your screen name sounds so familiar to me. Just sayin...

-chef-

[HardWorkingDem]

80. Why don't you just come out and say whatever it is....

the reason I piped in here is because I've noticed some of the same things that SouthernDem mentioned:

the quick locking of controversial posts;
how many people are quick to throw around diatribes when disagreed with;
how some posts are kind of violent;
and so on....

[chefgirl]

92. ...

:eyes:

-chef-

[bahrbearian]

83. "Either your with us or against us"is how I read it.

Southern Dem seems to ignore the fact he CAN THINK FOR HIMSELF
In one of the situations, "Boiling Point" is written about. Which is "coming to a country near you"

[alarimer]

100. Why would he have to take action?

Just "following orders" like the good Nazis?
But if the government was using the police to murder its own citizens (and this has happened from time to time), why don't "good" cops stand up and not allow it to happen? In other words, just simply refuse to do it. Losing a job is far preferable to killing citizens who have every right to protest.

[tkmorris]

48. Why do people post this stuff?

I simply cannot imagine ever "announcing" my departure from a forum.

[Lerkfish]

66. having been guilty of it myself, early on...I think its a combination of

things.
1. you want people to notice you've left. If you just leave quietly, no one knows, and that doesn't satisfy your inner narcissist.
2. it lets you pick an issue to be a martyr about: you think the "seriousness" of your announcment to leave will garner attention to the issue that it deserves, of your point of view, of course.
3. It makes you feel "principled", but it doesn't really advance any principle for anyone else, just your own sense of it.
4. It can be a final "FU" to people you feel have wronged you.

any or all of the above, I imagine.

but, like I said, I've been guilty of it in the past, and in extreme self retrospection came to the above list. Not always good to face that in yourself you're not proud of.
Hopefully, I'm a better person now, for understanding my motivations better.

Unless I miss my guess, southerndem will read and reread this thread over and over the next few days, like returning to scene of the crime.

HI, SD! I understand where you're coming from in you actions, but be apprised, as I"ve found out, this accomplishes not what you intended.

[tkmorris]

93. Wow Lerk

I must say, I admire you ability to examine your actions and your motives and actually reach an uncomfortable conclusion. That seems such a rarity these days.

Not only that, but posting publicly that you had done such a thing, that takes humility as well.

Your example forces me to admit that part of the reason that I would not post such an announcement is the fear that no one would notice or care. I wish I could say that I am somehow too superior to be a Drama Queen about things, but I think the real reasons are not so admirable as I previously thought.

SD I can recall disagreeing with you on many occasions but honestly I'd rather you stayed. At least don't leave like this. Cool down for a few days, then come on back.

[spacelady]

96. Lerkfish, what an awesome introspection, kudos to you......and I am

saying that in the spirit of having those second thoughts and recognizing that the more I am here, the more I learn. Now, In my own introspective analysis, some people have the gift of communicating and some have to work on it. And then there are those who have an agenda and will try to push it. Whether any of these contributors will succeed depends on their presentation.

[PhilipShore]

50. Can you or anyone else recommend a Private Investigator for me in Miami?

I am not a lawyer, but I sued and got a favorable ruling in the Federal Appeals court the eleventh circuit, against some parties and I need a PI to assist me. I hired one PI-- but he screwed up-- after I hired him to help me. Most of the parties-- I later learned-- and their lawyers are very well connected Republicans, one of whom is even the lawyer for one of the largest campaign contributors for the Republicans in Miami.

The recent ruling says:

Plaintiff (myself) seeks to attack the stipulation agreement which he believes rewrote Party A’s Will to deprive him of any funds that Party A intended to leave him and which he argues is void due to the failings of Party B. We need not decide whether we are barred from reviewing the agreement by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine or the statute of limitations. It is sufficient to note that, to the extent plaintiff was wronged Party C is not the offending party. The agreement was between Party D and Party E (It was also signed by Party B on behalf of Plaintiff and Parties F,G, H) Party C merely signed a form that acknowledged that it was being appointed….for the reformed Will… and agreed to follow the directions given in the agreement.. Party C is not the one that negotiated the agreement nor did it have any obligation to plaintiff....It is not Party C who has harmed Plaintiff...

[Mr_Spock]

53. You said DU was becoming a "Fundamentalist" website.

I think if you kept your rhetoric to the point of the inappropriate remarks and unnecessary violence, you may have fared better.

[Raine]

54. Whatever...

:boring:

[DistressedAmerican]

57. delete

[Bunny]

59. Haha! Didn't get to laugh your ass off when the indictments came

down, did ya? :rofl: See ya - wouldn't want to be ya!

(Sorry, that last sentence contained as much maturity as your OP.)

[bbinacan]

63. I'm new and miss your point.

What are you saying? Thanks in advance.

[Bunny]

68. You had to be there.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

69. You should be able to ascertain from this thread that....

...the OP had a rather interesting posting history on DU on a number of subjects.

[Lerkfish]

75. truly. I've been on the opposite end of the OP in a few threads,

and he simply accused me of being less than worthy to talk to.

I was most annoyed by his stand supporting tasers

"interesting posting history" is very apt description.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

78. I have also learned to be more understated on DU. :-)

[Bunny]

87. Why? Did you swear at him?

He doesn't TOLERATE profanity!!!

:rofl:

[bbinacan]

82. I understand that and I

guess I was wondering what the whole thing was about.

[bahrbearian]

102. You mean like looking down at "Civilians"

[opiate69]

67. ...

[tx_dem41]

71. SD...please take time off and reconsider. We need your voice here

and your unique perspective that is rare on DU.

I have always appreciated your posts, and eagerly await your return.

[Catherine Vincent]

77. We?

Speak for yourself.

[tx_dem41]

85. I am...that's why my name appears by the post.

There are several posters here that have agreed or at least appreciated his posts here in the past. I don't want to live in an echo chamber. Do you?

[HardWorkingDem]

95. I'm with you 100 percent....

and thought that is what is supposed to be one of the great things about being a Democrat: that we are the truly inclusive party.

[tx_dem41]

99. Sadly, it appears that many are afraid to hear even slightly different..

viewpoints. I wish they could be more assured of theirs, so that they wouldn't be afraid to have them challenged.

[GirlinContempt]

108. Oh, sort of like

the OP when he called out people with different views than his own?
That kind of 'scared'?

[EFerrari]

109. I think you must be reading a different site.

DU has a wonderful capacity for difference that is rare, indeed.

[tx_dem41]

116. Yep...its on wonderful display on this thread.

:eyes:

[opiate69]

112. I personally love to have my opinions challenged..

What I can't stand, though, are these attention-whoring, "woe-is-me" martyr posts people feel obligated to make upon leaving.. they strike me as particularly immature.

[QC]

101. But...but...but...he is IMPURE! He must be purged

in the name of the Glorious Latté Revolution!

Seriously, though, I think a lot of people here would be perfectly happy with an echo chamber. The narrowness of the range of acceptable opinion here is not much different than what one would find on a right wing and/or religious site. If I thought that DU were in any way representative of the Democratic Party, I would truly despair for the future of our party and our nation.

[tx_dem41]

104. I believe the range, acceptable to many here, is exactly as narrow.

Hey, QC :hi:

Always good to see you here.

[Catherine Vincent]

115. Imo, those posters are trolls.

[shanti]

73. buh bye

:shrug:

[Rainscents]

94. What happened? Did I miss something?

I'm lost!

[AspenRose]

107. See post 60

eom

[spacelady]

105. Gee SouthernDem2004, this is your most popular thread yet!

[jsamuel]

111. it didn't "might question DU" it DID attack DU, and labeled everyone

here as violent. That was wrong and it should get locked.

Those were statements, not questions.

[EFerrari]

114. You know and I know this is an over reaction.

It's cool. I have them all the time. It's not fun, for sure.

I hope you reconsider.

Be well, SouthernDem2004

[Moderator]

119. Locking

Continuation of another locked thread.