Let's try this again - this time with *no* thread title

[Stinky The Clown]

To the extent that any elected official actually gives a shit about you, you need to be forceful in making clear what you want from them. Keep in mind they, in theory, work for you. They owe you, not the other way around. When they do what you want, consider that not laudatory, but expected; simply a grade of "acceptable". When they go against your wishes, you need to let them know forcefully. That's your job as a citizen.

Your elected rep works long hours? So what? That's part of the job.

Your elected rep has a lot on his plate? So what? If he didn't, why would we need him?

Your elected rep has people saying not nice things about him? Tough beans. It comes with the territory. Half the people, on average, didn't even vote for him.

The pressure might make him quit? Maybe that's for the best.

Being a fan of someone's personality leads to bubbles and echo chambers.

Action talks. Bullshit walks.

Support concepts and principles and policy.

Not people.

[Individualist]

1. Enthusiastic K&R.

[tekisui]

2. I am with you.

Push or pull people to the right position, based on sound and firm principle. Support the person as they move towards that position. When they are moving away, give them hell.

[Hutzpa]

5. Push or pull people to the right?

what has gotten into you guys tonight.

[Stinky The Clown]

8. Noboday said "to the right" .... but nice try.

[Hutzpa]

14. Here

Push or pull people to the right position,

what's that suppose to mean?

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

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

[Hutzpa]

28. Explain yourself

instead of being abusive.

[tekisui]

33. The word right means correct in that sentence.

But, I think you know that.

Did that explanation help?

[Hutzpa]

61. Gotta becareful how one uses 'RIGHT' these days.

Just saying.

[donco6]

64. Yeah. Sure. We'll get right on that.

"Right" as in "quickly".

[PavePusher]

93. Ease up on the "P.C." pills.

You're over-dosing.

[girl gone mad]

121. Can I buy you a dictionary?

You seem to have issues with English usage.

[Jakes Progress]

94. He knew that. But misdirection

and thread hijacking are all people can do with they have no real point.

[rhett o rick]

132. Agree. I suggest the alert button for those that consistantly do it. nm

[Individualist]

24. Let me explain it to you...

Use your cursor to click on this link - http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/right then read definitions 1 through 12 VERY carefully.

[donco6]

44. Seriously?

That's where you're going with this?

Pathetic. But it might work.

[Hutzpa]

47. It's called INCEPTION.

:think:

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

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

[inna]

52. it's called malicious misrepresentation

[Hutzpa]

58. I see it as nipping BS in the butt. n/t

[Dr.Phool]

154. You could always go find another thread to infest.

Some place where your remarkable talents are appreciated.

[Tansy_Gold]

172. Actually, the CORRECT phrase is "nip it in the bud"

That thing about glass houses and all that? You might wanta keep that in mind. . . . .

Just sayin'.




Tansy Gold, NTY

[Name removed]

186. Deleted message

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

[tekisui]

214. What BS? Your moratorium on the word 'right'?

[tekisui]

56. Cute, isn't it?

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

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

[Hutzpa]

68. Then you have no idea how to win

there is nothing wrong with being a DK kind of politician, the problem with that is how much stuff can you get done?

I am not trying to get this thread lock, the OP started this topic on personality attack, which tells me that the OP is

quite comfortable with people tarnishing the personality of a seating Democratic President.

[donco6]

76. Ah . . . "winning".

I see.

Good luck with that.

[Tansy_Gold]

173. Excuse me, but that's "sitting" Democratic President.

Not "seating."


But you knew that, didn't you?




TG, NTY

[spiritual_gunfighter]

193. You need to try reading before you comment

Show me where in the OP the word President is even used?

[sabrina 1]

200. Win what? Bush won, a lot by his standards. But did

the country win anything with this winner in the WH? Sometimes winning can be losing as we surely have learned by now.

Since you brought it up, a DK presidency would be a real winner for the American people. We are not advanced enough as a nation to choose such a leader, yet. Hopefully we'll get there if we keep working on it, other countries have.

[Swamp Rat]

203. How do we win the war against BP in the Gulf of Mexico?

BP is killing Americans and our way of life.

Help us Hutzpa!

[OnyxCollie]

118. Amphiboly

Amphiboly: An element of the argument has two equally valid interpretations, which are not clearly distinguished in the argument, and in which one is carefully substituted for the other without the reader's noticing.

You rely on fallacies. You got nothin'.

[Enthusiast]

134. "Right" as in correct. Not right wing. nt

[pattmarty]

158. Jesusfuckingchrist!!!! What has DU become? We REALLY are fucked.

[Catherina]

164. Intentional misreprentation. For shame. On to ignore with you n/t

[spiritual_gunfighter]

195. Congratulations

You are now the second person I have ever ignored on DU.

[sabrina 1]

198. As opposed to 'wrong' postition? Seems easy enough

to understand!

[tekisui]

13. Ten into yo?

What has gotten into you?

Not sure who 'you guys' is.

[tblue37]

70. The right (appropriate; correct) POSITION! nt

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

91. Hutzpa, there are only two metaphors appropriate here:

1) Quit digging when the hole is already so deep;
2) Pull your head out.

Just redeem yourself by saying, "my bad." It ain't hard. People will applaud you, maybe even like you.

[rhett o rick]

131. "you guys? What's that suppose to mean? nm

[theFrankFactor]

170. Really? That's how you understand that? Right = CORRECT!!!!! GEEZUZ!

[YOY]

240. Sweet jesus you cannot be that blatantly misleading

I refuse to beleive you are that blatantly mistleading.

You are just not blatantly mistleading...you simply forgot to put in a "sarcasm" sticker...

THAT'S IT!

[Hutzpa]

3. In other words create a tea party kind of pressure

where you attack the individual instead of going after their policies.

You've lost the plot.

Keep digging.

[JBoy]

38. FAIL. I have no idea where you get that from the OP.

[Hutzpa]

40. Take a look at the OP's other locked threads and then come back

and report to me.

[JBoy]

45. I've only read this thread.

OP says:

Action talks. Bullshit walks.

Support concepts and principles and policy.

To which you reply:

In other words create a tea party kind of pressure
where you attack the individual instead of going after their policies.

Explain to me how that's not a reading comprehension problem on your part.

[Hutzpa]

Are you sure you read this thread or you are just nit picking

did you miss this part from the OP

To the extent that any elected official actually gives a shit about you, you need to be forceful in making clear what you want from them. Keep in mind they, in theory, work for you. They owe you, not the other way around. When they do what you want, consider that not laudatory, but expected; simply a grade of "acceptable". When they go against your wishes, you need to let them know forcefully. That's your job as a citizen.

I'm just wondering what does that mean, forcefully.

I read that as insinuating teabagging, but you are entitled to your own understanding just as I am, ARE WE COOL ON THAT!

[donco6]

62. We've often been encouraged to call our Congresscritters -

RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!1!!1!!111

I see that as pretty forceful. So, yeah, I'm cool on that.

But I'll check to make sure my signs are spelled right first. (That's "right" as in "correctly.")

[girl gone mad]

120. Definitions of forcefully on the Web:

# In a forceful manner; vigorously; powerfully

# forceful - characterized by or full of force or strength (often but not necessarily physical); "a forceful speaker"; "a forceful personality"; "forceful measures"; "a forceful plan for peace"

# emphatic: forceful and definite in expression or action; "the document contained a particularly emphatic guarantee of religious liberty"

# forceful - With assertive force; powerful


Definitions of stretch on the web:

# occupy a large, elongated area; "The park stretched beneath the train line"

# become longer by being stretched and pulled; "The fabric stretches"

# a large and unbroken expanse or distance; "a stretch of highway"; "a stretch of clear water"

# extend the scope or meaning of; often unduly; "Stretch the limits"; "stretch my patience"; "stretch the imagination"

[Crunchy Frog]

189. I'm absolutely certain that he means throwing bricks through their headquarters windows

and sending them death threats. What else could he possibly be implying? :shrug:

[Dinger]

144. *SNAP*

Good catch:)

[McCamy Taylor]

152. Being locked is not necessarily an indicator of poor quality. Just means it made someone mad.

[Jakes Progress]

169. Guess I have to edit this out.

I replied with an observation about what is happening to DU. When I did that last night, I got deleted.

Sorry. Guess I'm not long for this place.

[rhett o rick]

137. Do you have something to say or just here to snark? nm

[pundaint]

162. Way to completely misinterpret the OP. The careful reader is aware that the approach being

advocated is to ignore the individual, and judge only the actions. For instance my Rep, has voted with the corporations, and for war, while never bringing any pro-People bit of legislation to the floor in over 20 years. He calls himself a Democrat, but it's manifestly clear that he's working for himself. He needs to be fired for America to progress. Those of you not in MA 2 will need to do your own evaluations. Good government requires an alert and informed citizenry, willing to act.

[WillyT]

4. Exactly !!! - HUGE K & R !!!

They work for us!

Well... in theory anyway...

:kick:

[demmiblue]

6. K&R!

Third time a charm? :rofl:

:yourock:

[Webster Green]

7. I tend to agree

IBTFL?2.0

[nc4bo]

9. K&R. nt

[treestar]

10. You've only got one vote

They can't work for YOU, but have to work for US, there is a big diversity of opinion there.

Who can you vote for other than yourself? There's no one who agrees with you all the time.

[Stinky The Clown]

12. You recognize that is a bogus postulation, right?

Only a moron is intractable on 100% of his own "issues".

I *wanted* single payer universal health care. I would have settled for some less complete "public option". I got crap.

I *wanted* Gitmo closed. I still do. NMo middle ground.

I *wanted* us out of Iraq. I would have settled for a one year timeline.

Etc.

[treestar]

21. I want a lot of things I am not getting too

But as one of some 60 million voters, I don't expect all or even most of it.

I just don't see that are working for "me" or even just those who voted for them. Once elected, they work for an entire population that includes everyone you disagree with.

[sabrina 1]

207. "Once elected, they work for an entire population that includes everyone you disagree with. "

They do? Can you point out anything the Republicans did for eight years for the entire population? I know they satisfied those who voted for them, but as someone who didn't, I can say without a doubt I got everything I was opposed to.

If you mean that Democrats suddenly, after election, feel compelled to represent Republicans' ideas on issues, then that's the problem the OP is talking about, isn't it?

Representing what is best for the entire country is what they should be doing. And that's why we support the Democratic Party. Eg, the Glen Beck contingency doesn't know what is best for themselves or the country. So it's up to the leadership to know that and to implement it and Beck and his moronic followers will then benefit also despite themselves.

Your argument makes no sense, as it implies NOT representing the entire population, but 'catering' to a part of the population whose ideas the country, when it elected Dems, rejected, wisely I thought.

[Enthusiast]

221. +1, again.

What you said should have been clear to start with. But....

[sabrina 1]

246. I know, it should have been

but apparently things are becoming less and less clear :-)

[Hutzpa]

26. So

where were you when the republicans where running the fucking country to ground? huh :shrug:

You have a President who is working his hardest to put things right and all you can come up

with is this shit about single payer, gitmo and Iraq, what about the blue dogs Democrats that

are constantly standing in the way, what about the the republicans that are voting no on everything,

I guess they don't count right?

[Stinky The Clown]

41. I don't think he's working in my best interests - or yours, for that matter.

Leaders lead.

Yanno?

[treestar]

82. If Clark had been the nominee and then won

I'd be supporting him now, too.

My guess is so would most of the people who you are slamming with "fans" and "cult of personality" and worship and cheerleading, etc.

[Hutzpa]

85. Because some people chose not to critique

this President they are considered cheerleaders, dang! I thought insinuating cheer leading is outlawed,
but what do I know.

[Swamp Rat]

196. I chose not to critique Obama for two years, but then BP happened

:shrug:

[FrenchieCat]

11. I remember so well when we both supported Wes Clark......you and I....

long after the primaries were over....
To the point that some might have accused us of being "fans"....or whatever.

There wasn't "action" in that whole situation much at some point,
but certainly many of his faithful supporters remained.

And I agree, Bullshit walks.

[Stinky The Clown]

15. Wait, lemme post a picture of myself in a pink tutu.

[FrenchieCat]

20. Bullshit walks....

but does it dance as well? :rofl:

[Stinky The Clown]

27. How clever

:eyes:

[FrenchieCat]

31. It will be our "secret".......

Go on now. You've got an audience,
and we are begging for more!

[NJmaverick]

32. Didn't you say this about Wes Clark?

"Oh well, I still love the guy."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8202920&mesg_id=8205773

[FrenchieCat]

39. It's all good! Cause you've got to remember

it's whatever floats the boat! :patriot:

[Stinky The Clown]

49. Yes it is. Including STEALING personal pictures you have no right to use to make some silly point

[Stinky The Clown]

48. Yeah I do. But you missed the thread I put up when supported the other candidate in the primaries

I was pretty vocal about my displeasure at that. But that's okay. I know you're busy elsewhere.

By the way, I'm flattered that a big time poster like you knows all the posts by little old me and knows where to get them. Or where you coached on that by someone we might both know?

[NJmaverick]

53. No matter, maybe it's just me but someone who openly states they

"love" their politicians shouldn't be trying to lecture us on "Being a fan of someone's personality"


PS- You should try a thing called Google, because when you denied Frenchie's claims, it was all that was required to find out who was right.

[Hutzpa]

57. Bingo. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

63. I'm amazed at your cleverity

What about the OP? All you seem to be doing is trying to get in a dig at *me*. Why not refute the OP?

OoooOOOooooOOOOO ... I denied the picture thief's claims. I'm not big on people who steal.

[NJmaverick]

66. I already refuted your OP in post #25

[Swamp Rat]

199. Nope

But it was one of your best efforts so far.

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

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

[donco6]

90. No effing kidding.

Pretty disgusting.

[Hutzpa]

97. Just as disgusting on those trying to piss on Obama every chance they get. n/t

[Swamp Rat]

197. Who are "those" who "try to piss on Obama every chance they get?"

I do not see "those" people anywhere. I suppose the Mods are doing their job very well.

[sabrina 1]

208. Where is anyone 'pissing' on Obama? Didn't a majority of

people here vote for him, as they will probably again? I think maybe you are confusing constructive criticism with 'pissing' on a president. It is the duty of citizens to speak up when their elected representatives appear to be making mistakes. Eg, many people were very upset when Obama ended the ban on Offshore Drilling and they said so. Should they have remained quiet about that very bad mistake? We assume presidents have advisers, but they also have constituents, and that is a perfect example of when the president was badly advised and would have been better off listening to those who voted for him.

He's human, people make mistakes all the time. Some of our greatest leaders were very flawed human beings and made many errors in judgement. This a representative Democratcy. No one is king, as Bush wanted to be, and those who care about a leader succeeding should NEVER remain silent when it becomes clear that the s/he is making a mistake. Obama himself predicted that he would need us to keep him grounded.

Do you disagree with Obama about that very fundamental element of our democracy? The people who elect representatives need to be very vigilent about reminding them who they represent. I think he was right about that, do you?

[Yuugal]

110. +1

[inna]

16. Personality politics is a trap. Support principles/policies, not personalities.

[FrenchieCat]

29. Ha-Ha!

I find this entire OP exercise quite humorous.

Not your specific response so much....
just the fact that folks are having amnesia,
as they become self righteous!

This has been quite the show! :rofl:

[inna]

43. I'm glad you're amused. Can you share what's so funny? People need a good laugh these days.

[FrenchieCat]

65. Well......it all started a long time ago....

http://216.158.54.197/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2136524&mesg_id=2136524

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2882711

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2882711&mesg_id=2882950

http://www.democraticunderground.org/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6431438

[donco6]

72. I don't get it.

Here's the first link:

What is wrong with the Democrats today? Really. This is a serious post

I'm not looking for drive-by platitudes or drive-by "spineless" type answers.

What, really, is wrong with today's Democratic Party.

It seems to me, in very broad brush, pretty much all of our elected representatives are doing what might be expected of them. I don't see a lot of surprizes. A few, to be sure, but not a lot. Just as an example, Leahy's vote on Roberts was a surprize.

But in the larger sense, what's wrong with the party?

In my view, it comes down to one word - 'leadership'.

We don't have a leader.

(Howard Dean is DNC chair. By definition, that isn't the party leader. I think he's been doing a great job is his new role and this is NOT a hit against him.)

Second link:

Kosovo, Wesley Clark, US 2008 elections
Today, as most you know by now, Kosovo declared itself independent of Serbia.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23203607 /

This thread is not to discuss that. Rather, it is about Wesley Clark.

Do you think this will lead to him being a go-to guy in the news? If that happens, will it raise his profile again? All I've seen of him of late is at one Clinton campaign event (he endorsed her a while ago).

I wanted a Clark presidency way back when. My dream ticket this go-round is Gore/Clark.

Will a higher profile Wesley Clark give him a chance of being involved in the (now clearly going to happen) Obama administration?

Third link (with post just before for context):

Response to Reply #11
15. 8 years, he'll be 68. You think that's too old? nt

Stinky The Clown (1000+ posts) Mon Feb-18-08 03:17 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Yeah, kinda

Hey, I am a HUGE Clark fan. ***HUGE*** (even after his endorsement of Clinton). But I think that's too old for anyone to run for President (I'm 60).

And the last one:

Obama has DEEPLY disappointed me (re: Wes Clark)

"Rejected" Clark's statements about Captain Combover????????????

"Disavows" Clark's statements about Captain Combover????????????

What a chickenshit, whistle-assed, cowardly, stance.

Clark was one hundred percent right.

How many more people will the campaign throw over the side?

I'm sorry, but this pisses me right the fuck off.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/30/obama-r... /



I don't see anything here that implies Stinky ran a personality cult on Wes Clark, as you've implied. Certainly nothing like we see today in this very thread.

[treestar]

81. "I'm a huge Clark fan" come on

Then calling Obama's supporters "fans?" Not just a little inconsistent or more likely, projection?

And then Obama did not give Clark a job. I see some hanging onto resentment here.

But that's way past it sell-by date. Both Hillary and Clark endorsed Obama. It seems their fans cannot move on even when the actual principals did.

[liberation]

106. Pssst. Clark is and wasn't an "elected official."

I know that sort of nullifies the false dichotomy you guys thought of ever so cleverly.

Although I must say this subthread is like some weird honeypot of the usual suspects and their projection exercises. LOL

[Fire1]

184. And you sorta 'missed the point!' Duh. n/t

[Fire1]

183. OH! *SNAP* n/t

[Catherina]

167. Stinky is not the one who does personality cults. Au contraire n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

73. I'm flattered that you think so much of my posts that you bookmark them.

Are you a "fan"? C'mon, you can admit it to me. You're a fan, right?

You forgot the money thread, though.

[FrenchieCat]

79. I'm a fan of google.......

and that's about it.

What I am not a fan of is a bunch of bullshit!

[depakid]

104. "What I am not a fan of is a bunch of bullshit!"

I think that sums up rather succinctly what a LOT of us think about statements coming from politicians (in both parties) that don't reflect the actual policies promoted (or the intent behind them).

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

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

[Hutzpa]

75. Talk about contradicting ones self.

[FrenchieCat]

78. You're not supposed to notice that when we had no leader,

everyone wanted one, and knows who would be the perfect person to be that leader.
Than once we have a leader, we don't need one, now it's about policies and issues,
not who leaders; who needs personalities....whatever that means?

Bullshit walks.
History talks.

Means that half of the time, we don't know what we want,
we just know we don't want what we have, whatever that is.

I say we work hard to keep a majority and keep on keeping on...
certainly, we won't all be happy all of the time, but hell better that,
than being unhappy about real shit that can't ever change all of the time.

[Hutzpa]

80. Working hard is coming to a theatre near you soon. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

84. I never said we don't *need* a leader

You're reaching.

[Radical Activist]

77. LOL Busted.

[treestar]

30. Some person has to be elected!

And it's not a personality cult to vote for a person! Who would you vote for? No one is eligible as concepts can't hold an office.

Beyond weirdness here.

[FrenchieCat]

36. I'm just amazed how little substance we really get into......

even those who "claim" to be all about it,
and nothing but.

We are 4 months away from the difference between day to night,
and somehow personality is supposed to be a relevant topic
of activism at a time when going into the voting booth and voting
is what should be relevant.

But hey, like poster said....whatever floats one's boat.....
but in the end, we need some fucking action....
I'm thinking like voting to save our fucking lives!

[Swamp Rat]

201. So, show me how voting will help us save the Gulf of Mexico and our way of life

Millions of us are wondering. :shrug:

[Hutzpa]

35. You see the ideology is to start throwing this bullshit

out there so that the not so bright can jump on their personality bullshit about Obama.

Thats where this is heading.

Nip this shit in the bud now before it gets out of hand.

:banghead:

[Hannah Bell]

17. kr. that's what they tell *us* to do, anyway.

[Tailormyst]

18. Right on

[Autumn]

19. K/R again n/t

[cordelia]

22. K&R

[NJmaverick]

25. You got one thing right and two things wrong

you are right it's about action. Then you push for the antithesis of action by pushing the idea that the most important thing is "Support concepts and principles and policy." Concepts don't get people badly needed medical care. Principles don't get needed money to green energy initiatives (or raise fleet MPG) and concepts don't save a nation's economy that is in a tailspin.

Finally you try to prop up your position of putting ideals ahead of helping people by incorrectly suggesting it's about "Being a fan of someone's personality"

As for the rest, I think it's a good example of unrealistic expectations.

[LoZoccolo]

34. I heard that they're most likely to work hard for the constituents who

have a belligerent attitude and are constantly threatening not to vote for them. Like they're willing to sacrifice the votes of two normal people for just one of the malcontents, because that's just smart politics. So keep complaining forcefully; they won't write you off or anything.

[Oregone]

42. "Like they're willing to sacrifice the votes of two normal people for just one of the malcontents"

If the "malcontents" describe those center-right independents and Republicans, thats a pretty accurate assessment.

[LoZoccolo]

46. I think you understand that constant use of an "ultimatum" strategy is not effective.

They'll never know if they'll get anything out of serving these constituents because who knows what the next ultimatum will be. The ones pursuing a reciprocal or "tit-for-tat" strategy will more likely get what they want.

[Fumesucker]

51. Absolutely, it's the people who say "I'll vote for you no matter *what* you do"..

Who get what they want out of politicians..



















:sarcasm:

[LoZoccolo]

55. You're locked into a vote/no vote mentality.

There's way more to politics than that.

[Fumesucker]

59. What does a politician want out of you?

Your vote and your money.

I'm related to some people that are politically connected, I'd rather swim in a septic tank than do what they do.

[LoZoccolo]

69. You don't get it. n/t

[Fumesucker]

74. There are many things it's better *not* to get..

2 girls 1 cup, for instance..

But I'd rather get that than what many politicians do for power and influence.

[Oregone]

54. Nor is the "walk over me and let it be" strategy

Apparently, nothing works when politicians don't give a fuck about you.

[countingbluecars]

37. I support the president.

I even admire him and his family. If that makes me a "fan" so be it. It doesn't keep me from doing my "job as a citizen". But thanks for the lecture.

[Swamp Rat]

202. Most of us do, but we sure could use some help on the Gulf Coast

BP is killing us as I type this.

[jgraz]

67. Locking

Threads without titles are not allowed on DU.

:P :hi:

[LWolf]

71. Another k&r

for concepts and principles and policy.

[Lorien]

83. A simple, common sense sentiment that you would think any believer in Democracy

would get behind, yet somehow there are those here who take offense and actually argue against the points made in the OP. I'd like to say that I'm amazed, but nothing down here in the Rabbit Hole surprises me much anymore.

[Stinky The Clown]

86. Oh yeah .....

..... a usual and common occurrence. And then it degenerates to sophomoric gotchas and self congratulatory high fives.

[Hutzpa]

95. Your intention was made known from your first two threads

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8647626

and

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8647341

I am challenging your premise of worshiping Obama, because some chose to give Obama time to
fix the mess he inherited they are considered cheer leaders and worshipers.

[Warren Stupidity]

99. Funny thing: no mention of Obama.

In the abstract - ignoring your unsubstantiated assertion that this thread is about Obama - do you agree or disagree that "political personality worship is okay if that floats your boat, but there must be action"? In other words, is politics about the 'leader' or 'the policies'? In some other words, what the heck is the point of all this politicking?

[JNelson6563]

139. Projection if ever I've seen it.

Coming from one in mighty need of attention to top it off. The complete package as it were.

Julie

[ihavenobias]

127. +1

Absurd and incredibly disappointing. I'll leave it at that.

[Stinky The Clown]

87. I'm going to back out of this thread. Please don't cause it to be locked.

There is the usual tactic afoot (which I admit I fell into) to get a thread locked. I'm going to shut my mouth and hopefully allow this thread to stand.

[donco6]

92. Agreed. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

96. Well this is pretty sad

In order to keep a discussion going, we have to stop having the discussion. WTF?

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

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

[girl gone mad]

119. The best advice I can give you...

put them on ignore.

They do the same thing in every thread they deem "unacceptably critical" to the PTB. Their goal is to start flame wars. Ignore them, because they never have anything worthwhile to contribute.

[Jamastiene]

124. + 999 zillion

It all boils down to saying you are not going to reward their hijacking attempt with a reply and get mired down in the back and forth that leads nowhere.

It's a tactic some posters use to derail and hijack threads and it cannot work if you don't even see them. There is no need to reward their behavior. Ignore puts you in control of the situation.

[Dr.Phool]

150. I went about 6 years without an ignore list.

I'm using it quite a bit now.

I got tired of their hijacking and disrupting. I keep a couple alive for sheer entertainment value, but they're even starting to wear that out.

[Catherina]

168. +1000 My ignore list is a mile wide because of that dishonest tactic n/t

[Individualist]

219. Agree and suggest everyone follow autumn's mother's advice...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8608296&mesg_id=8608862

[JohnnyLib2]

160. Good for you.

Lots of support; way too much scurrying from the main points by a few. :banghead:

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

89. Oops. Delete.nt.

[varelse]

100. I agree with the OP

"Support concepts and principles and policy."

That resonates with me. The stalking, trolling, and personal attacks I see in the thread do not; I see them as pathetic and deplorable.

[Swamp Rat]

101. The Cult of Personality wants free-thinking Humans to shut up

Weak-minded people, who require constant affirmation and someone to tell them how to think, do not like their idols to be criticized under any circumstances, even constructive criticism.

I was like that at one time, when I was a child. For example, if you said, "Jimi Hendrix is a sloppy guitar player" I would get very mad at you. Upon reflection, and after decades of guitar playing, I now realize he was, indeed, technically a sloppy player. However, I still think he is one of the best rock guitar players of all time.

The need for a social structure controlled by dynamic leaders is often taken to absurd heights by many adults, resulting in the loss of control they so desperately need - quite ironic.

[DeSwiss]

105. Although he had another target in mind, I think this is applicable here as well....

"The church hates a thinker precisely for the same reason a robber dislikes a sheriff, or a thief despises the prosecuting witness. Tyranny likes courtiers, flatterers, followers, fawners, and superstition wants believers, disciples, zealots, hypocrites, and subscribers. The church demands worship -- the very thing that man should give to no being, human or divine.

To worship another is to degrade yourself. Worship is awe and dread and vague fear and blind hope. It is the spirit of worship that elevates the one and degrades the many; that builds palaces for robbers, erects monuments to crime, and forges manacles even for its own hands. The spirit of worship is the spirit of tyranny. The worshiper always regrets that he is not the worshiped.

We should all remember that the intellect has no knees, and that whatever the attitude of the body may be, the brave soul is always found erect. Whoever worships, abdicates. Whoever believes at the command of power, tramples his own individuality beneath his feet, and voluntarily robs himself of all that renders man superior to the brute."

Robert G. Ingersoll

[Swamp Rat]

107. Very good, and we should add to the list of the worshipped:

Free Market Capitalism and the Almighty Dollar.

To tread on this sacred ground in $America$ is a death sentence.

[DeSwiss]

113. And our failure to tread upon it.....

...is a death sentence as well. Although even more ignominiously -- as with a whimper.

- So if we're damned if we do and damned if we don't, we might as well do......

[scarletwoman]

117. Better to die on our feet than live on our knees. nt

[DeSwiss]

153. Exactly. n/t

[Spheric]

157. +1 Sums it up pretty well for me.

[amborin]

126. +100

[ProgressIn2008]

102. I'm with you. K&R.

[DeSwiss]

103. K&R

“Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.” ~ Anon

[emilyg]

108. k/r

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

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

[Swamp Rat]

111. That's okay, others will pick up the spear

:D

[scarletwoman]

114. Your point #2 really nails it.

Their tactics are really clear.

sw

[bvar22]

112. Congratulations, Stinky.

Well Done.
:patriot:

[Nikki Stone1]

115. +1

/

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

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

[Goldstein1984]

122. Elect them for their commitments

Toss them if they don't follow through.

In theory, our "leaders" do what we tell them to do, not the other way around.

[laughingliberal]

123. K & R nt

[amborin]

125. K&R

[William Z. Foster]

128. K and R

Nicely done. Thanks.

[LoZoccolo]

129. "Action talks. Bullshit walks."

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8597849

[Divine Discontent]

130. wonderful OP!

[Enthusiast]

133. That's another one

you got right. Racking up the score.

[Greyhound]

135. K&R, just to piss of the trio that fears discussion. n/t

[rhett o rick]

136. You dont need thread titles, Stinky. nm

[pecwae]

138. Very enthusiastic Knr.

[gleaner]

141. I agree, and it is very well said...

thanks for persevering to get a very important concept across. K&R. And this is what I have been doing with my elected representatives and will continue to do. They should wise up. If they don't have a seat who is going to offer them money for votes and influence they don't have?

[Dinger]

142. K & R # 139

Well said Stinky.

[xchrom]

143. recommend

[MissDeeds]

145. I agree with Stinky

Well said.

K&R

:kick:

[WonderGrunion]

146. Being a fan of someone's personality leads to bubbles and echo chambers.

Does that apply to thread posters on DU as well?

After all, I see a lot of recs for this thread.

[Dr Morbius]

147. Concepts and principles and policy are all well and good.

But concepts and principles and policy do not govern. People govern. I tend to think some people are untrustworthy and some people are trustworthy. I tend to put some trust in the latter; I don't think that makes me a fool. I'd prefer, in fact, to trust specific individuals rather than institutions. I trust my wife, too. I suppose that means I live my life in a bubble.

A refusal to trust anyone, or a refusal to put one's trust in government, is in my mind myopic. Sure, it is foolish to trust blindly, and never would I recommend blind trust. But when I think someone has earned my trust, at least to some degree, I'm somehow a bad person for actually trusting him?

I trust Joe Biden almost completely. I trust Nancy Pelosi almost as much. I trust Barack Obama more than any President I can recall, and I largely trust him. I sort of trust Al Franken. I completely distrust John Boehner, Lindsay Graham, and Dick Cheney. This makes a fool? I completely agree that one needs to hold one's elected officials to a high standard and one needs to communicate one's displeasure when one feels it. I completely disagree that my elected officials have some kind of responsibility to do "what I want." I vote my country's interests, not my own personal interests. I consider that MY job as a citizen.

You go ahead and refuse to ever trust people. Whatever. I hope you aren't a very sad and lonely person when you get old, and find that - surprise - part of life involves trusting people. Part of liberalism involves trusting people.

Let the flaming begin, for I disagree.

[Robert DAH Bruce]

148. That merited a re-post?

:shrug:

[Name removed]

149. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

204. Deleted message

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

[LostinVA]

232. hahahahaha

[YOY]

212. You know...your very existence is proof of certain things. It's not even cute anymore.

Not even remotely... But hey!!! Thanks for being you! You're the best around! Nothing gonna ever keep you down!

[Name removed]

242. Deleted message

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

[Dr.Phool]

151. Kick and Rec.

Why do you hate Amerika Stinky?

[Unca Jim]

155. Sure...

...but they also need positive reinforcement and a sense of appreciation for the hard work they do.

I'd hate to be an employee of yours.

[newtothegame]

156. Concepts, principles & policy don't make history though.

Minorities being elected President do.

[mochajava666]

159. Well said again, Stinky

Rec.

[demmiblue]

161. Wow, this is still here!

Again, good post!

(I wish people would stop engaging those who simply want a thread locked.)

[sufrommich]

163. A thinly veiled OP thread complaining about "the cult of

personality" that supposedly exist here on DU. Followed by 160 posts complaining about the police state that supposedly exist here on DU. By a poster who had 2 threads locked which were basically the same as this thread. Irony is ironic.

[Catherina]

206. Sucks trying to enforce maintain message discipine these days n/t

[YOY]

213. So are people who have left wing avatars and RW mentalities...

Just look around...craziest thing here I tell you.

[bear425]

165. i love this post, but with one change...

I would love if the last line said: and the people who work for them. After all, those people deserve our support.

Great post!

[Catherina]

166. Rec'd Stinky. "Support concepts and principles and policy." n/t

[Jakes Progress]

171. Highly recommended. Please note

the large number of recs and the large number of positive replies. This post reflects the attitudes and beliefs of the majority of DU. A few vocal dissenters can try to clog or misdirect or lock the thread, but this is where DU belongs.

[pleah]

174. K&R

[Clear Blue Sky]

175. Well said!

[Eyerish]

176. K&R

Well said Stinky!

[racaulk]

177. K&R!

Excellent post, Stinky! :thumbsup:

[Doctor_J]

178. Well-reasoned, and naive

Your rep just got a $10,000 from the NRA and another one from Exxon. who do you think she's going to vote on behalf of?

rec, nevertheless

[Swamp Rat]

218. Au contraire: Stinky The Clown is precisely addressing naïveté

Your example of thieving politicians supports this thesis perfectly.

We should support political personalities only to the extent they represent us.

Right now, I am not represented in Washington DC. In fact, I have been left to die for the second time now: Katrina and BP.

[Doctor_J]

235. But your rep will get re-elected anyway

mine won't because he's a Dem in a very red area, but the guy who will replace him is even WORSE.

[Swamp Rat]

241. I'm not represented at all

David "Diapers" Vitter, "Typhoid" Mary Landrieu, and Bobby "Volcano" Jindal do not represent me at all.

Rep. Steve Scalise, a total scumbag of the lowest order, and the rest of the repuke reps are are assholes, with the best of the lot being the republican Anh Cao, and the only democrat Bobby Melancon.

So no, my non-existent rep has never been elected to office in the State of Louisiana. I'd vote for Huey P. Long's ghost if I could.

[BrklynLiberal]

179. K & R

[Drops_not_Dope]

180. Okay Stinky The Clown

but what if your rep doesn't protect and defend the constitution and the voters aren't told?

Valid question.

[Bluenorthwest]

181. Most excellent post

And the thread very useful for looking at the nature and the quality of the posts in support of the OP and those who felt differently.

[bvar22]

182. +203 recs

:dem:

[Swamp Rat]

217. +251

[demmiblue]

237. +320 (according to the Top Tens)

:bounce:

[rateyes]

185. Support concepts, principles, and policy. Not people. Not

party.

[LiberalLovinLug]

191. That's the main point of the OP

I don't know how others have misinterpreted that.

Its time to shake off the cult of personality, and focus on progressive principles.

[rateyes]

205. I agree. IMO, the Democratic Party has abandoned much

of its principles. I'm through voting for Dems just because they call themselves Dems.

[reflection]

187. Hearty k/r. Nicely said. n/t

[defendandprotect]

188. Exactly . . . concepts over personality ... they're all politicians . . .

Although I will say that those like Kucinich and Grayson and others who do care --

and who quickly become the "enemy" here -- have a rough road --

easier to be on the side of power!!

[Kermitt Gribble]

190. Excellent, Stinky! K&R!

There should never be such a thing as loyalty to a politician or even a political party. If a particular politician or party represents YOU, then they earn your vote. If not, time to find someone who will represent YOU. "That's your job as a citizen."

I'd like to add, the word 'leader' should never be used when referencing an elected official (except for majority leader, et al, within a party). WE are the leaders, they are our representatives.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

192. "Modertation in princple is always a vice." Tom Paine

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." John Quincy Adams

[Uncle Joe]

194. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Stinky.:thumbsup:

[avaistheone1]

209. Strongly agree.

:thumbsup:


:kick:

[tango-tee]

210. That's a masterpiece, Stinky!

Too bad I can only recommend once! Bravo!

[closeupready]

211. wow. Can I kiss you? lol

Way to go, Stinky. :yourock:

[truedelphi]

215. Does anyone at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue think they are working for us?

Geithner has told at least one Congress person that "Your government" not his, or "ours" but "hers" did not have the ability to properly respond to the Economic crisis without the TARP.

Rahm told Obama that we progressives were "retards."

Funny how Pres. Obama can fire McC for making harsh statements about him, but not fire Rahn for making harsh statements about us.

[havocmom]

216. still gonna agree with ya on this, no matter what you put in subject line

:thumbsup:

[lsewpershad]

220. Totally agree

We need to get rid of all of those who are working for coporations and filthy rich. Ben Nelson anyone?

[theFrankFactor]

222. 265 Recs! Not too shabby! Not everyone is a mor.... I mean, silly bugger.

[liberal N proud]

223. No heroes here

I have no heroes whatsoever. Heroes just disappoint.

[mike_c]

224. agreed, 100 percent, and shame on the DUers at the top of the thread...

...who deliberately obfuscated your clear and succinct expression!

[autorank]

225. k*r I like voting for this. Anytime dude! n/t

[Catherina]

226. Looks like you hit a home run but the responses look like swiss cheese to me

So many ignored posters. So little time.

Looks like you hit this one out of the ballpark.

270 recs? There's hope yet. Rec'd earlier. Congratulations.

[thesquanderer]

227. I have no idea why this message was posted.

Apparently it has something to do with some other thread I didn't read.

I was suckered in by the mysterious title and all the RECs.

By itself, it provided nothing of sufficient value to justify all these RECs, so clearly I've missed something.

But I have learned. If the subject is "untitled" -- skip it.

Unrec, for uninformative headline and minimal intrinsic value.

[Number23]

234. Weird, isn't it??

The number of recs certainly says alot about how strange this place has become.

I think people must just really like the OP. That's the only explanation I can think of.

[Moochy]

244. well that's because the other two versions of the thread

got locked and or deleted because the subject line referenced newly forbidden words.

[bobburgster]

252. I agree with you.

[unapatriciated]

228. k&R

[bobburgster]

229. Have to agree with pattmarty....Jesus christ!!!! ......

I read the initial post, it was good, valid points etc. My initial reaction was that it was not, knock your socks off, 271 recs. worth of an awe inspiring post. Then again, I've been known to allow the obvious to slip right by. So, I proceeded to read through the follow-ups....uh, a mind-numbing debate on the definition of "right", English as a second language interpretation difficulties, and great job opportunities for the moderators. :argh:

[donco6]

248. You should have seen the DELETED messages.

:rofl:

But we mustn't skewer people too hard these days.

[hulka38]

230. A glimpse of reality is a little too sobering for some

[GlennWRECK]

231. Amen Bradah!

Most just can't handle the fact that they are insignificant.

[Number23]

233. Huh??

Is this OP supposed to mean something?? What is this about??

Support concepts and principles and policy.

Not people.

That's some weird stuff right there. I have no idea what that even means.

Tell you what, when "principles and policies" are able to shake hands, kiss babies and campaign, then we'll have a deal. Until then, I think the majority of people will continue to support people as they are the only ones able to implement said "principles and policies??" :shrug: :crazy: :shrug:

Weirdest thing I've seen all week...

[Martin Eden]

236. Our elected Representatives work long hours ...

... but how many of those hours are spent gathering campaign contributions and meeting with lobbyists?

[Agony]

238. John Adams said, our nation is "a nation of laws, not men."

concepts, principal and policy embodied in law.
the statements of principle in the OP seem inarguably fundamental to me!

Thanks Stinky!

[YOY]

239. Goah golly gee whiz! You sure got the Recs Stinky...but some folks sure don't like it!

Could it be that their opinions are not outstandind as majority rules? COULD IT BE???????

Gosh...I just can't say for sure...

[FrenchieCat]

243. It's just one of those things......

It always depends on one's audience.

[donco6]

247. Filmed your last Meetup, eh?

Who held the camera?

[FrenchieCat]

249. I don't hold meetups except for those dealing with directly helping to elect

Democrats.

My priorities are helping our politics move in a leftward realistic direction,
understanding the complexity of the political map,
and the ease in which a rightward corporate media
assists in shaping public opinion against the policies of those
on the left on a daily basis.

I witnessed the 2000 election stolen from underneath us,
and I vowed never to sit by and let that ever happen again.
So that's my focus.

But you should do what you do! :hi:

[donco6]

250. 'K!

:hug:

Meanit!

[YOY]

251. People sure are stupid aren't they Frenchie?

Yup yup! Sure are!

[grantcart]

245. Theoretically your 100% The reality is that people need to have their principles

incarnated into a person for it to have a resonance.

Theoretically people wouldn't vote out of fear and we would have a small conservaitve party as a third party, a large Democratic Party and a Socialist Party competing for 1st and 2nd position.

There is a reason that when you go to check out at the super market there is rack after rack of magazines with identifiable people in all kinds of trouble and no NYT.

Most people don't relate to policy they need people to embody the principle.