Send Us Hatemail ! mailbag@conservativecave.com
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-01-10 07:37 PMSkinner and admins, I don’t think your rule clarifications deal with the core problem here in DU. I greatly appreciate your hard work to make DU a place for decent political discussion. However, I don’t think your rules deal with the major problem here in DU. There are two distinct factions of Democrats here in DU that have major disagreements on policy.As the Republican Party dies off, many conservatives are fleeing to the Democratic Party. Major corporations are smart enough to recognize that owning the Republican Party lock, stock and barrel isn’t enough to guarantee favorable legislation. The corporatists have turned to the Democratic Party for support and are being welcomed by quite a number with open arms (and hands out), especially by the New-Democrats (the conservatives). Those of us that support the core Old-Democratic principles see this trend as a huge threat to the Democratic Party. It is no longer appropriate to say Democrats good and Republicans bad. There is a growing number of bad Democrats (DINO's) that vote Republican. There I said it. So your rules do not deal with the problem that we have progressive Democrats vs. conservative Democrats (Republicans in Democrat clothing).You made a comment about supporting constructive discussion re. the DLC, yet I have found that the consera-Dems, blue dog DINO’s, and/or the DLC sympathizers here in DU will not discuss their agenda or their stands on issues. They will not answer questions like why wont Pres Obama fix the corrupt Bush DOJ? or why oh why wont he dump DADT? Or why not fix the Patriot Act? End domestic spying, end the horrible wars, stop rendition, close Guantanamo, prosecute war criminals, etc. They seem only capable of attacking those of us that are trying to hold our Pres accountable to core Democratic principles, and telling us that we shouldnt be attacking those in our own party.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8673473It wasn't so much the post but one of the sentences contained in his theory that caught my attention. Does he seriously think conservatives are "fleeing" to the democratic party? Seriously?
"The nation that couldn’t be conquered by foreign enemies has been conquered by its elected officials" odawg Free Republic in reference to the GOP Elites who are no difference than the Democrats
MadBadger (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-01-10 08:45 PMResponse to Reply #1013. We arent talking about Congress people, were talking about DUers And nobody on DU votes for Republicans
Are you sure? no 1?
Wow, that is some seriously deluded dain bramaged dope baked stupidity there.
Oh my! the Democrats aren't even "fleeing" to the Democratic Party LOL.
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-01-10 10:43 PMResponse to Original message189. While I would disagree with most of the details, I agree with your main point. Edited on Thu Jul-01-10 11:45 PM by SkinnerNo, the rule clarifications do not deal with the core problem. Here's why: Because they can't.There are two distinct factions. There is nothing I can do to change that fact. The rule clarifications are not going to change that fact. Indeed, the rule clarifications were not intended to change that fact. The point of the rule clarification is to set clear limits, and manage everyone's expectations, and most of all get everyone on the same page -- members, moderators, and administrators -- so we all have a similar understanding of what is expected of everyone. But that's all we can do. Here's the big secret about the "new" rules: Our goal is to moderate *LESS* than we did before. We can deal with the worst excesses, but we can't possibly "fix" the core problem. We'd prefer that you all fight it out, rather than keep throwing ourselves in the middle.The Admins have been through all five stages of grief, and we are now (finally) at "Acceptance." This is the way it's going to be for the next two-to-six years. Maybe longer. Get used to it.Now, YOU ALL need to decide if you want to have a good-faith dialogue with each other, or if you want to keep talking past each other. The choice is yours.
Hutzpa (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-01-10 11:22 PMResponse to Reply #189212. Wait a minute Skinner Edited on Thu Jul-01-10 11:24 PM by HutzpaIf I understand the OP correctly, isn't he advocating openly that Democrats are being bought by corporate and since corporate is buying democrats DU should be lenient on the fact. So in other words, if republicans are fleeing their party democrats should look the other way and change our party to accommodate the republicans. yes? no?I thought those switching party should change their attitude, when in Rome do as the Romans do, right?I thought these where the very same things we are fighting against?
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-01-10 11:32 PMResponse to Reply #212217. My response was narrowly focused on the OP's observation that there are two broad factions on DU. And his assertion that the recent rule clarification does not address this issue.That part is true. There are two broad factions on DU. The rule clarification does not address this issue. Nor could it.(For what it's worth, I completely disagree with most of the rest of the post, which I believe is a divisive and unfair characterization of the "other side." The moderators could have easily locked this thread -- and probably should have -- but we thought there might be some value in responding to the main point.)
Catherina (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-01-10 11:46 PMResponse to Reply #217230. Thanks for your response. Would you please clarify the following? Edited on Thu Jul-01-10 11:51 PM by Catherina"We welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives who will work with us to achieve our shared goals. "I know what our shared goals were when Bush was in office but now that we have a Democrat in office, what are our shared goals? Mine are still what they were under Bush, like not supporting the wars, supporting equal rights, fighting corporate power, fighting poverty. It would help people like me if we knew what you mean now by shared goals. Thank you in advance for your answer.
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 12:06 AMResponse to Reply #230244. Everyone here is progressive. Everyone here is broadly supportive of progressive policies and ideals The split on DU is NOT between people who are progressive and people who are conservative. The split here is, roughly speaking, idealistic progressives and pragmatic progressives.We all want to move the country in the same general direction. We may disagree on details, but the big picture is the same. The real disagreements on DU are about how best to get there.
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 07:15 AMResponse to Reply #277391. This site has very few litmus tests. The shared goals are support for broadly progressive change and support for Democrats for office. I'm not going to give you a list of issues and insist that everyone agree.
Zhade (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 01:06 AMResponse to Reply #244304. Everyone here is progressive? Are you kidding me? You have self-professed CONSERVATIVES here. Hell, some of them use it in their names!If you honestly think that everyone wants the same goals here... I really don't know what else to say.
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 07:32 AMResponse to Reply #304398. I am not kidding you. I did not say that everyone wants the same goals. I said we disagree on the details, but we all want to move the country in the same general direction.As for self-professed conservatives, there are very, very few here (and they all qualify the characterization in some way). There are certainly not enough self-professed conservatives to account for the large contingent of people who are generally supportive of President Obama. Those who do generally support him -- and I count myself among them -- almost always characterize themselves as progressives, liberals, or both. My understanding is that President Obama has better than 80% approval among self-described liberal Democrats.
YOY (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 09:20 AMResponse to Reply #427437. No. I dislike it because I am not really a "communist". Not by the faintest definition. Edited on Fri Jul-02-10 09:20 AM by YOYHowever, the accuser most certainly is a "McCarthyite" and obnoxiously on a witch-hunt. By the simplest definitions in the book.I do not like people who redefine things. Change the goalposts. It is a fascists game.I disagree and find "idealist" and "pragmatist" to be incredibly insulting.
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 09:28 AMResponse to Reply #437444. Honest question: Is it possible that people on the "other side" of the divide also feel that they are being targeted by a witch hunt?
YOY (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 09:35 AMResponse to Reply #444449. So who has been TSed from that camp? Edited on Fri Jul-02-10 10:18 AM by YOYOther than "WeDidIt"? Who seems to have come back...once at least unsuccessfully. Mostly, it seems, because people were all over him.Really?How many times has a certain DUer insinuated that those among us who have some pretty sane views are "communists" or "extremists" because we dare to question the wisdom of two ultra-expensive wars? How about the guy who wants to debate what the definition of "torture" is? The only person who talks that way is Cheney! You TSed Lerkfish! CaptainHilts! Among several others. Really. Loyal progressive Dems to the end. You TSed them. You said "they know why." Some of them don't. They really don't.I'm talking to you Skinner. Please don't delete this for daring to mention specific cases. We need to get things out in the open. If you want civility back, let's talk about it in the open. Please!
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 10:19 AMResponse to Reply #449474. As you know, in general we prefer not to discuss why specific people get banned. But I will say this: Every single one of them made it abundantly clear that they did not value this community, and were only coming here to tear it down. Now that they are gone, my understanding is that every one of them is glad to be rid of this place.We can argue about various litmus tests for DU mebership. Personally, I prefer fewer litmus tests rather than more. But I think it is reasonable for me to expect, at a minimum, that our members not deliberately disrupt.
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 07:49 AMResponse to Reply #393404. I think the "pile-ons" go both ways. I think it's obvious that folks on the "other side" feel the same way you do. As for "favoritism" I have made clear that you can't call President Obama rude names, and you can't oppose Democrats for office. Yes, that favors one side. But you are welcome to offer any substantive criticism of the President that you like.
YOY (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 08:50 AMResponse to Reply #404420. I'm afraid that's not true. So many folks here have noticed it that it's just not. The TSing of long time DUers versus the virtual indestructible nature of several of those on "the other side" are proof of this.I don't call Obama rude names. I praise him when it's due and criticize him when it's applicable. It's the standard that he told us to hold him to. Those who feel that criticism is all senseless attack need to be questioned not the critic. Get rid of the new rules Skinner. They do not bring civility at all. They only polarize us further.
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 09:18 AMResponse to Reply #420433. Pssst: Here's a secret. The "new" rules aren't new. Our intent is to clarify the rules we have had here for half a decade. None of them is particularly difficult to follow.
YOY (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 09:23 AMResponse to Reply #433441. and you've just decided to enforce them now? n/t
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 09:31 AMResponse to Reply #441445. No, we've been enforcing them for years. Apparently some people didn't notice. Which is why we thought it might be useful to make it obvious.
Reading that exchange my fellow alum Skins had with a few primitives illustrates the reason I think my fellow alum is poorly paid for all he does, and deserves much more, as much as he can milk from the primitives.Trying to reason with primitives is at least a $1000-an-hour job.
Problem is Coach, I think he holds many of the same beliefs, if not even more radical!
Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Fri Jul-02-10 12:06 AMResponse to Reply #230244. Everyone here is progressive. Everyone here is broadly supportive of progressive policies and ideals
But, AR, at heart, $kinner is a capital$t. And he really can't come out and say that.This one got me chuckling . . .If you knew just how many moles are at DU, $kinner, you'd shit your pants.
My understanding is that President Obama has better than 80% approval among self-described liberal Democrats.
Where did he pull that stat from?
