General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOpposing American policies that harm people is not Obama bashing
quit hiding behind that bait and switch cover for your real priorities.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)"bash" to disagree. And some policies hurt "some" people while at the same time helping others. It's seldom a clear cut option.
reddread
(6,896 posts)while there is plenty of baseless and racist hatreds being directed his way by the right,
we see a lot of convenient useage, albeit illogical, of Obama's political fortune and reputation
while the heart of issues never merit redress. Just distraction from the real problems Americans face.
Insults tossed at figureheads, meant to discredit concerned posters concerns.
beerandjesus
(1,301 posts)...no matter how well-informed, well-placed, or well-articulated the criticism is.
Now please excuse me. I have to take a break from implying Obama might be slightly less perfect than Jesus to go volunteer for Rand Paul.
lamp_shade
(14,796 posts)To ridicule, denigrate, hurl insults at and overall bash that person is quite another.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)people who state their opinions on some of the policies of this president, many of his Republican nominees and on issues he has totally reversed position on since the campaign. Offshore Drilling eg. Mandated Insurance to name just two of them. People are obligated to let elected officials know when they are unhappy with their policies. Airc, that was one of our biggest criticisms of Bush supporters, no matter what he did, they supported him and attacked anyone who did not. We are Democrats, and Democrats do not march in lockstep for any politician.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)"F@$% You, Mr. President ... You piece of sh!t used car salesman"?
lamp_shade
(14,796 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I have seen very few such comments here from critics of some of the Presidents politics. You seem to be accusing everyone of attacking the president personally because one or two people may have done so.
That is like me characterizing YOU as one of those who consistently personally attack people here who dare to have remained consistent on the issues. But I would not do that, since to my knowledge, YOU have not done so. You haven't chastized those who do, but that doesn't make you guilty of what they are doing. So how does this apply to me? I can only control what I do or say.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)with a HUGE DU following. Did you see the Rec count on that thread? Weren't you one of the Rec'ers?
reddread
(6,896 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)an issue very important to Democrats is not endorsing every single word of it.
Eg, a now banned poster posted a homophobic OP about Greenwald which was rec'd by pro NSA members here. As a result of that OP the poster was eventually banned. Should we assume those who rec'd that post are homophobic also?
If that is your standard, then I know we can have a whole discussion on this alone and if what you are implying is true, we have a whole lot of people here, which we can tell by their recs, who should not be here. Do you want to have that discussion, I think we should. I don't have a lot of time to comb through people's recs, but I'm sure others would be willing.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)It directly disproves the poster's claim.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)They don't even use simple management psych. "acknowledge the problem then discuss a solution" or "give praise then critic" "yea I agree he fucked up with that but yea he has done a lot of good" Instead we get denial and insults.
pampango
(24,692 posts)and labeling.
We can all disagree with Obama on a number of issues and explain why we think he is wrong and we are right. None of us ever agree with him (or anyone else) all the time. That does not mean we are "bashing" Obama. It means we are thinking for ourselves.
When we start calling Obama names ("corporatist", "neo-con", "republican" that equals "bashing". One could argue that is a "justifiable" bashing, but not that it does not qualify as "bashing".
reddread
(6,896 posts)Using Obama as a figurehead or smokescreen for US policies he is hardly responsible for.
is it bashful of me to call him a puppet?
pampango
(24,692 posts)That is not discussing policy differences or why he may or may not even be responsible for a particular policy or set of policies. That would not be "bashing".
reddread
(6,896 posts)I dont think it comes so close to bashing as to refining the analysis
The Emperor's clothes and all that.
pampango
(24,692 posts)We all know people who love to label others and call them names. Most of such people whom I know don't have a large enough vocabulary to use the phrase "refining the analysis" but that is what they are doing. Why go to all the trouble to explain why you disagree with another person, when you can just call them a name, save time and "refine the analysis".
reddread
(6,896 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Terms of relevant accuracy not predicated on pejoratives or editorials. Which is why I enjoy reading objective historical analysis of leaders, as "dear leader" and "puppet" are generally not found as descriptors unless quoting period party hacks.
Veilex
(1,555 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Verifiable 'facts' only please!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)many of those that are labeled "Bashers", are treated so because they make it a daily ritual of scouring the internet to find something ... anything ... from any source to rage on, no matter tangential the connection to President Obama.
There is a reason that the "Thanks, Obama!" meme caught on ... one would just think that a site named DemocraticUnderground would have been immune.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)because its so good to know what trash is being purveyed, we need to pass it around.
a slight double standard?
FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)paulkienitz
(1,295 posts)because the Obama and Bush administrations are equally guilty.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)their modus operandi to admit to it.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Opposing American policies that harm people is not Obama bashing"
..."opposing American policies" that help people, that is, keep people alive, like Obamacare?
"quit hiding behind that bait and switch cover for your real priorities."
Now, who supports policies that "harm people"?
Can you give an example of who and what policies?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)that Obama is responsible for the bad policy.
I've seen complaints about Obama and Keystone, which is really a
reddread
(6,896 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Omaha Steve
(99,055 posts)I agree. K&R!
JJChambers
(1,115 posts)Which is something Ive seen insinuated numerous times on this board.
beerandjesus
(1,301 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)by the wayside
this blastfax will pass in time
treestar
(82,383 posts)lack of adoration of Eddie and disapproval of his actions is not supporting a Big Brother Totalitarian State.
And disagreeing that the policies harm people is allowed also? I mean I know we abhor lock-step here.
reddread
(6,896 posts)ananda
(28,780 posts)..