Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
90 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Is it appropriate to cite websites where Hillary Clinton is referred to as "hitlery" any where on DU (Original Post) DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 OP
NO. that term belongs to the RW riversedge Oct 2015 #1
It is in a forum here. I am not going to link it and get a hide... DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #2
Have you alerted on it? cwydro Oct 2015 #17
There is a link to an article... DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #19
I think it was alerted and jury voted to leave it GusBob Oct 2015 #20
More proof the jury system is tainted... DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #23
If it helps, second alerts go to the Admins. Raine1967 Oct 2015 #32
I didn't alert and even if I did I doubt it would do any good... DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #35
No GummyBearz Oct 2015 #3
No,it's not. But that's not going to stop some. nt sufrommich Oct 2015 #4
No. Very nasty. bravenak Oct 2015 #5
Most certainly not treestar Oct 2015 #6
Oh hell no! workinclasszero Oct 2015 #7
Apparently, IOKIYAB. MohRokTah Oct 2015 #8
Shit...I've seen "gender card" and "race card" being used regularly by so-called liberals. nt LexVegas Oct 2015 #9
"Hitlery" sounds like something Ben Carson would say. SunSeeker Oct 2015 #10
Yeah, it's like they're lifting their verbage from the demented asshole, ben carson. What a sad Cha Oct 2015 #24
That Bobbie Jo Oct 2015 #11
"That and the playing of any "cards" belong in the RW trash heap." Number23 Oct 2015 #76
No. n/t zappaman Oct 2015 #12
Its just going to get worse workinclasszero Oct 2015 #13
Does GD or the Primary forums count? Because, if it hasn't appeared there yet..... Walk away Oct 2015 #14
It is posted in the Bernie Group ... with 22 rec's. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #36
Well, they can chew on Hillary's latest endorsement. Sherrod Brown! Walk away Oct 2015 #38
But endorsement don't matter ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #44
Especially when it comes from a great big progressive.... Walk away Oct 2015 #45
... and internet polling and social media. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #49
I can't find it. Can you provide the link so I can go kick someone's ass. cpompilo Oct 2015 #69
By request Jury ... By request ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #73
I don't know all the rules GusBob Oct 2015 #80
On DU, these days ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #83
Such posts should be a 7-0 hide mcar Oct 2015 #15
That will never happen ronnykmarshall Oct 2015 #27
It was a 2-5 leave. nt GusBob Oct 2015 #29
Well that's depressing mcar Oct 2015 #59
No. alittlelark Oct 2015 #16
Absolutely not! Spazito Oct 2015 #18
What about the 22 DUers that rec'ed the OP? ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #40
I would agree it is most likely they didn't go beyond the header... Spazito Oct 2015 #46
Well ... It was posted by a long time, multi-10s of thousands post count DUer ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #53
You are being kind by calling this "silly season".... Spazito Oct 2015 #55
The poster literally changed the words in the cited text without attribution. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #85
No BooScout Oct 2015 #21
It's going to get much worse GusBob Oct 2015 #22
Is your question about barring the term or about blacklisting the whole site? Jim Lane Oct 2015 #25
I can not conceive of any scenario where it would be appropriate to compare Hillary to Hitler. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #28
So are you saying that frazzled Oct 2015 #78
I would be more open to such links, depending on the circumstances. Jim Lane Oct 2015 #86
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. NCTraveler Oct 2015 #26
But the post said "hitlery" ... er, HRC can't possibly win the G/E, so ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #30
Please respond to my remarks on "jury infallibility" in Post 33 DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #34
If a jury allows it it is, there are no banned sites. Autumn Oct 2015 #31
A jury made Socrates drink the hemlock, sentenced Jesus to be nailed on a cross, sentenced the... DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #33
Then get Skinner to do away with the jury system or change the rules. Easy enough to compile Autumn Oct 2015 #39
There are larger principles at stake, like not conferring universal morality on juries. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #47
Like I said talk to Skinner, he has put thing like that in the hands of jurors. Autumn Oct 2015 #77
There are larger principles at stake, like not conferring universal morality on juries. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #47
I was going to write: 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #41
We can add George Zimmerman jury to that rbrnmw Oct 2015 #70
The first SoCal jury acquitted the cops who beat up Rodney King. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #88
This message was self-deleted by its author m-lekktor Oct 2015 #37
Tthe Hitlery thing *should* have been a BLATANT hint, if one even got past ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #42
Two questions, bro DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #51
Shit, Yeah ... Hell, Naw! ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #60
this is my third heated primary season here.. wyldwolf Oct 2015 #43
Isn't this recursive? Chan790 Oct 2015 #50
Well, it's apparently appropriate to cite authors who say Obama only won because he's "exotic" Scootaloo Oct 2015 #52
Where was that done ... And, was it in the same article/OpEd? n/t 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #62
The author in question is Froma Harrop, and no it wasn't Scootaloo Oct 2015 #67
Don't you think that makes it a little bit of a false, and forced, equivalency? 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #72
Nope. If we're gonna complain about sources, then we're complaining about sources Scootaloo Oct 2015 #74
Okay. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #82
The problem is wingers cite & google DU and post this shit elsewhere... Historic NY Oct 2015 #54
The DUer that posted it is a long time DUer with 84K+ posts ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #63
if Sanders can be called BS ... MisterP Oct 2015 #56
what? Beaverhausen Oct 2015 #61
When did his (real life) initials become offensive? n/t 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #64
At a different site they call him BS. For Bull Shit. Autumn Oct 2015 #84
Are you fucking kidding me? rbrnmw Oct 2015 #75
BS does/does not equal hitlery? DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2015 #90
No it is not appropriate. FarPoint Oct 2015 #57
Nope ... 1StrongBlackMan Oct 2015 #66
Absolutely not, and I'm a Sanders supporter. n/t ColesCountyDem Oct 2015 #58
No! Skidmore Oct 2015 #65
Absolutely not it sickens me rbrnmw Oct 2015 #68
The right hates Hillary. The fringe left hates Hillary... SidDithers Oct 2015 #71
Um no and pretty disappointed with some Bernie supporters in that thread who I respected. n/t seaglass Oct 2015 #79
It is not appropriate in any way. MineralMan Oct 2015 #81
Only if you're a bernie saboteur Cha Oct 2015 #87
Some of Sanders' supporters here embrace the term "Clintonistas," so why not? Orrex Oct 2015 #89

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,705 posts)
2. It is in a forum here. I am not going to link it and get a hide...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 04:34 PM
Oct 2015

When I saw it I had more sorrow than anger.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,705 posts)
23. More proof the jury system is tainted...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:33 PM
Oct 2015

I can not even think of a political figure another Democratic candidate could be compared to that would be as odious...

Cha

(295,907 posts)
24. Yeah, it's like they're lifting their verbage from the demented asshole, ben carson. What a sad
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:36 PM
Oct 2015

pathetic loser.

Bobbie Jo

(14,341 posts)
11. That
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 04:44 PM
Oct 2015

and the playing of any "cards" belong in the RW trash heap.

I'm assuming your question is rhetorical, but for the sake of clarity let me just say...OH HELL NO.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
76. "That and the playing of any "cards" belong in the RW trash heap."
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:46 PM
Oct 2015

You have said nothing but the truth.

But considering the (consistently unintentionally hilarious source) of the "cards" idiocy, I'm sure you were as surprised by that as the rest of us.

It's been a banner week on DU. Race cards, Stockholm Syndrome, and pointed political discussions at clubs ('cause that happens ALL of the time, you know) that had the whole damn board laughing. It's been a hell of a week.

 

workinclasszero

(28,270 posts)
13. Its just going to get worse
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 04:46 PM
Oct 2015

when it becomes clear beyond all doubt and spin that Hillary Clinton is going to win the nomination, handily.

And after the polls this morning she is 3/4s of the way there.

Unless the owners finally step in and start enforcing the TOS anyway.

Walk away

(9,494 posts)
14. Does GD or the Primary forums count? Because, if it hasn't appeared there yet.....
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 04:52 PM
Oct 2015

I'm sure someone will create a thread and it will probably go straight to the top of the "Greatest" list!

Walk away

(9,494 posts)
38. Well, they can chew on Hillary's latest endorsement. Sherrod Brown!
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:12 PM
Oct 2015

It's only going to get nuttier over there as the endorsements roll in. At this point it doesn't really matter anymore.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
44. But endorsement don't matter ...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:30 PM
Oct 2015

this is electioneering 9.0. ...The rest of the world will catch up in 12-16 years.

Walk away

(9,494 posts)
45. Especially when it comes from a great big progressive....
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:33 PM
Oct 2015

and he endorsing Hillary! How could that matter in the real world of unicorns and rainbows???

cpompilo

(323 posts)
69. I can't find it. Can you provide the link so I can go kick someone's ass.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:25 PM
Oct 2015

This was all over DU in 2007. It wasn't appropriate then nor is it now.

GusBob

(7,286 posts)
80. I don't know all the rules
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:54 PM
Oct 2015

If I asked about a specific post in that thread just by number, as in:

I really don't understand post (#)...... is that a call out and hideable offense?

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
83. On DU, these days ...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 08:08 PM
Oct 2015

It's not so much about what is done; but, by whom (visit the African-American Group and look for the posts about "alert-stalking" there are several of them) and who it offends (you'll get that from the threads in the AA Group, as well).

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
18. Absolutely not!
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:14 PM
Oct 2015

Anyone using that in a post should be turfed, imo. Appalling rabid right wing language, imo.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
40. What about the 22 DUers that rec'ed the OP? ...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:18 PM
Oct 2015

I guess in fairness ... I doubt any of them read beyond the: "poll shows Donald Trump beating Hillary Clinton...Trump taking 70% of the electoral votes" title ... or, they would have immediately backed out of the thread ... beyond the "hitlery" term, and beyond the site's tagline: "Dedicated to the restoration of and strict obedience to the United States Constitution, the site cites to "Based on an average of the RCP (Real Clear Politics) polling data from all the states and all the 'head to head' matchups between Donald Trump", that don't exist ... well, don't exist on the RealClearPolitics site.

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
46. I would agree it is most likely they didn't go beyond the header...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:34 PM
Oct 2015

at least I sure hope so anyway. Surely if they would have seen the word "hitlery" they would never rec something like that, right?

I tend to hold the OP poster responsible for what they post and where it comes from, ie rabid right wing sites.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
53. Well ... It was posted by a long time, multi-10s of thousands post count DUer ...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:53 PM
Oct 2015

I think this gives new meaning to the term "silly season" when long time folks are affected.

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
55. You are being kind by calling this "silly season"....
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:57 PM
Oct 2015

I think that ended August 31, we are now into "throw crap at the wall and see what sticks" season. It is unfortunate to see long term posters using sites like that one as they must know it's genesis.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,705 posts)
85. The poster literally changed the words in the cited text without attribution.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 08:21 PM
Oct 2015

I suspect that's a violation of copyright law.


(Occurred when the poster changed "Hitlery to Hillary."

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
25. Is your question about barring the term or about blacklisting the whole site?
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:50 PM
Oct 2015

Most people here seem to have answered the first question but your wording more naturally suggests the second.

As to the term, it would be permissible to employ it in an "inverted commas" use, where the DUer is reporting that a person or website used it about Clinton. That would often be legitimate information. As for using it oneself, as a description of Clinton, I can't imagine any context where it would be acceptable here.

I do not, however, agree with blacklisting an entire website. It might be a forum, like DU. There have been some statements on DU, including some that survived juries, that some DUers found grossly offensive. If you say it's never acceptable to cite a cite where there's an offensive term, you'd be barred from citing DU on DU.

Even if it's the same author, not just the same website, I don't agree with a ban. Suppose the author refers to Clinton as "hitlery" in the course of criticizing her actions in connection with the Honduras coup. If the criticism is, for example, that Clinton was publicly saying X but actually doing Y, then that criticism is valid or invalid without regard to the author's overheated rhetoric. The author's personal credibility might or might not be relevant to the criticism, and if it's relevant then a valid response could include pointing to "hitlery" as an indication that the author had an ax to grind. Still, even people with axes to grind sometimes stumble upon the truth. In general I tend to favor responding to the substance of the criticism rather than an ad hominem attack on the messenger.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,705 posts)
28. I can not conceive of any scenario where it would be appropriate to compare Hillary to Hitler.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:54 PM
Oct 2015

I don't think the site should be blacklisted. I do get a sad that some folks can be so hateful.


frazzled

(18,402 posts)
78. So are you saying that
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:54 PM
Oct 2015

if someone made a post criticizing Sanders on some relevant issue and, in the course of making their argument they happened to post a link in support of their position to a white supremicist website in which Sanders is referred to as 'Bernie the Jew scum," you would think it inappropriate to ban that site from legitimate discussion here?

I certainly wouldn't. I'd find it outrageous to use right-wing sites to make ANY kind of argument, for or against a candidate or for or against a policy, here.

Writ simple: we should not link to any right-wing sites here, unless it is in the service of showing how wrong (and sometimes horribly wrong) they are on a subject.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
86. I would be more open to such links, depending on the circumstances.
Wed Oct 28, 2015, 03:15 AM
Oct 2015

The question would be what kind of “support” the white supremacist site provided. If it said, in essence, Sanders cast the following votes in favor of aid to Israel and thus shows himself to be “Jew scum”, then there’d be no value to the link. A DUer who wants to criticize Sanders on Israel issues can just set forth his votes (from official sources, which the racist site would have had to use) and explain why they’re objectionable. If the white supremacist author wrote that someone on Sanders’s staff had been convicted of some crime, there would be a link to a reliable source – in which case cite that instead – or there wouldn’t be, the accusation being based solely on inside information supposedly possessed by the author, in which case an accusation that would be dubious if it came from someone else becomes totally worthless when coming from an obvious bigot.

The only case I can think of where there might be a reason for the link would be if the white supremacist author took some publicly available data (with link(s) provided), and performed some further analysis. For example, if the author used FEC data about contributions and computed some further data, such as percentage of donors who come from New England, and that’s of interest to a DUer for some reason, you might decide to (a) report the analysis; (b) credit the author because you don’t believe in plagiarism; but (c) note that the author is both someone who did the tedious work of statistical analysis and a raging bigot who used an anti-Semitic term about Bernie.

Note that the OP’s question was about the site. If a white supremacist site includes one piece that calls Sanders “Jew scum” and another piece by a different author that attacks Sanders’s college-tuition plan as too expensive, I don’t think a DUer would be barred from quoting the second author just because of the racism of the first.

In general, as a practical matter, this won’t come up. A site that allows anti-Semitic insults is probably not going to have anything worth quoting or citing. Even Fox News is more likely to have something to contribute than is Stormfront.

Speaking of Sanders's proposals, there actually were posts on DU that referred to the attack on him in the Wall Street Journal. That's certainly a right-wing site but is certainly a cut above the white supremacist sites. That particular attack by the WSJ was debunked. Nevertheless, I don't think that's a reason to bar quotations from the WSJ, for all its general wrong-headedness. If a Clinton supporter wants to point to something on the Wall Street Journal site that says Sanders's proposals would cost too much, or that Clinton is right in not seeking to reinstate Glass-Steagall and that Sanders is wrong on that issue, I don't think that would be outrageous. As a progressive, I would disagree, but I wouldn't vote to hide. DUers can consider the source.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
26. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:51 PM
Oct 2015

At the same time there have been some people hurting the last two weeks. I have seen gibirish come from people I believe to be very intelligent. Politics is very personal. I was recently taken back for a day when I learned something about Clinton. There is an investment and attachment.

Not that it is acceptable here at all, but I can think of one way that term could be used that would be amazingly offensive.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
30. But the post said "hitlery" ... er, HRC can't possibly win the G/E, so ...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 05:57 PM
Oct 2015

it is acceptable in the eyes of those posting and recc'ing it.

Never mind the article doing an analysis of "averages of 'real clear politics' polling" that doesn't exist ... well, doesn't exist on the RealClearPolitics site.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,705 posts)
33. A jury made Socrates drink the hemlock, sentenced Jesus to be nailed on a cross, sentenced the...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:03 PM
Oct 2015
"If a jury allows it it..."


A jury made Socrates drink the hemlock, sentenced Jesus to be nailed on a cross, sentenced the Scottsboro Boys to death, let the Klan members who blew four little black girls in a Birmingham church to kingdom come to walk...




Juries and jurors aren't infallible...

Autumn

(44,755 posts)
39. Then get Skinner to do away with the jury system or change the rules. Easy enough to compile
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:17 PM
Oct 2015

a list of banned sites.

Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Original post)

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
42. Tthe Hitlery thing *should* have been a BLATANT hint, if one even got past ...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:26 PM
Oct 2015

site's tagline: "Dedicated to the restoration of and strict obedience to the United States Constitution."

But for real "patient folks", like myself, I would never cite it as a source because the site cites to "Based on an average of the RCP (Real Clear Politics) polling data from all the states and all the 'head to head' matchups between Donald Trump", that don't exist ... well, don't exist on the RealClearPolitics site.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,705 posts)
51. Two questions, bro
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:47 PM
Oct 2015

Do you think it would have been hid if a Clinton supporter cited it?

Do you think a link from stormfront would be hid if the right people cited it?


Thank you in advance.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
60. Shit, Yeah ... Hell, Naw! ...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:12 PM
Oct 2015

The latter would be assured protection by it being posted in the Bernie Group; but, the former would have been unsafe anywhere on DU!

wyldwolf

(43,865 posts)
43. this is my third heated primary season here..
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:28 PM
Oct 2015

... and the first one that such sites are generally accepted by some.

 

Chan790

(20,176 posts)
50. Isn't this recursive?
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:46 PM
Oct 2015

I mean now that you've referenced it, DU is now a website where Hillary Clinton has been referred to as "Hitlery"--even if just to criticize the practice.

Thus, the question is now inclusive of Is it appropriate to cite DU on DU?

In all seriousness, I'd argue that it's not inappropriate to cite such websites on DU (They may have other valid content) but it is inappropriate to actually call Hillary "Hitlery" on DU.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
52. Well, it's apparently appropriate to cite authors who say Obama only won because he's "exotic"
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:53 PM
Oct 2015

...So long as said author is making up complete bullshit about Bernie Sanders.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
67. The author in question is Froma Harrop, and no it wasn't
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:23 PM
Oct 2015
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251616086

Here's her piece about Obama from 2006.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/12/obama_scores_as_an_exotic_who.html

And here you can see Cali's takedown of it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251616648

For which she was alert-stalked by hillaryclintonsupporters. Thus my sig line

Historic NY

(37,449 posts)
54. The problem is wingers cite & google DU and post this shit elsewhere...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 06:55 PM
Oct 2015

they should be ashamed of themselves but apparently they don't care period.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
63. The DUer that posted it is a long time DUer with 84K+ posts ...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:17 PM
Oct 2015

Can't say they are a winger ... just coming across as comfortable in wingerish ports.

Autumn

(44,755 posts)
84. At a different site they call him BS. For Bull Shit.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 08:18 PM
Oct 2015

Because you see, according to them, what he says is Bull Shit. So the story behind that is, when you see the people who find that to be such a wonderful fitting description of Bernie Sanders at their site using the initials BS here? It is offensive, because they aren't using the BS as his initials. A little insider joke if you will Calling a candidate by anything other than their name is not appropriate. calling Hillary Hitlery and Bernie Bull Shit are not okay, both are nasty RW names.

FarPoint

(12,209 posts)
57. No it is not appropriate.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:01 PM
Oct 2015

Evidence of right wing trolls with a mission for disruption.... That is my educated guess on the matter.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
66. Nope ...
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:21 PM
Oct 2015

The DUer that posted it is a long time DUer with 84K+ posts ... unless he/she was deep, deep, deep, deep, deep, deep undercover, with impeccable mission discipline.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
81. It is not appropriate in any way.
Tue Oct 27, 2015, 07:56 PM
Oct 2015

I'd object in that thread, but cannot. I hope, though, that DUers, regardless of candidate affiliation, will refrain from using right-wing sites that use such vile names for the leading Democratic candidate in their posts. It shows extreme disrespect and no common sense at all.

Orrex

(63,085 posts)
89. Some of Sanders' supporters here embrace the term "Clintonistas," so why not?
Wed Oct 28, 2015, 07:20 AM
Oct 2015

If they're content to let Rush Limbaugh write their talking points for them, then why wouldn't they latch onto any hateful term they can find?

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Is it appropriate to cite...