When Andrew Sullivan or WSJ link to us

is it possible for the moderators to put useful information to the public at the end of that link, rather than the idiot post of the day?

We must be more aware that DU is not some little backwater Lefty site nobody pays any attention to. Au contraire....we are referenced constantly, whether we like it or not; whether we want to be quoted or not.

I do NOT advocate we censor ourselves but I advocate an increased sensitivity to "outward appearances" because, as Skinner has indicated, our critics are trolling for red meat.

I get flamed so much for stating this obvious reality. Perhaps if more established DU members also urged caution -- or what we in the media business called "The Washington Post Front Page Test" -- we'd be better off. By that I mean, if it wouldn't look good splashed on the front-page of a major newspaper, then don't say it!

I don't think that we should censor our thoughts merely because the powers that be suddenly want to avoid using the heavy seven words. That is asinine.

I'm proposing that we have a summary of the lying that each of these organizations has done, and when we get word that they have internally linked, we replace the linked thread with the prepared material.

Seems like a lot more vanity posting these days, too.

Unfortunately, it's quite easily for freepers to post really dumb/insulting/digusting comments and those get picked up by sites that have an agenda to discredit Democrats.

Those who post here that truly care how we are perceived probably don't contribute, but there are many who really want to discredit us.

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/

And damn if he didn't:
=======================================================
THE POST: Here's what Democratic Underground didn't want you to see:

I Hope the Bloodshed Continues in Iraq

<snip>

The only way to get rid of this slime bag WASP-Mafia, oil barron ridden cartel of a government, this assault on Americans and anything one could laughingly call "a democracy", relies heavily on what a shit hole Iraq turns into. They need to die so that we can be free.... (blah, blah)

<snip>

"I'm not saying this represents anything but a radical fringe. Implying that liberals or Democrats support his kind of poison is absurd. But this exists. And it's part of what's fueling the anger of the far left. (By the way, Democratic Underground has more traffic than this site, Instapundit, the Nation or the New Republic. It boasts over 30,000 subscribers.)"

. IN my opinion. DUer's just don't write like that.

third paragraph

http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/

Because THEIR extremism is acceptable discourse in Bush's America. They don't need to watch what they say. They are the new "mainstream." Yesterday's far right is today's middle.

Self-censorship at this critical juncture in your history is the road to irrelevance and oblivion.

Fuck Andrew Sullivan. Let him and all like him know how mad you truly are.

... simply modifying the initial post to begin with a DU statement such as:
"This is merely a Bulletin Board with thousands of posters that do not all represent the opinions of DU".

...followed by something like:
"Similarly, Bulletin Boards like the one at Free Republic often have inflammatory posts by their members, such as..."
(then list a few examples of some of the much more rabid posts from Free Republic, or better yet, whichever blog is linking to DU).

THEN follow this up with the initial post.

That information would be VERY useful, and would instantly place into context the point that Sullivan or others would be trying to make. It would also not be censoring ourselves, since the original post would be included (although the Mods simply deleting a questionable post is nothing more than they do every day here at DU when someone posts something that is particularly inflammatory).