Everybody here claims to hate Fox news so much, but they're more than happy to use their tactics....

The title of this thread is a quote from DUer MonkeyFunk from a thread about John Edwards being late.

"...everybody here claims to hate Fox news so much, but they're more than happy to use their tactics when it suits their agenda."

MonkeyFunk, hate to post a quote from you without clearing it with you...but you got it correct.

How come so many DUers claim to hate Faux News, but you use their tactics?

Seriously....

I see more attacks on Democrats here than I would on FauxNews.

It gets old, and is sickening.

I can't stand Edwards. But I have never once started a thread about some trivial thing he's done. In fact, I don't think I've ever started a thread about him, and I rarely participate in threads about him. and I have defended him in stupid threads that attack silly things, like being an hour late for an appearance.

But some people just LOVE to breathlessly report the latest non-story about the candidate they hate most.

It's childish, stupid, and unproductive.

You are the very last person on this forum who should EVER complain about anyone else being sickening. Every single one of the hundreds of flames you've been involved in have been initiated by you, so enough with the goody two-shoes advice for us.

Now please stop following me around thread to thread, thank you.

My OP brings up a legit point made by a Hillary supporter, if I'm correctly identifying MonkeyFunk.

You've got some nerve accusing anyone of following you around when you're the most guilty of doing that of any poster I've ever seen. How do you live with yourself lying so much?

and Kerry2008 has not started flames.

Get lost

I was told it wasn't. I don't agree with you about who it describes though.

To make everyone on DU stop some behavior that is perceived by the poster. How did he expect people to respond? "Oh thank you so much for pointing this out. We all promise to be better in the future".

This was flame bait in at its best. The poster even tried to blame it on another poster.

Oh, ok.

Gotcha thanks. I'll just let DU continue to sling mud about Clinton, Obama and Edwards.

and up to the mods to decide what constitutes inappropriate posting. If you posted this in a specific thread, you might have more of a point.

That doesn't weaken my point. It's a fair one to make, even if you want to attack it.

And we'll sling mud if we want to! :rofl:

he isn't calling out the person he quoted in order to start some argument with them. he is AGREEING with the person he quoted. and person he quoted has responded in this thread.

Why would I attack them for posting a quote I used to make a point?

LOL!!

I don't believe everyone here uses Fox News tactics and I think to state such is asking for a fight. And if you read the responses, I guess that's what happened.

It's not a complicated issue for heaven's sake.

Does it?

be extremely thin-skinned. They can't even accept their candidates own votes or words when you try to point out his problems/negatives to them.

I don't have a candidate - I happen to think most all of the candidates on both sides suck corporate ass - but it is interesting to view the tactics and flames thrown by each camps' supporters.

be extremely thin-skinned. They can't even accept their candidates own votes or words when you try to point out his problems/negatives to them.

I don't have a candidate - I happen to think most all of the candidates on both sides suck corporate ass - but it is interesting to view the tactics and flames thrown by each camps' supporters.

I've found that you can back up your post with a dozen links, and you still get jumped on for critizing poor John.

I accept any and all criticism of my candidate. But when we're talking about Edwards hair cut, Hillary's cackle, and Obama yelling at old people...I venture to say the board has taken a turn for the worse. True or not true?

And oh, I'm not flaming. Only making a point.

It isn't much of an OP, just your opinion. How are you distinguishing attacks from legit criticism for example?

:popcorn:


dp

mom, they keep picking on my favorite candidate

whine

They take up a large part of the GDP section of DU.

That is basically what GDP is all about.

For example, we should refer to the Jr Senator from NY as Senator Clinton and not Hillary. Other candidates are not called by their first names so casually. And I agree that some posters "attack" other posters personally instead of sticking to issues. Price you pay for free speech i guess. But a lot of "attacks" as you call them are nothing more than disagreeing with issues. For example, if I were to point out that Sen Clinton voted for the BushCorp war, this is a fact and not an attack.

I am curious what your point was with this post? Were you trying to get everyone to be nicer? If so, I would tender, wrong approach.
Just sayin.

By the way, I am not a Sen Clinton supporter in case you thought that from the above response.

Bill is very much active in Hillary's campaign, so it's confusing when people just say "Clinton". The only reason it's not confusing when you call GHW Bush's son "Bush" is that GHW was so lacking in personality, that he's pretty much forgotten, LOL.

distinguish her from President Clinton. I guess if she should win she'd be Pres Clinton II. I only brought it up because the poster was going off on people here "using Faux News tactics". I don't agree with that observation and was pointing out that the poster, if so concerned about behavior on here, could have been more polite in the post. Once again I personally don't care because I think we should have thicker skins than that.

And I am concerned that I spent as much time on this post as I did. I need a life.

He even follows posters around all the time, goes into their threads whining about what they have to say, starts flames, and then wonders about it when payback happens.

to further your agenda. If you believe that DU has too many attacks on Democrats then just say so. Why quote someone else?

Ummmm, yeah. It's not.

And plus, the poster who posted it just commented in this thread...so I doubt it's any problem with them.

Why make a big deal out of something that's not? Why not discuss the OP instead?

I think it deserves the boards attention.

in my criticisms of any of the candidates. My issues with them have NOTHING to do with any issues the RW might have.

And the fake issue being people using "fox news tactics"

Invent something outrageous.
Express outrage.
???
Profit!

Grow up.

Get over it.

And please stop trying to tell me what to do, thank you.

We are doing much better than the MSM on this front.

I admit I'm guilty of it too. Maybe we've been beat down so much and it's done collective psychological damage which manifests itself in funny ways (i.e., recycling rw slurs and memes to use against our own).

If they didn't, we wouldn't need a site whose name -- Democratic Underground -- positions it as an insurrectionist force.

As for meanness allegedly being a Fox News tactic, well, my son, are you new at this politics thing? It's not because Fox is vicious or sneaky that one hates it. One hates Fox because it's right wing.

One hates right wing Democrats for the same reason.