How is posting McCain's and Palin's pic & telling people to shut up anything but suppressing dissent

:eyes:

This is a strawman argument - this is NOT our choice - between Obama and McCain.

We live in a democratic (small d) society with free speech and a right of dissent.

We did not elect Obama as a King for four years but rather as a President.

We have THREE branches of government not one.

People who argue that we should count ourselves lucky and shut the hell up if we don't like something that Obama does are practicing Bush/Rove suppression of dissent and saying "my way or the highway".

I did NOT work for the last 5 years to restore a democratic Constitutional form of government by getting Democrats elected so that we can run things the same way as the people we're replacing.

Doug De Clue
Democratic Activist

:hide:

does cause Obama to be removed and replaced by John McCain.

THAT is why it is a strawman argument.

from the wiki tubes:

Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking the simplified version.

best to use the sarcasm smiley...
:)

n'est pas?

What some people are tired of is the incessant whining about almost
every
single
thing
Obama
does.

No one thinks he is perfect. No one is telling you "shut the hell up if you don't like something that Obama does." You know that.

exactly as I have described - so NO it is NOT a "straw man" that I am discussing but actual posts.

C'mon, grow a spine (this is tongue-in-cheek, if you can't tell).

:rofl:

and this post IS growing a spine.

squeat.

You are new here, right?

Then how would you know what took place the last 2 years?

The OP is correct and you are wrong.

BTW? Welcome to DU! ;)

Attack them for suggesting "some" are (thus implicating yourself) and in the process keep the loop of BS in full circular firing squad mode.

Good work! :)

Introduce me to him sometime.

http://squeat.com/

squeat 17 up, 1 down love ithate it

A word called out, usually loudly, to harken hungry friends or associates to gather and travel enmasse to some established eating area such as a cafeteria or dining hall. The derivation may have originated from the phrase "let's go eat!".

:rofl:

:rofl:

That would be a good thing if people actually paid attention to every single thing our elected officials did, wouldn't it?

I love this "I am not telling you to shut up..." which is usually followed by "I just think it has gone 'too far'" or something like that. "I just want you to not talk about some things some of the time, and I will let you know when it happens."

So we should just shut up some of the time about some things. Things you don't want to hear.

If we cannot consider criticizing every single thing a politician does, may we criticize half of the things they do?

Perhaps you could generate a list of the things that we are permitted to comment on, and the things that we are not.

Will you let us know when our commentary becomes "incessant whining?"

you are free to do it, and I am free to disagree with it.

Carry on...

:yourock:

:loveya:

"I don't feel confident in my postion"

Why are you showing your lack of confidence in your positions for all to see?

;)

:rofl:

:shrug:

If I wanted to listen to an echo chamber, I could listen to Rush Limbaugh...

sigh...

As if, without fighting amongst each other and claiming the "other" is trying to silence YOU, we can't have "political" discussions.

:rofl:

OMG - that's a good one!

only the recitation of dogma...

Truth is not revealed by merely repeating dogma - it is more often OBSCURED by it.

The hypocrisy is stunning in these sorts of posts.

like inventing strawmen and trying to create fear through the use of McCain and Palin's pictures -so NO you are wrong - that's the one thing you can't do is suppress open debate and call the act "free speech".

You can't have it both ways.

Well you can try, but you will be called a hypocrite by some.

What's good for the goose...

Dissent is opposition to a popular idea.

You are really not getting it.

a common tool used to enforce conformity of thought and YOU KNOW IT.

I'm going to end this leg as this is getting out of hand.

It necessary sometimes to point out this sort of thing in clear terms so that all can see it.

That's a lame cop-out explanation for your continuing the childish fighting here.

Are we grown ups here or...?

only thing I see that is childish is peer pressure tactics and name calling..

If you want to be a "grown up" then ACCEPT other people's right to dissent and stop making fun of them.

Don't see the the utter circular illogic to your reasoning?

In other words:

Don't get mad when someone tells you that you are visciously attacking the person they agree with - WHAT GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO STOP PEOPLE FROM TELLING YOU TO SHUT UP??


HYPOCRITE!!


HYPOCRITE!!

HYPOCRITE!!
HYPOCRITE!!


HYPOCRITE!!
HYPOCRITE!!
HYPOCRITE!!
HYPOCRITE!!
HYPOCRITE!!
HYPOCRITE!!

You can't claim that trying to censor OTHER people's speech through fear tactics and strawmen is itself "free speech" - it is not.

Look in the mirror if you want to see hypocrisy.

"Trying" and "succeeding" are two different things and it's why we are gifted with something known as a brain.

You have the right to object as you have done in this thread.

Where's the censorship?

Are you afraid some people might fall for the "strawman" arguments?

These back and forth threads are nonsensical and hypocritical IMO, but fun :)

opinion...

The ONLY reason I'm not afraid that people won't fall for the peer pressure group's argument is that I've exposed it for what it is : an attempt to censor dissent.

We can keep going at this all day if you like but you won't wear me down so...

Yes, I know this is an inflammatory argument, but you are hot under the collar and you are setting yourself up for this.

You were so much more inciteful during the primary - I really enjoyed your perspective.

Lately you seem to be more concerned with style over substance.

People will do better to hear reasoned, logical arguments from you rather than watching you and others get sucked into the "he said, she said" version of DU (which SUCKS).

If nobody speaks out against this sort of cheerleader peer pressure to censor dissent within the Democratic Party then YES we WOULD end up like the Republicans all marching in lockstep.

I'm not sorry if I've offended you by speaking out against it.

Doug D.

Sometimes elevating an issue through bitter objection provides validity to it and motivates further pointless back and forth. Fortunately, me arguing with you over the stupidty of these back and forth arguments on DU will perhaps open some eyes to how stupid this all is and may help to curb it.

:rofl:

You just can't take this stuff too seriously!

:)

merely "earnest".

Nor do I believe that it is valid to argue that I am providing "validity" to the other side by exposing the fundamentally flawed logic behind their peer pressure.

Doug D.

Here: :hug:

And for the rest of DU, a group hug: :grouphug:

:toast:

If some ordinary DUer posted it (as opposed to say, a moderator), it is just an opinion.

people love to gang up on unpopular points of view.

He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression - Thomas Paine

If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. - George Orwell

If there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought -- not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate. -- Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

You can protect your liberties in this world only by protecting the other man's freedom. You can be free only if I am free. -- Clarence Darrow

Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right - Mohandas K Ghandi

I believe that any man who takes the liberty of another into his keeping is bound to become a tyrant, and that any man who yields up his liberty, in however slight the measure, is bound to become a slave. - H.L. Mencken

You *can* tell people what they want to hear, you *are* free to express thoughts that people hate, and you *aren't* being deprived of any rights.

You just don't like others making fun of what you are saying.

How does it "make fun" of dissenters to post McCain's or Palin's picture?

Answer: It doesn't.

No, instead it attempts to intimidate them and paint them as disloyal people who would rather see McCain or Palin in office.

:shrug:

I would also like to add my own pet peeve: seeing posters called "freepers" because their dissent/noise/issue gets on a last nerve. Anyone who avails themselves of the dubious pleasure of actually reading www.freerepublic.com will know the fucking difference. Freepers are NOT into dissent. And they are largely disgusting bigots. Calling fellow DU-er's that name unless they are obviously a bottom feeding troll is NASTY!

</rant>

:rofl:

I count myself amongst those who feel the need to dissent on a number of choices Obama has made.

Perhaps you are amongst those who feel tat Obama walks on water and can do no wrong...

I have seen quite a lot of peer pressure from the Obama "cheerleader" crowd here even just tonight including two posts with McCain/Palin pictures, one that used all caps telling us not to "wash our dirty linen in public", etc., etc. and I'm frankly sick of people telling me what I cannot say even if I didn't come here tonight to complain about Obama.

Doug D.

Wiki sez:

"Suppression of dissent occurs when an individual or group which is more powerful than another tries to directly or indirectly censor, persecute or otherwise oppress the other party"

it is NOT popular speech which needs protecting as we all know - it is the UNpopular speech which no one wants to hear.

If you feel pressured to change your opinion because you're disagreed with, then grow a goddamn sack already, and stop whining about "being suppressed."

My problem isn't with people who wish to debate ISSUES but rather with people who use cheap tactics to label dissenters as disloyal by suggesting that they'd rather see McCain in office and/or they should count themselves lucky and just shut up and stop complaining.

even if they disagree with you in a rude, abrasive, and intellectually petty manner, then either prove them wrong or ignore them. Don't start a thread to cry about it, hoping people similarly disposed to you will pat you on the back and tell you that the mean ol' people who believe different things are all just bullies.

You do not have the right to be agreed with. You do not have the right to be disagreed with politely. Hell, you don't even have the right to not be told, "shut up." The appropriate response to "shut up" is not "OMG I AM BEING SUPPRESSED I AM A VICTIM," it is to say, "No, thank you, I won't," and move on.

I am NOT opposed to people disagreeing with me.

I am OPPOSED to people who try to pressure me to shut up by labeling me disloyal.

Doug D.

You're being disagreed with. They're doing it in a petty, dishonest, offensive way, sure. But complaining that you feel "pressured" and "suppressed" is just pathetic. There is not one thing that anyone here can say that can suppress you, unless you decide to be suppressed. There is not one thing that anyone here can say that can pressure you, unless you decide to be pressured.

It's like when the right would play the, "but don't you love America?" card. The correct response wasn't to toddle off somewhere and whine about how they were suppressing you, it was to throw it right back at them. "Yeah, I do. I give a shit about this country, which is why I'm completely against throwing billions of dollars and thousands of kids into Iraq without even talking about it first. You love America? Then treat her kids and her bank account with some damn respect--oh, and stop dirtying up her house while you're at it."

They say "well Obama's better than McCain?" Tell them, "yeah, and Bush is better than Hitler. Not that damn impressive. I'm out here trying to make sure Obama can be remembered for more than being "a bit better than McCain."

My point is NOT that I am being disagreed with.

You can disagree with me all day long and debate me all day long - I encourage it.

Stop trying to put words in my mouth that I am NOT saying.

I object to those who try to silence debate through fear and peer pressure tactics - none of which can fairly be characterized as "disagreement or debate" since they are in essence personal attacks, NOT debating the issue.

If dissent was suppressed on DU, traffic would really be slow. There seems to be more dissent than delight at finally having both Congress and the WH.

THAT is what I object to.

POPULAR ideas don't need protect - it's the UNpopular ones that we must protect.

If you're proud of your ideas, and want to wear the title of dissenter, then man up and dissent already. Don't sit crying because people are disagreeing with you. You don't have the right to be agreed with. You don't even have the right to be disagreed with politely.

I'm NOT crying because people "disagree" with me.

I'm pointing out how some people are trying to label Democratic dissenters as "disloyal" by painting them as would be McCain supporters and/or calling them "ungrateful" for complaining because they could have ended up with McCain.

It's cheap, it's tacky and it's a peer pressure tactic and I WILL speak out against it.

They're doing it in a dishonest way, yes. They're doing it in a reprehensible way, yes. But they are not suppressing you, oppressing you, repressing you, or otherwise preventing you from saying what you want to say. Feel free to call 'em cheap-shotting, moronic bastards. But complaining about how "suppressed" you are is absolutely without merit. You don't want "childish insults?" Don't act like a child.

and it would be dishonest to pretend that it is not.

I'm not acting like a child - a child would not stand up against this type of treatment.

We don't need free speech laws to protect popular speech - we need it to protect unpopular speech.

and NO it is NOT disagreement to try to smear your opponent, it is a cheap peer pressure tactic.

If people want to debate me on an issue then FINE, stick to the issue, don't try to make out your opponent to be a McCain backer, ungrateful, or otherwise disloyal.

Just pointing out to you that you live in a country in which 46% of the population was willing that McDope be President! And Sarah Phailin one heartbeat away! so why are you turning on the 52% majority who is generally supportive of you?

:banghead:

If it was you might have a point.

is neither liberal nor honest.

Group think knows no party or ideology.

I never would have figured they'd be marching lockstep against about every Obama says or does.

Most of the opposition to choices Obama has made have been "single issue" or "cabinet choice" type objections such as (and not to stir these up again) Rick Warren or Hillary Clinton as SoS or Gates as DefSec or other cabinet choices etc. I really haven't noted any particular individuals who blanket oppose Obama's every move.

our own candidate even before his inauguration?

Some people just expect perfection and therefore complain constantly, since perfection is unattainable!

NOW, when it might make a difference, not 6 months from NOW when it probably wont.

but even I give him a "C" grade, so I'm obviously not against every thing he says or does.

Obama's report card

Lockstep, dishonesty, bigotry and hate cross all lines. One can see these traits displayed at progressive and conservative sites and coming from progressive and conservative people in RL.