can anyone tell me?

what is the deal with the little woodchuck avatar? I'm kind of putting it together.... non- Obama supporters?

What's the point and what does it mean?

making fun of pragmatists for compromising and being realistic.

Actually, there was so much mockery involved in "Chuckles the Woodchuck" because of the alleged locksteppery of Obama supporters, that it bred a few responses here, such as

 

and the one I stole for my sig line.

Hekate

It started out with "kool aid drinkers" progressed to "cheerleaders" then to "groupies".


As these disparaging terms were challenged as being contrary to the rules of a site that is meant to serve as a foundation for supporters of the the Democratic Party these terms were eventually ruled beyond acceptable terms of civility.


It continues as the unofficial "dog whistle" of people who feel that terms of civility constrain their main point that such supporters of the President offer a clear and present danger to the republic that is of greater concern than anything on the right.


To use the picture you have to be more pissed off of Obama supporters than FOX news and hold to the belief that if a more aggressive combative tone was taken by the occupant of the White House then the rules of the Senate that require a super-super majority to pass legislation would magically melt away.


Posters think that it is an exceedingly clever and original way to express their primary focus; defeating the insidious power of the hero worshiping cult of supporters of the President who gaze upon the President as a leader so great that he transcendsends the need for rational and civil discussion. They know that person is actually Dennis Kucinich.

I was sick of reading all the woodchuck innuendos.

"Pragmatism is the first and MOST IMPORTANT Progressive Value" . . . when you have no principles.

I'd say any pretense at civility went by the wayside with this one, wouldn't you?

it is also the reason I asked the admin. why my Elm Tree Disease post was removed from general discussion. Have not received a reply yet.

How about:

"Progressive Values talk reminds me of Tea"

Ahhh, I'm not to good at this.

They are more pissed at those of us that generally support Obama then they are at Rethugs. I never lost sight of the real enemy. They are caught up in thinking WE are the enemy. Anyway, you put it way better then I could grantcart. Also, who wants to have the same avatar as a ton of other people? I prefer not to follow everyone else off the cliff.

Then what?

Will this mean they've won???....and if so, what did they win; policy wise I mean????....
cause I presume Principles = Policies....otherwise, why be interested in politics;
if defeating a personality representing a party only means to have an alternative
much worse waiting backstage whose policy position are so far against what one's
principle values are until it ain't even funny?

In otherwords, why work so hard to defeat an opponent, only to face an opponent
that will be 100% in opposition of all that you believe?

See, I get the goal (destroy Obama et al)....but I don't understand the objective...
unless it is simply to be able to gloat that one was right.

So as I type, I realize that principles for some = being right at any cost, including
cutting off one's nose. Doesn't sound smart, rational, or insightful.....just
bitter, self serving, and self centered.

Being correct at all costs is the just about the same as being right....on the GD