The Reports of DU's Cruelty Have Been Greatly Exaggerated.

So I'm Browsing DU, and for the first time I catch a headline about http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x343162">Duer's cheering the savage beating of Fox News reporters. This is the first I've heard of this horrific event, and it's not about the event, but rather about the apparently widespread callousness and inhuman schadenfreude being expressed by 'many' on DU.

Now, first, I'd like to say that open condemnation of anyone experiencing glee at human suffering is a trademark of what makes a progressive site for good, responsible, civil persons the shining example of the best traits in a national population of otherwise borderline psychotic primates. Not that I'm necessarily blaming the primates, but it's nice to see one place that tends to rise above the visceral and vitriolic far more often than not.

By that same shiny token; Why would so many nasty, horrible, violence-glorifying, vindictive, petty people be expressing so much viciousness on such an otherwise civil site?

So, I picked two http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4720768">prominent http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x341003">threads where the issue itself (the beatings) had been brought up, and took a snapshot. (I just left the various browsers window open and took tallies)

I did this; I counted up the number of posts in the threads, then meticulously went through and read every single one. At the time of counting, it was approximately 11:26pm EST. Between the two threads there were, at the time, 155 post. Now, I have no illusions that my time and effort to determine whether DU was a bastion of civility or a wretched hive of scum and villainy will be terribly appreciated, but I really wanted to get some kind of empirical sense of just how bad (or not) DU really was.

I used a fairly reasoned, if somewhat imperfect methodology to quantify my findings. I'll lay out the method as I put down the stats.

Between 23:20 and 23:30 on 2/3/11, a total sample of 155 posts was recorded between two total threads.

The selected categories of personal displays were as follows;

1)'Empathy/Concern' (for the reporters)
- This parameters for this category were very simple; any expressed concern or well-wishing for the victims, or condemnation of the attacks. -That was the easy one.

Out of 155 total posts, in this category, there were 50 indisputable instances of true empathy for the Fox News Crew.

2) Deleted posts/sub-threads
- This one seems fairly straightforward, but we've all seen the popular 'deleted scapegoat' on DU. If someone can't find an example to back something up, then it had to be a deleted post. In this case, I treated each of them as a quantity of one as it was either a single rules violation, or likely a post by one person followed by a rules violation by one or both of (usually) two adversaries. Either way, there is no way to determine the relevance of those deleted posts, and they permit a standard sample in the 'uncertainty' category.

There were a total of 3 deleted posts/sub-threads (1 and 2 respectively) recorded during the sample period.

3) Neutral/Unrelated
- Not terribly difficult. The distinction for this category was something that did not directly wish harm, evoke sympathy, or attempt to deal directly with the issue of the reporters circumstances. These were such as; "What were they doing there?", or "Why weren't they prepared?", or "Bill O'Reilly is a chickenshit", or any other conversation dealing with politics or journalism that had no direct expression of the actual beating or any direct suggestion regarding it. Basically, if it didn't fall into the other categories, it wound up here.

There were a total of 86 substantively neutral or non-relevant posts recorded during the sample period.

4) Attempts at Humor
- This was, of course, a little more dicey as 'humor' is entire subjective. In this instance I made the criteria simple as it was so warranted; If it dealt directly or indirectly with the event or the journalists, but neither condemned nor condoned the beating, and suggested neither in any way that would require the reader to assume intent one way or another, I very generously put it into this category. Things such as; 'Why didn't they say 'we're on the same side!'', or 'They can hardly be called journalists'. While I know very well that we all loves us some witchhunting, I know also very well that DU is a place that will often give a fellow the benefit of the doubt and realize that he may just be making a miguided attempt at humor where the opportunity is present. Very often, we use levity to distract ourselves from the weight of anger, discomfort, or sorrow we might otherwise feel, myself included. So anything that wasn't explicitly mean; 'attempted humor'.

There were a total of 13 such 'attempts at humor' recorded during the sample period.

5) MEAN
- This was not hard to determine at all. If it was negative toward the plight of the Fox News crew at all, it was MEAN.

There were a total of 3 MEAN posts recorded during the sample period. They were, to paraphrase;

- 'I'm having trouble feeling sympathy for them'.
- 'I wish I was watching them get beat up'
- 'Waaaaaah!'

That, my fellow DUer's, was the worst of the worst during the sample period.


Out of 155 individual posts; 3 were mean, 3 might have been mean, and 13 could either have been mean or not with no way to know at the time without reading minds or perhaps asking them.



I know that there should be no condoning of malicious posts, and that DU is a very generous, kind-hearted community, but even without the benefit of the doubt, I can still say I am very proud of the humanity, compassion, and kindess of DUer's to their fellow travellers. I am also proud to be a part of that community... even if I'm kind of dick sometimes.


Thanks for putting up with me. :hi:

Thank you!

I think DU tends to be kind, on the whole...

In my experience, to be sure...

And I have zero trouble putting up with you...I've known you since the beginning, six years ago today, actually...;)

:hi:

You pretty much started talking to me out of the blue. I remember your arrival here very well, and you'll find this amusing; because I had just been banned on a RW site and I initially suspected that you might have been a cross-web stalker from there. Your timing was that same night.

So, I did what I always do; assumed you were what you say you are and looked for signs that you were not.

I'm happy to say that it only took a week or two for me to recognize that you were exactly the sweet, bright, classy, brilliant, creative, gorgeous gal you really are.

I just have to say, when I talk about the humanity of DU, you, sweet thing, are a HUGE part of that wonderfulness!

You make everyone here feel so much warmer. You're like Kaylee on Firefly (obscure reference, I know).

I can't tell you how glad I am, and how nice it really feels when you just say 'hi' to me.

Divine blessings love... and Happy Anniversary!

But I believe I've found the thread where we first spoke, so long ago:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=322683

It was a lot of fun, and I've never forgotten that night...

Thank you for all your graceful compliments!

:hug:

Damn.

You are so bright-hot I just can't wipe the smile off my face! Whatta blast from days of yore. Just wish I'd tried it out on more than two people.

(It worked, BTW)

You totally rock. You're one of the people I hope to meet someday... when I bike x-country on my Yamaha. It'll happen, just not sure what year yet.

... We can slap each other down when we get out of hand.

I have to think that everyone's been an asshole about this at least once in their life and every one of us who WANTED to post mean stuff, but didn't, thought about it briefly.

I don't want to see anyone hurt, but I sure thought about it in the context of whether it would change any of their suits at the top. Of course, it wouldn't. The reporters are as expendable as the rest of us are.

lol

Sure, a couple of responses seemed callous but there was no high-fiving going on. Based on the responses I assumed I'd missed some really vile Limbaugh style schadenfreude. Glad you set the record straight.

Destroy du and getting away with it time and time again,

What's a 'freezer reject'?

From my own domestic perspective (which is fun to say out loud), it sounds like something you don't want to... ahhhhhh...


Ok, I get it now.

...as that other thread made it out to be.

:hi: back

I'm sure I would have made some posts we could have all been ashamed of if I'd had the time. Real life and all that, you know? I feel like I've let you down by not cheering the savage beating of the Fox News reporters more callously. Because that post really puzzled me when I stumbled across.

I'll try to do better in the future.

So, how'd I do? Did I make it all about me, Me, ME?

and nice to see how the numbers stack up.

K&R

that was my impression, too.

i took a look around, too as i was worried that a progressive site was desending into a vile place usually associated with the rightwing.

my impression is that the cries of disgust with DU was simply a smear against DU and it's members in general.

thanks for making it plain :toast:

Perhaps not their scope, but certainly their direction. There were not nice things said on DU. Things that really don't fit well in a progressive, and humanitarian frame of reference.

I'll admit that I have such ugly and sometimes marginally justified thoughts as well, but it serves my community and myself to reflect upon those thoughts and the value of their expression. Believe me, expressing hatred is not something I'm afraid to do... it's just better to think first.

Too bad folks like Glenn Beck can't wrap their pointy little heads around the same concept. Right?

Oh, and welcome to DU! :hi:

thanks for the welcome :hi:

And remember, boys and girls, Progressives and liberals MUST ALWAYS BE NICE!

and don't you forget it!


:eyes:

:rofl:

a spirited introductory post

:hi:

it is great to be here :hi:

:hi:

Don't let your nasty little facts stand in the way of my false outrage....


We see what we wish to see, but thanks for trying to focus the view...



K & R

Nice job!

Maybe that was the point.

has no place in a civilized forum. It's a legitimate concern.

It's just a little overblown is all. DU is essentially a very good and civil place.

"to those cheering the Fox reporter beatings"... that would be about 3 people.

The vagueness of the title makes it seems that there was a preponderance of cheering. The title absolutely makes DU look bad.

It meets every point of reason and logic in that from a spectator's standpoint it's a virtual condemnation.

I'll just add; I don't necessarily believe the poster meant it as a condemnation of DU, just of the 'apparent' nastiness here.

One can hardly be blamed for condemning any level of puerile nastiness, no matter how small.

Thanks for the info! :hi:

Well that's just eye-ballin' it, LOL, but with the exception of one or two posts they are complete assholes and since when are Fox journalists "liberals?"

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2667427/posts#comment


Lovely liberals getting a lesson in real life...


>> Imbeciles, where do you think you are, Israel?

Heh... good one!

WTH are US citizens doing there in the middle of a war?


I don’t believe anything these “journalists” are posting including Anderson Cooper’s “beating.” They are all liars but expect them to have Obama saving Egypt. This will be the headline.

Another “Wag The Camel” propaganda job.

Notice they are saying it is pro-Murbarak’s people who are doing the threatening. I don’t know for sure who it is, but, surely, it can’t be the peace-loving anti-government people.


Whole thing sounds fishy to me.

Stupid liberals....do they think their “goodness” will protect them?

siding with the Pro-Mubarak fascists. It makes me sick to my stomach.

in Iraq or anywhere else --- the last of their excuses for wanting to invade that country was "spreading democracy" then when it actually starts happening on its own they are against it cuz there's s-s-scary Muslims in Egypt who can't handle it. What the neocons want is US control over every foreign country, a giant empire of propped up dictators funded by us, oh, and teeny-tiny taxes too! It's such nonsense.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x340846

This is the kind of thing the right wing Freeper / Mubarak supporters are cheering about. Mubarak's people are running dissidents over in the streets.

Laughing about a FAUX news reporter getting punched in the head pales in comparison.

...which got far much recin'


Some well-written outrage, no matter how misguided, always gets appreciated!

I've done it so very rarely. It's kind of like watching a bunch of people loosing balloons and then shooting one just because you don't like the color. (of the balloon, that is)

Like the last line of 'Borderlands™' after opening the Vault.

Why?

Well, look up the reasons for the disparity in Medieval language between the Chinese nobles and the 'underclass'. It has to do with obscure references, not necessarily intellectual superiority.

Many people go out on a Thursday night instead of counting how much empathy/uncaring goes on in a thread.

Wow.

Silly me for valuing intellectual pursuits, however limited in their nature, rather than doing the same sort of thing I've always done for the last few decades that you apparently consider more valuable.

I'd take a wild guess that you are younger than I am, but hey... there are plenty of swingers at every age. ;)

So... is it just a master-stroke of irony that you would be here, on a Thursday night/Friday morning commenting on some guy counting posts?

Just curious.

:toast:

commenting on some guy counting posts?"

LOL

Thanks!

Wow.

Loser.

Kudos to you.

One single defense of correspondents being abused while trying to get out the story is one too many.

One single defense of DU posters who think correspondents being abused in any way whatsoever, ESPECIALLY because they aren't ideologically pure in your mind is WAY too many.

You stay classy though, k?

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say, but I know that in this reality I defended no such people.

I'm still not sure though, as you never completed the part about 'what they think'.

Some of those deleted posts and subthreads were pretty nasty. That's why they were deleted.

And I agree that it has been exaggerated, but I'd rather see people flipping out over even the slightest sign of it then not saying anything at all. And for the most part, those three "mean" posts that you pointed out are what drew a lot of DUers' ire. The people bringing it up are just showing that we don't deal with that shit here at DU, ever.

What we have to remember is that, while we're mostly good people here, we're still human. Our emotions run high, especially when it involves something we really and truly hate like Fox. I don't believe for a second that those posters really want to see harm done to anyone, but their emotions just got out of control. The rest of DU responded and told them it was unacceptable to think like that. And the ones that are just beyond offensive get deleted and their posters TS'd.

I've seen some really awful things posted by DUers...and I've only been here since late 2010...people wanting bounties put on Erik Prince's head, the blatant mean posts about the Fox crew, and other things. But the great part about DU is that hardly represents all of us. It might represent the majority of certain other *FREEREPUBLIC* sites...but not us.

I appreciate the work you did here, though. :hi:

We can assume, if we wish, that the deleted post were quite horrible. It's not unreasonable at all to consider that a reality.

I've had my own posts deleted for reasons that had nothing to do with wishing death upon anyone. The criteria around here is pretty tight. So I really can't know without being all of the Mods at once.

Thanks for making a very good and solid point.

:cheers:

(Just a headsup though, I'm not assuming about those posts--I saw them. They were quite awful).

But yeah, I agree, posts can get deleted for much less than that.

Cheers! :hi:

You've gone and messed with the heads of some anti-DU Duers, now. They will hate you forever now that you've shown their rants were pretty much baseless.

Next project: Take on those who claimed DU has turned neo-con. Good luck.

It's an epidemic!

for truth

decided to kick it... pretty good analysis BTW.

:kick:

I read that entire thread too and thought the OP was making a mountain out of a molehill. 90% or more of the posts were against the beating of Fox or any other organizations reporters.

we might as well live in caves again.


DU should be given the benefit of the doubt. ALWAYS. And the nannies, too many.

n/t

I love your style, i wanted to keep reading. I'm going to check and see if you have a journal up...

K&R :)

EDIT: You do have a journal! :bounce:

I've noticed this also with occasional debate here on the Second Amendment and gun culture.

There is an active pro-gun group at DU (nothing wrong with that). They are quite tiny, but whenever the subject comes up, they swarm the thread, and they make it appear as though there is great division here on "gun culture.

I think the same kind of posting analysis done by The Doctor would show that there really isn't any serious division and that most here support gun control, appearance to the contrary.

It's good to see these debates in perspective.

Thank you.

--imm

attempts at surgery. Failure comes at a great price, and success takes much precision, practice, and preparation. Snark is very popular on the net, but nearly impossible for the average poster. How many 'attempts at heart surgery' does a non surgeon get before we just call it murder?
This sounds extreme, but think of a guy like Rush, who says horrible things, then says 'just joking' for decades on end. Do you believe that his is always 'just joking' or that the consistent behavior suggests otherwise?
I see attempts at humor here, very rarely any actual wit. The net is a tough room.

I created that category because, well... the explanation is in the OP.

:).....

Loved your "obscure Firefly reference" by the way. What a lovely compliment to pay your friend.

Dropped far too soon.

We have periodic Firefly marathons and we never get tired of it.

We do the whole set, then Serenity, of course.

It was a series that could have explored the depth of each of the characters, created new story arcs, reintroduced recurring villains/allies, and just gone on for a decade without ever getting old. It was the perfect framework for writers.

But what wound up with longevity? 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer'. :(

I made sure everyone has both the Firefly series and the movie Serenity.

FOX really messed up with Firefly. They didn't promote it, changed the nights it was aired, and most bizarre of all, played the episodes out of order. I believe they played the pilot last.

I have forced this show on so many people and everyone without exception became hooked immediately.

That OP title was "sensational" and the "content" was hyperbole. Thank you for your research. Dana ; )

...ought not to be conflated with the image of cheering crowds.

I didn't do the work you did, but I skimmed through and found none of the examples of cold heartedness that was driving the poster to consider leaving DU and comparing it to Free Republic (where such hatred is common).

There was no proof cited in the post, so I shrugged and moved on without recommending the thread.
I'm clicking recommend on this one.

DU poster proudly proclaims DU worse than Freerepublic:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x343162

Republicon black ops suckerpuppets pollute a lot of threads on DU -- but their poison does not go far...

My only criticism is that some of the things you call "neutral" might better be labelled "insensitive," which (imho) is a mild version of "cruel." "What were they doing there?" and "Why weren't they prepared?" are pretty d*mn*d insensitive, especially because it appears that one of the Fox guys was badly beaten up, not just shaken up.

I don't know that that invalidates your results, though.

:hi:

If I had thought of it, I might have mentioned that such posts were 'insensitive'. However, since they did not reflect a position on the event one way or another, I chose not to characterize them either way due to the BOTD.

Thanks for the point though.

I think a lot of your "neutral" responses would be taken as somewhat cruel if the shoe was on the other foot. For example, take one of your neutral examples, "What were they doing there?"

If, say, Amy Goodman or Rachel Maddow were reporting from Cairo and got beaten in the streets, and someone on DU commented, "Well, what was she doing there?" that person would be torn a new hole. That response is, in other words, blaming the victim of the violence.

On edit: Also, someone already mentioned your Firefly reference, but I loved your Star Wars reference too. :)

Well done. I was wondering the same thing. You put my idle thoughts into action.

This is the sentence I like:

Glee at human suffering is a trademark of what makes a progressive site for good, responsible, civil persons the shining example of the best traits in a national population of otherwise borderline psychotic primates.

That's not kosher.

I wholeheartedly support your sentiment.

It just seems every time some right-winger dies, the pissing on the grave, dancing on the grave, etc. starts.

Like you, I never take glee at human suffering. Sure some demonized bastard dies, but that doesn't mean they didn't have a family that's suffering. It's something I just can't participate in.

It's not what I said though, so no attribution, please.

That's considerably less than the number of Freeper infiltrators.

First, the thread title isn't "Duer's cheering the savage beating of Fox News reporters," as you posted, but "To the Duer's cheering the savage beating of Fox News reporters." The poster wasn't claiming most DUers were reacting like that, he was just condemning those who were, and doing it well.

Second, those deleted might have had a lot of posts.

Third, the posts got more sympathetic as time went on, and especially after the "to the Duer's cheering the savage beating of Fox News reporters" thread.

If you had signed on when the story was first reported, you'd have seen a lot of early cheers, followed by people saying "that's not right," then a trend towards showing support for the reporters.

So yeah, we all knew that the majority of DUers weren't cheering the beating of journalists even if we despise the type of reporting those journalists in general do. But the fact that the majority was in the right doesn't excuse those who were doing the cheering. And if no one had posted opposition to those cheers, the overwhelming impression of outsiders would be that this was a very nasty, close-minded, bigoted place.

First; I didn't say that was the thread title. Bone up on the reading comprehension there.

Second; I posted the methodology and reasons. I also never claimed that was perfect. You can read it for yourself in the OP.

Third; I'm sure that the trend is inconsistent. They get that way sometimes. I took a snapshot of two threads and made every reasonable effort to see what the character was at that time. You can claim it was so much worse, and I'm sure it may well have been. I'm also sure that those posts were properly dealt with at that place and time by conscientious DUers. What brought the issue of nastiness to my attention as well as, it's safe to assume, to that of 'outsiders', was a post titled; 'to those cheering the Fox reporter beatings'. From that post, I (and presumably any outsiders) was left with the distinct impression that DU was as nasty as FR. Here was my clue;

"I swear i am about ready to delete this site.It's becoming WORSE than FR."

There is no way, in Heaven, Hell, or on Earth, that DU has ever been 'worse' than FR on their best day in pettiness, hatred, or childishness. Ever.

What I set out to do was demonstrate, correctly, that DU is nothing like it was characterized by that post.

without your knowing the timeline or trend of the posts. That's like someone who jumps into Europe on D-Day and concludes that since most of the forces he sees attacking others are British and American, the Brits and Yanks must be the aggressors who started the war, and since they defeated the Germans, clearly the Germans were the victims.

The early trend on that story, and the one on the front page for quite some time, were from people cheering, and I am counting attempts at humor in that. Yes, they were opposed, but there were still a lot of them. The post you maligned said what a lot of us wanted said, which is why it made it to the front. The snapshot tally for the johnny-come-latelys doesn't show the whole picture.

I'm sorry to have thrown a wrench into that popular meme.

I already addressed your points.

Note the typos.

:drink:

DU a great disservice by comparing US to FR! I see by some of the replies here, you got their collective underwear in a real bunch. Not surprising, you call a hyperbolic garbage writer on their crap and the apologists and excuse makers come crawling out from their rocks to prove your point even that much more!

Kudos.

the issue.

for a little perspective. I didn't read the thread but found it hard to believe a lot of DU'ers would take joy in anyone getting beaten. To say DU is becoming just like FR, and threatening to leave DU because of that delusion, is pure, deluxe hyperbole.

I noted on that first thread a poster even bookmarked the thread to use against any DUer claiming RW cruelty.

Lawrence O'Donnell showed a clip from Rush's video cam from his radio program last night and Rush was howling and making fun of the NYT reporters being hassled.

But, 5 minutes later, the news of the Fox News reporters came out, and all of a sudden, he changed his tune and said that he was only joking earlier in his program.

We need to get Rush off of the "over the air, free" airwaves.
Al Sharpton is leading the cause to remove Rush, and we need to join up and clean up the "over the air" airwaves that we own.

Let Rush go to Sirius and take on Howard Stern.
Stern would crush Limbaugh like a cockroach under his heel.

Someone, in support for the other thread , was praising Limbaugh for back-tracking.

Wow, I'm impressed.

thank you for setting the record straight.

Facts and figures, I love that. Excellent work.

This kind of vitriolic crap is not rare or unusual at DU. It appears in every single thread about violence toward a right winger, and it's shameful.

Your attempts to quantify and therefore downplay the meanness are, moreover, disingenuous and unconvincing.

First, it's wholly inaccurate to characterize as "neutral" statements like "What were they doing there?", or "Why weren't they prepared?", or "Bill O'Reilly is a chickenshit."

Those statements are far from neutral. If people made those kinds of comments about a rape victim ("What was she doing there?" "Why wasn't she prepared?" "Her family is trash."), we would rightfully slam them for blaming the victim. The entire purpose of those statements is to take issue with or deflect from the fact that the violence was wrong.

Ditto for the statements in your category of "attempts at humor." If a freeper made "attempts at humor" over Gabby Giffords like those made here, you would be screaming bloody murder.

There is glee and viciousness all over that thread, as there ALWAYS is when right wingers come to harm and someone posts about it. Yes, it's a minority who post like this, but it's a significantly larger and louder minority than you are claiming, and downplaying does not help address the problem. I wish DU would take this crap seriously instead of constantly trying to excuse it or shove it under the rug.

Statements that neither condoned nor condemned the beatings are 'neutral' under the consideration of intent. To assign value to them one way or another requires presumption of intent.

You want to see malice, so you will see it. I apologize for the fact that my objectivity somehow offends you.

The fact is that I can demonstrate that DU is no such hive of scum and villainy, at any time, and you cannot show otherwise in any significant way at all... 'woo me with science'.

In fact, I challenge you to go to the other threads and condemn those otherwise neutral posts. I'm sure that will go over well.

Meanwhile, if DU is so awful, why stay?

thought of DU in the way it was expressed. Sure maybe sometimes our thoughts are not expressed in the best manner as they should but in most cases, they are.

Thanks again.

There is a distinction I tend to make, a correction if you will, when people tell me I'm 'nice'.

No, I'm not nice. I'm Good. I can be a nice person, but I'm inherently good. That means that I don't always have to be 'nice'. For certain, I am not.

In fact, it occurs to me that part of the problem here is that so many equate 'nice' with 'good', when there is a real disparity available between the two.

What has happened here on DU is that many people equate 'lack of niceness' with 'lack of goodness'. They are wrong in this, of course, because nearly everyone on DU is undeniably 'good'.

Just don't be under the impression that anyone who fails the test of 'nice' is necessarily 'bad'. That's the problem we really have here.

Sometimes people who are "nice" are quite evil. I've seen plenty of those, especially in rw politics.

and in Many Cases, I've found they were posting stuff that wasn't factual...but that there were folks who promoted the post either to DU GREATEST or TOP PAGE when one "Logs In."

I assumed it was the right of the "Owners of Democratic Underground" to decide what goes up on their FRONT PAGE and TOP of the MOST ACTIVE SITES.

So...I didn't think to much about it. I've seen so much of this posting that "DU'ers support Killing of THIS AND THAT...that I started to IGNORE IT...a few YEARS AGO.

I always figure it's TROLLS AND FREEPER Cross Overs who somehow manage to SIGN UP ON "Democratic Underground" and have their "FREEDOMS" until a Mod or Two get WISE TO THEM AND "Put them In Their PLACE!"

GOOD FOR THIS SITE THAT WE WEED THEM OUT........but that they get on here and do their EVIL MISCHIEF...is NOT GOOD THING. :-(

I had a similar reaction to the same posting. But I didn't happen to have the drive to follow it up right at that moment. thank you for doing so.