Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark?

by zcflint05, Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 03:59:16 PM EST

Happy Independence Day! Hope you all are enjoying it. Unfortunatley, I'm stuck at work, but the holiday pay cushions the blow of having to work, and I'll get off in time for fireworks. But our question today is a natural one: with all the recent claims of "concern trolling" against contributors who have always been of a good value to the discussions we've had, and now with a diary on the rec list touting how we all just need to shut the hell up on FISA and abortion, has MyDD jumped the shark?

It seems that the main worry from many Obama supporters is that there's "concern trolling" from many converted Clintonistas--those of us who have declared our support for Barack, but are now deeply concerned about his FISA position, and his movement to the right on Iraq, abortion, and faith based charities.

I find this especally interesting given the rhetoric that many of us heard back when Hillary conceded--that "if we have any questions or concerns about Barack--please voice them, we know this is hard". Now when things are truly getting hard, when Barack is truly drifting to the right--it sounds like we doth protest too much!

Look, I'm not going to speak for everyone here--but this is my position on this:

YES. We can go after Barack all we want about drifting right--because honestly? This is kind of scary. He's drifted right so quickly in the last two weeks on a variety of very important issues that I'm going to be concerned. One of the reasons that I was concerned about Barack from the beginning is the "post-partisan" attitude that he brought--there are some issues that I prefer to have defended completley and totally, no compromise with the Republicans. And now it seems like he might even consider a GOP Veep! I thought that was impossible two weeks ago, but he's drifting right now...it might be more possible than we thought. But before you go there---YES, I KNOW JOHN MCCAIN IS WORSE. HOWEVER, THAT DOES NOT GIVE BARACK OBAMA THE ABILITY TO DRIFT FURTHER AND FURTHER TO THE RIGHT. And we should all know that, and we can all be able to call him out on that.

NO. I'm not a "concern troll", and neither are the wonderful contributors Colebiancardi and Sricki, who have and are supporting Obama in the general election, just like me. The prevaling attitude that I've seen in many threads is that "well, you talk about this so much, you're helping McCain". Look, we all know how terrible McCain and the GOP is. But Barack's right leanings recently are pretty bad too. And I don't blame people being concerned about that.

So maybe I'm "concerned" but I'm not a "concern troll". I've defended Barack and his wife since Hillary dropped out in the interests of party unity, have donated to his campaign and am voting for him in November. That does not give him carte blanche to become GOP lite.




Tags: FISA, "jumping the shark", "nuking the fridge", Obama, abortion, Iraq, triangulation (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 165 Comments :: Post a Comment


Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 7)

HOWEVER, THAT DOES NOT GIVE BARACK OBAMA THE ABILITY TO DRIFT FURTHER AND FURTHER TO THE RIGHT

totally agree.  Obama doesn't NEED to do this.  If he gets the pissed off republicans, the indies and the democratic base, he has got the GE in the bag.

he doesn't need the ones that are further to the right on the democratic platform.  

otherwise, there is no difference between our parties and I know, as well as others, that there is a hell of a lot of difference in the party's platforms.

This is how Gore lost.  People thought the dems and repubs were the same.  How they were so f'ing wrong.


by colebiancardi on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:03:11 PM EST

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (none / 0)

Well, not to be on contrarian, but Gore lost by running one of the most mixed up and passive campaigns ever.  

I'm not sure moving the right, or flip-floping really hurt Gore.

The press did a stunning hit job on Gore, remember "I invented the Internet" which HE NEVER said....Remember the whole "Color scheme"  thing.

What was STUNNING was, it was so clear BUSH had nothing to offer, except a change from the CLinton Era.  I think, in any other year, Gore wins.

He didn't lose his left base, but those who voted for Nader weren't ones he lost during the campaign by shifting the right, they were dissastisfied coming INTO the campaign.

Even so, Gore lost by not getting enough cross-overs and independents IMHO.


"Well the danger on the rocks is surely past... Still I remain tied to the mast"...Don Fagen, Poet and Piano Player
by WashStateBlue on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 08:12:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (none / 0)

Obama & Co. disagree with you.  Since you are an angry blogger who doesn't know the difference between mental distress and mental illness and he is the presumptive nominee, I will give him the benefit of the doubt on his strategy.  


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 08:20:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (none / 0)

I am not an "angry" blogger.  And I disagree with his his strategy.


by colebiancardi on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 08:21:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama shifting versus not shifting (2.00 / 5)

Barack shifted on FISA = Bad Obama.  This flip is indefensible.

Faith stuff.  Barack agrees with Hillary on this one.  They support faith-based initiatives.  This was not a flip.  I think religious groups do great works and if they can help make our society better without openly pushing their religion on you, we should help them.  It is much more cost effective to fund already running soup kitchens than to start from scratch.

And Iraq.  He has not shifted at all.  Not even 0.1%.  Anybody that says he is was not paying attention for the last 12 months or only heard what they wanted to hear.  His position in a nutshell is:  When he becomes President he will change the mission in Iraq to withdraw.  He will then discuss the new mission with Generals on the ground to develop the withdrawal strategy.  He thinks this can  be done in about 16 months but has always left the door open to longer if a shorter time would put soldiers lives in jeopardy.  Please link me to his recent comments that go against this policy.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:05:43 PM EST

Re: Obama shifting versus not shifting (2.00 / 1)

Thank you! Someone with common sense! If you've read The Audacity of Hope you already know that he supports faith based charities and in fact considers helping the poor and feeding the hungry to be a primary mission in his role as a leader. And the Iraq "flip" was misleading media hype and McCain campaign spin.

The "drifting right" meme is so powerful now that supporters who want to criticize him are embracing false information in order to give more weight to their argument. Don't spread the lies, folks!


by indythink on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 03:11:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

great diary! (2.00 / 13)

today has been crazy - ive been called a troll almost a dozen times as well as great contributers to the community.

and just a sidenote, i remember your first diary where you threw your support to BO before HRC - i was actually a little upset that you were doing this before her.  but now it seems us 'concern trolls' are finally showing our real selves!

highly rec'd.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:06:47 PM EST

Re: great diary! (2.00 / 5)

People that have been here for a while and have paid any attention at all know that you guys are trolls.

The people that are calling you trolls are probably just battling their inner anger with Obama switching sides on FISA.  They would rather argue with you than admit Obama is making the super wrong choice.  


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:15:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: great diary! (2.00 / 4)

Are NOT TROLLS
ARE NOT TROLLS.

Wow that is the worst typo ever.  How quickly one word can change everything.

Sorry.  


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:16:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

its okay - i got it ;) (2.00 / 4)


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:18:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Metatroll (c) (2.00 / 2)

is my copyrighted name for a person who seems overly concerned about concern trolls. I am willing lease it to you on very reasonable terms - the first ten billion uses are free of charge. :)


Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.
by itsthemedia on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:12:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Metatroll (c) (2.00 / 1)

thanks - i just might take you up on it.;)


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 09:46:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks, zcflint. (2.00 / 9)

It's really hard to do what we've done -- to give Obama our support the second Hillary conceded (and some of us before). For people to harass us because we disagree with the nominee on a few things is incredibly pissy and unfair.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:13:52 PM EST

Re: Thanks, zcflint. (2.00 / 3)

Yes, it is, and I don't know why you even acknowledge them. I really wish that they'd stop. They're not stupid people, most of them. They just don't argue as often as they do shout down, and that sucks.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:19:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 1)

So maybe I'm "concerned" but I'm not a "concern troll".

All I could think of when I read that was "I've got soul but I'm not a soldier", and now I want to die.

I think that the stifling of dissent is actually far less than it has been as of late. I'm often frustrated that we don't see more from the people who have problems. Move things further along into WHY he's saying what he is saying and the overall strategy.

There are far worse enemies of progressive ideology than Obama, and many of them have too much power. I seriously think Obama was pushed into a position he really tried hard for a long time to justify. It's never been difficult for him to spin something he believes. Never difficult at all. But with FISA, it seemed like it took way too long for him to issue such a short statement.

I dunno. Bitching about his policies is all well and good, and probably 100% necessary. But perhaps people should try to hold themselves to a standard of making sure to criticize McCain and the Republicans more often than Obama.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:18:10 PM EST

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 6)

But perhaps people should try to hold themselves to a standard of making sure to criticize McCain and the Republicans more often than Obama.

unless we are branching out from mydd, here that would be like preaching to the choir.

I do criticize McCain & republicans outside in the RW, but here?  Who is going to argue with me?  I see what you are stating, but the majority of us are going to vote for Obama.  

Mydd should be a place where we can openly discuss stuff without being called trolls.  


by colebiancardi on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:21:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 2)

Fair enough!


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:22:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 2)

But this is also a place where we arm ourselves to deal with the RW.  If you think you might have a useful bit of info, a worthwhile point of view, or a tight turn of phrase, then spill.  If it's not actually good then you may get sent back to the drawing board, no big deal.  
The founding cultural difference between MyDD and DKos is that, back in the day, the Front Page here made some bad predictions.  Everyone who had no tolerance for mistakes flounced off to Kos, and those that remained here created a tone of rationality and forgiveness.  The current strife will not erase that--everyone on all sides wants it back, and eventually everyone will tire of demanding apologies first.  
Yes, I'm aware there's a possible misogynist reading of the myth. Sorry.
by Endymion on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 08:26:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yay! a new word game! (2.00 / 1)

> All I could think of when I read that was "I've got soul but I'm not a soldier"

I've gotta pee, but I'm not a peon!


Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.
by itsthemedia on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:17:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 2)

I do agree, there are certain people here who NEVER say one bad word about McCain?

They are simply here to take out their bile on Obama, and to keep fighting the primary war.

I'm NOT talking about Canadian Girl, or Siricki, or Cole or Linfar....

But, you know who they are, They ONLY post on the anti-obama diaries. They only write diaries praising the Clintons, and almost always in those HAVE to give a shot at Obama.

Look at the Rec list. Some of those authors DO NOTHING BUT carry the Clinton torch, and have nothing but scorn for Obama.

I get how much of a struggle it is for the former Clinton folks, but there are folks who are just here to work against the common good.


"Well the danger on the rocks is surely past... Still I remain tied to the mast"...Don Fagen, Poet and Piano Player
by WashStateBlue on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 08:18:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (none / 0)

I would take it a step further and add that we have people on here who have a great deal of contempt for Obama and don't trust him one iota, but they still give credit when credit is due and are still open to discussing things. And are probably going to vote for him in the fall, even though they still hate his guts. Catfish2 and SevenStrings leap immediately to mind. They get crap ALL the time, but they will talk to you and listen if you return the favor. Aliveandkicking would be in this category if I didn't grow more convinced daily that he's a troll (albeit a nice one to talk to).

But let's be fair, there's Obama supporters that do the same thing. Some that will talk to anyone, some that are abrasive but still insightful, some that don't ever say anything nice. Less of the latter on the Obama camp than in the Clinton camp, though. Largely due to how the election turned out.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 10:26:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

um. (2.00 / 2)

Less of the latter on the Obama camp than in the Clinton camp, though. Largely due to how the election turned out.

you'd think so right?  i wish i could agree.  as much as people bash mydd and the trolls here - there are people that continually bash HRC and people that they perceive as her supporters.  maybe you're less open to it which is why you notice it less.  but it really is astounding.

what bothers me more than this however - is that most of the good 'eggs' do not stand up to this filth.  some do - like you, kysen, spaceman, SG, Johnny, brit - but most don't which is why is perpetuates this idea that there is a double standard in place.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 10:46:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: um. (2.00 / 1)

I would like to see more people stand up for that, too. You guys have been very good about it, and I try to stand up for you and Clinton whenever I can think of something to say because of that. I keep worrying that eventually some moron will hit the breaking point and send you all out of here.

Generally speaking, though, I'm much more likely to see a hateful Obama comment than a hateful Clinton one. I'll have to just look closer, I guess.

Seriously, though, everybody. Kick the ass of any Clinton-bashers. The only Democrat we make fun of here is Joe Lieberman. Thank you.


If you're being chased by an angry bull and then you notice you're also being chased by a swarm of bees, it doesn't really change things. Just keep on running.
by vcalzone on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 11:05:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Isn't it Ironic? (2.00 / 9)

BO himself said Hillary "will say or do anything to get elected". How ironic, considering that HE is the one doing this very thing.

People on a progressive site should be allowed to call him out for it, without being labeled trolls.


by Chelsea in 2020 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:19:17 PM EST

Gas Tax Holiday (none / 0)

Clinton lied like a rug about the gas tax holiday.  I don't think Obama had done anything so blatantly dishonest.  You seem to be an expert on Obama's misdeeds so I am sure you can correct me.  


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 08:24:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Isn't it Ironic? (none / 0)

Examples please....

Or are you buying into the MSM meme that he has changed position on Iraq...?  FISA is a bit of capitulation, I will grant you that, but the other changes are not changes... not at all.

Beyond that, here are my concerns...

My husband's car battery won't hold a charge.

I can't decide whether to buy a gas or charcoal grill.

Even with the baffler in place, the squirrels keep raiding the bird feeder.

That's pretty much it.  Nothing about Obama concerns me.  I have a choice between two candidates this Fall and it really isn't a choice.  McCain is so completely wrong on everything, Obama is the one I am voting for.


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 01:04:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 5)

Oooh, zc, what you said.


by linfar on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:27:32 PM EST

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial (1.85 / 7)

I'm less concerned about Obama's waffling than about his anaemic poll numbers. I never for a moment believed he was going to renegotiate NAFTA although the switch on FISA surprised me and the wobbling on Iraq will be fatal unless he clearly reasserts the difference between his position and Bush/McCains. Given that we have a president at 28% and 80% of the country thinking we are going in the wrong direction, the fact that Obama is only about 6% ahead is bad news. If pointing out this elephant in the room makes me a concern troll so be it but then the Obamanauts were never much attached to reality.  


by ottovbvs on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:28:29 PM EST

In 1992 (2.00 / 1)

Bill Clinton beat George Bush by 6%. Bush beat Dukakis by 7% in 1988.

6% is healthy lead in a Presidential race. We're running against John McCain not George W. Bush and many people still think McCain is a maverick moderate, a concept that will probably survive until election day no matter what we do. None of our candidate, not Hillary or Edwards or Biden or Richardson would be doing much better.

If the election was held today and Obama beat McCain by 6%, it would be an electoral landslide.

BTW, did you know that even before Obama's "wobbling" on Iraq, a majority of people trusted McCain on the issue? At the end of the Democratic Primary, McCain beat Obama on the issue;

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/25 5435

I think it was Gallup that had the two tied on the issue only a week or two ago.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:41:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: polls (none / 0)

above comment is talking poll numbers; you the actual election numbers.  Bush beat Dukakis, but the pre-election polls had Dukakis leading Bush by about the same percent as Obama now leads McCain.  


by moevaughn on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:30:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: In 1992 (none / 0)

For all of his weaknesses, McCain is clearly the worst result we could have gotten from the Republican primary.  All of the other options would have had to rely on Bush for a hand in generating national name recognition (maybe not Rudy, but he would have gone around with Bush anyway),which would have meant automatic landslide.
Incidentally, Obama could put Noam Chomsky or Mark Penn or the corpse of Jesse Helms up as his running mate; a tough & ubiquitous campaign to identify McCain with Bush would still net him a landslide (OK, with GotV too).
Yes, I'm aware there's a possible misogynist reading of the myth. Sorry.
by Endymion on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 08:40:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial (2.00 / 1)

A hint: Pointing out poll numbers won't make you a troll. Using needlessly dismissive language like "Obamanauts" might.


by jere7my on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:57:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial (2.00 / 1)

Well I like to pull their noses occasionally because they are such hypocrites. Six months ago Nafta was a pact with the devil which Obama was going to put right, now they say he's making a tactical adjustment. I never believed he would touch NAFTA and don't think he should but I was ticked when they trashed Bill unmercifully for passing it. Obama has already backed off on FISA and shows signs of wobbling on Iraq, the WSJ ed page was making fun of him a couple of days ago for being a Bush clone, if these things don't bother you they bother me because for me as for many dems the war and the reckless stupidity of Bushco in prosecuting it are huge issues.    


by ottovbvs on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:09:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial (2.00 / 1)

I agree on FISA its indefensible.

You are wrong on Iraq and are simply by the media bullshit hook, line and sinker.  

For the third time today: He has not shifted at all.  Not even 0.1%.  Anybody that says he is was not paying attention for the last 12 months or only heard what they wanted to hear.  His position in a nutshell is:  When he becomes President he will change the mission in Iraq to withdraw.  He will then discuss the new mission with Generals on the ground to develop the withdrawal strategy.  He thinks this can  be done in about 16 months but has always left the door open to longer if a shorter time would put soldiers lives in jeopardy.  Please link me to his recent comments that go against this policy.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:13:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial (2.00 / 1)

"Pulling noses" and calling people hypocrites are both the actions of a troll, no matter who's doing it. If people call you a troll, that is probably why. Look at the words you're using, not the opinions but the words, before dismissing them out of hand.

I have no problems with your differences of opinion, and hope you'll continue to express them. But insulting people is not appropriate, and not helpful.


by jere7my on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:02:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial (2.00 / 1)

I agree with this.  Obama only leads by 4% in Gallup and 5% in Rassmussen.  I can absolutely assure you that if Obama is only ahead by 4-5% at the end of the summer, camp McCain will be very, very happy.

On the other hand, the small size of his post-primary campaign bounce is probably one reason why Obama decided to back FISA.  Although I hate his position on the issue, I understand the political calculus.  If he had surged to a consistent 10-12 point lead, it would have been easier to stick to his guns on this.  But a six point lead is pretty small given the favorability of the overall political environment.  


John McCain: Extending SCHIP would be an "unfunded liability."
by Fuzzy Dunlop on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 08:52:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (1.16 / 6)

Obama is being a great candidate, and proving that he will be a truly great President. I would be much more upset if he were pleasing those who are whining at full throttle.

GOBAMA!

MyDD may have jumped the shark, and maybe not. What is more likely is that those who were disappointed with Obama's win in the Primary are coming to realize the true depth of their irrelevancy.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:35:55 PM EST

this message of... (2.00 / 8)

unity and progressivism was brought to you by xdem.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:38:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I have come to the conclusion (none / 0)

that this America will never allow a Progressive government.

It's a fascist nation, we can only get fascists elected, so let's vote for the least fascist.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:43:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I have come to the conclusion (none / 0)

Your definition of 'fascist' is pretty broad. Basically anyone who does not agree in the smallest detail with you qualifies as a fascist.

If that is the consensus at MyDD, then 'jumping the shark' is not nearly a strong enough description of the problem.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:48:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fascist (none / 0)

is one who is willing to compromise liberty to feel safe.

That pretty much describes the vast majority of people in this country.

We act like Americans actually care about their rights. They don't. They just don't want to get blown up, even if it means someone listens to their phone calls.

Since a terrorist attack is always one wrong turn away, could you imagine what would happen if the Democrats killed FISA and a bomb went off in New York City killing 100 people later this summer?

I guarantee you Obama wouldn't carry New York in November.

It's not being afraid of the Republicans, it's being afraid of the voters, who are not only willing, but happy, to give up their rights to feel safe and vote for the people who will.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:56:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't know which Americans (none / 0)

 You hang with, but that description doesn't apply to any of the people I know.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:16:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well aren't you lucky (2.00 / 1)

in my world...Queens...Long Island...People who couldn't care less if they get spied on unless they have something to hide.

In my world...where Democrats win by large margins...people would like the war in Iraq to end, but don't trust the way the Democrats want to end it.

In my world...wher everyone knew someone who died in 9/11...if they think giving up rights will prevent another 9/11 from happening, there's no debate.

Sadly, there is nothing you can do to convince a people who care more about their lives than their rights.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:48:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: this message of... (1.00 / 4)

My job is not to unify those who will not be unified. My job is to annoy them if I can.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:45:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: this message of... (1.50 / 4)

Trust me, you arent annoying anyone, I would be posting here despite your presence or whatever comments you would ever make. I cant wait for November when once again, after yet another loss,because of the wrong candidate we lose again.


by bsavage on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:57:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Who was the right candidate? (none / 0)

None of the other candidates would've done anything differently.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:04:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who was the right candidate? (none / 0)

"The Democratic Party doesn't live or die with the Clintons": This is probably one of the most fucked up signatures I have ever seen on this site. I think I respect the crazy homeless man on the street more than I ever would you.


by bsavage on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:13:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

im not in love with that sig myself... (2.00 / 1)

but that particular commenter has at least been an honest part of the discussion - please stop.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:18:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's still much more respect (none / 0)

than I have for you.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:45:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who was the right candidate? (none / 0)

The premise held by many, and by which Obama won the nomination, that he was New! Improved! Different! the Anointed One!

The premise was bullshit.  Suckers.

I'm voting for Obama with fingers crossed that he won't be as bad as I think he'll be.  The difference is that I know McCain will be bad, I merely suspect Obama will be bad and even so, the Supreme Court nominations will have to be better.  I hope I'm not deluding myself on this last point.


by InigoMontoya on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:16:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who was the right candidate? (2.00 / 1)

" the Anointed One!"

Funny, I only heard that term coming from fuming angry Clinton supporters, usually in conjuntion with "Kool-aid Drinkers, empty suit, thug...

You remember the vitrol?  I seem to remember you spitting up plenty of it.

I NEVER heard an Obama supporter call him that, it was always CERTAIN Senator Clinton supporters, degrading Obama supporters was their main focus.

Now LOOK which side of the campaign is running national publicised JIHAD, actively campaign to hurt the democratice party, TO PUNISH IT.

Claiming they have to save it, they want to vote in a team to pack the USSC with THREE more conservative judges (and don't give me this the Democrats will block it. Did they block Alito and Roberts) and almost worse, pack the district courts with Federalist Society hacks.

I have seen posters here panting over wanting to make Chelsea POTUS!

Talk about getting on your knees and praying to Royality.

I think, the Messianic rant had lots of folks on both side....


"Well the danger on the rocks is surely past... Still I remain tied to the mast"...Don Fagen, Poet and Piano Player
by WashStateBlue on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 08:53:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who was the right candidate? (none / 0)

Well said. But at this time I am considering staying home and not voting. I never liked Obama, I never trusted him. I think he is truly an empty suit put forward by evil men who want power. I don't believe that he has any deeply held values and that is why he can change his stands on a dime. Maybe that is what he meant by 'change'.

I expect this will be troll rated. The Obama fans don't want to listen to other opinions. He is going to be destroyed by the 527s - there is Wright and Ayers and Rezko and flip-flopping and lack of patriotism - and all the people under the bus. And those are all true. By election day he will be lucky to get 45%. McCain doesn't have to do a thing.

As for the Supreme Court? Elect this guy who wanted to vote for Roberts? Good luck to you if you believe he will choose liberal judges. He doesn't have good judgement.

So..... the Dems have done it again - even worse than usual. Gore and Kerry were reasonbably good candidates and they lost. Obama is a seriously bad candidate - and he will lose big time.

It is very sad. The country and the world will suffer for the stupidity. Remember the British paper with the headline in 2004, "How could 50 million people be this stupid?" Here we go again....


by Marjoriest on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 09:17:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who was the right candidate? (none / 0)

How many McCain points did you get for this comment, McTroll?


by Angry White Democrat on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 02:05:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who was the right candidate? (none / 0)

Maybe Dodd would, but he never had a prayer.


Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.
by itsthemedia on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:25:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: this message of... (2.00 / 2)

I think it is sad that you "can't wait for the Democrats loss".  If you are a Democrat, Obama would be a better President than McCain.  You should not celebrate the defeat of your idealogy.


McCain = bad Obama = good
by CAchemist on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:05:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's not about ideology (2.00 / 1)

it has nothing to do with ideology for many of these people, it has to do with THEM.

Because they didn't get their way, they take pride to see those who ruined their dreams suffer. It would've been the other way around had Clinton won. You'd be seeing glee on DailyKos at watching her lose.

That's how we are. That's why we will never win the Presidency.

We don't deserve to govern the country. After thsi week, I'm seriously considering changing my party registration to Republican and going on as a liberal Republican supporting Obama.

I've lost all my respect for many on the left.


The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.
by nrafter530 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:08:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's not about ideology (none / 0)

Buddy, I'm not on the left of the Dem party I'm on the right of it. However, the Iraq war and to a lesser degree FISA are something of litmus tests for me because they go to the heart of what being a democrat means. If he's wobbling on these it's a bummer. Sorry but that's how I see it.


by ottovbvs on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:02:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's not about ideology (none / 0)

So why are you still supporting Obama?


by Marjoriest on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 09:27:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: this message of... (none / 0)

I've been TR'd by:

kevin22262     
Scotch    
Kysen    

I couldn't be more pleased!


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:41:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

oh really? (2.00 / 3)

It is because you constantly are an ass.

If you are proud of this, then I am happy for you.


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:04:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ass? (none / 0)

 Well, I just hope that when November comes around you'll remember me and how I disrespected the concerns of those who felt dismayed at Obama's lack of purity. I hope you'll carefully consider how I pooh-poohed the idea that a Democratic candidate can never be allowed to express himself without running it past the wise ones who did not support him in the primary anyway. I hope you will then consider that there are only 2 candidates with an ice-cube's chance in Hell of moving into the White House in January, 2009. And I hope that after carefully considering your choices, that you vote any damn way you please, because I don't give a rat's ass how you ultimately decide.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:37:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ah yes (2.00 / 2)

thank you again for showing what a uniter you are.

You obviously know NOTHING about myself or ... most anyone.

Run this litytle quote through you head. It has been used in many forms by many different people but the most recent to give it weight is Wes Clark from 2003/04

"Dissent is patriotic".


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:57:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uniter (none / 0)

is a job I don't want, never applied for, and is merely a euphemism for ass-kisser. Do you want to be a uniter?

Stop trashing the best damn Democratic Presidential candidate in generations, and go after Grampy McPoopy-pants.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:05:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

hahaha! (2.00 / 2)

God... you keep doing it! You keep showing how ignorant you are!

Show me where I "trash" the "Democratic Presidential Candidate" ... fool.


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:14:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hahaha! (2.00 / 1)

It really hurts my feelings when you call me names.

As far as "trashing" goes, I believe that your criticisms of Obama qualify for that description for several reasons. One, they are intended to undermine the Democratic candidate - they won't accomplish it, but that is the intent. You fail to examine his positions fairly, because your criticisms are merely superficial - a sure sign of a critic in search of something to hammer on. You keep bringing up this 'uniter' crap - a sure sign that you are harboring continued resentments, which exposes your motive for trashing the candidate with specious accusations that are intended to undermine his candidacy.

Go ahead, call me that name again.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:24:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

For not caring (1.50 / 2)

what I think, you keep coming back. Why is that?

Once again... YOU know NOTHING about me, where I stand politically, or what I have said.

You seem to base your "beliefs" about me and where I stand on comments I made to you.

So... you continue to be a fool.

Is that better?


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:28:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is that better? (2.00 / 1)

I may know nothing about you, but that just means I'm like everyone else on the planet. And it doesn't matter whether I agree with you or not, nor you with me. That is my point. We have only one meaningful role in this election, albeit a small one. That would be to elect Barack Obama and as many down-ticket Democrats as possible with our one puny vote.
 Oh, and one more thing - not to work against that goal.

Here. I'll throw you a bone: I'd like to see Dennis Kucinich as Secretary of Defense if the House would have a strong Liberal Democratic Majority in his absence.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:35:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Throw me a bone? (none / 0)

Kucinich as Sec of Def?  That would be laughed out of the Senate confirmation hearings.


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:55:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Throw me a bone? (2.00 / 1)

Ah. So, it seems, political consideration IS something that can be taken into account when considering the chances of success with one or another position on a nominee or a Bill. And success doesn't have to mean perfection. Impurity is allowed in some cases!

This is a real breakthrough! Maybe not a Christmas miracle, but it may constitute progress.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 08:56:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

okie (none / 0)

dokie

you are a "different" one.


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 03:44:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: hahaha! (2.00 / 1)

specious accusations?

come on - Obama stated those things.  You should be pissed at him as well, but I guess we should all lockstep in line with every word he states.


by colebiancardi on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:29:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Parsing Obama's remarks (2.00 / 1)

yielded the ammunition you've use against him. I've done my due diligence by studying the charges and evaluating them against what he has actually said. He's clean. I can only assume that you are pressing the attack with some ulterior motive in mind.

Quite Rovian of you.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:44:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Parsing Obama's remarks (none / 0)

what parsing?  All I've done was read his own words.

he may be "clean" to you, but that shit about "mental distress" is plainly BS pandering at best.  If it is not pandering, then it is pretty f'ing bad.

Ulterior motive - yeah, right, sure.  Like women reproductive rights.  and yes, McCain is worse.  But I really didn't want a choice between worse and a little bit less worse.


by colebiancardi on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:46:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Parsing Obama's remarks (2.00 / 1)

 Your comments make my case.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:51:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Uniter (2.00 / 1)

And who might the "best damn Democratic Presidential candidate in generations" be? Kerry? Gore? Dukakis? McGovern? Obama?
Oh, I forgot! Clinton! Remember the only winner?
by Marjoriest on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 09:35:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: this message of... (2.00 / 1)

You are a unity troll.  

xdem made a good point.  If you don't agree with it then refute it.  You scream like a stuck pig when people call you names yet you don't hesitate to do it to other.  

I am really sick of your bullshit concern for unity.    It is as thin as a sheet.


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 08:30:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (1.60 / 5)

Do you have reading comprehension problems?

I truly hope you realize that this post is almost directly in application to you, the type of person who believes the "Chosen One" cannot be critisized.


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 04:49:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 1)

Hint:  Calling Obama the "Chosen One" is something a concern troll would do.  

I should hold a seminar for you concern trolls some of you really suck at it.


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 08:31:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

uh ok (1.50 / 6)

This line is bullshit.

"those who were disappointed with Obama's win in the Primary are coming to realize the true depth of their irrelevancy.".

Thanks for playing.


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:03:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Irrelevancy (2.00 / 2)

is an apt description of the impact of persons without influence. Delusional is an apt description  for those same people if they believe that ranting on MyDD is going to make the candidate come to heel and become ideologically "pure" through those sincere efforts.

Reality is harsh. It is no more or less harsh depending on one's level of satisfaction with it.

We have a great candidate. He is not perfect. You cannot make him perfect. If he did what you want him to do because you told him to do it, he'd be a fool.

And he will win regardless of whether you vote for him support him, or write a million diaries against him.

Therefore: irrelevancy is not only apt, it is perfectly descriptive.  


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:31:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Irrelevancy (1.50 / 2)

I love the arrogance of this comment. It would do credit to David Addington. Unfortunately, as the amount of diaries on this subject demonstrates we have a bit of an open wound in the democratic party. If Obama's supplicants believe this is going to help him win in November they are much mistaken. That's why it's not irrelevant. I'm a Clintonista, but I had no problem adjusting when he got the nod although I still think he is the much weaker candidate of the two. I have no problem with him backtracking on one or two of his more ridiculous pledges like renegotiating Nafta and gun laws, but FISA  is a bit of a different matter, and if he starts wobbling on an Iraq pull out then he's going to lose me and I suspect a lot of other hardcore dems. A month after he has won the nomination I'm appalled but perhaps not surprised at the weakness of his poll numbers given the general climate. I don't want to be Jonah but so far his candidacy has not proved a run away train and he has to be disillusioning a lot of solid dems by his wavering on FISA and the war.    


by ottovbvs on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:57:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You have my (1.00 / 2)

written permission to vote or McCain. In fact, I am ordering you to vote for McCain. Do not defy me!


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:04:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You have my (1.66 / 3)

xdem:
Are you really such a fautous twerp as you sound are you just doing an imitation.
by ottovbvs on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:16:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: And I was accused (1.00 / 2)

of not being able to annoy anyone. Well you've proven that my doubters were mistaken.

I'll put you in the McCain column (along with the rest of the losers).


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:23:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Irrelevancy (2.00 / 2)

Actually, xdem's attitude toward those who won't follow Obama blindly reminds me of another Bushie. Via Wikipedia:

writer Ron Suskind, quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush:

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality--judiciously, as you will--we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors...and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."


Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.
by itsthemedia on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:34:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Irrelevancy (1.00 / 2)

The problem with friendly discussions of Politics is that the participants begin to believe that the opinions they express are in any way persuasive or important. Here's the simple fact: we all have only one thing left to do that is of importance in this election cycle, and that is to vote for as many Democrats as possible when we vote. Everything else is just a drop in the bucket of warm spit.

If you are advocating voting against Obama and other Democratic candidates in the election, then I welcome your disdain, for thou art a Republican - and hence you are my sworn enemy.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:48:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Irrelevancy (2.00 / 4)

If you had any history at all on this blog, you would know that I have been advocating for democratic unity since long before the primary was resolved. The problem is not my disdain, it is your disdain for anyone who has the temerity to express an opinion different from Obama's.

A quadreinnial spasm of voting does not make a democracy. A national discourse and expression of the opinions of the people is essential for a functional democracy. Your attitude is anathema to everything Obama claims to stand for - people powered politics, open government, a responsive electorate. In fact, your attitude is a lot more like George W Bush's statement after the '04 election. He called it an "accountability moment", as if once passed, his accountability to the people was completed.


Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.
by itsthemedia on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 11:00:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

what (2.00 / 2)

a fool you are.


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:02:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Look--- (2.00 / 1)

all I'm saying is that
 A.
your opinion of the candidate is wrong.
 B.
your 'concerns' are baseless.
 C.
your alternatives are limited - and stark.
 D.
your influence is infinitesimal.
 E.
your opinion of me is irrelevant.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:12:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You forgot this one (1.75 / 4)

but it is directed at you.

F.
You have no Fucking clue as to what you are saying.


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:15:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: F. (none / 0)

 Now that wasn't a very uniting thing to say!


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:28:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

haha (1.80 / 5)

I never said I was a "uniter". That is an Obama thing.

I do believe in unity but not at any cost. I do believe that a unified, but cranky, Democratic party can kick some serious butt.

BUT... I want that unified party to really STAND for something and stand up for what is right!


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 07:36:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What's right (none / 0)

is what Obama is standing up for, always has, and only fabricated evidence has been brought forward to dispute that. "Unity" has always stood for the pipe dream that those of us who decided to go with Obama over Clinton would come to our senses and admit we were wrong after all. The attacks on Obama this week were and are specious, as he is not in favor of telecom immunity, is not against a woman's right to choose, and is not changing his position on Iraq.

If the time comes to criticize Obama for genuine cause, I'll be there. Until then, I won't be baited, and I won't shy away from defending him from those who attack him using false arguments.

I call that really standing up for what is right.


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 08:33:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

huh? (2.00 / 5)

What is this supposed to mean?


Washington Woman
theocracywatch.org
EENR Blog
by kevin22262 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:00:29 PM EST

Re: huh? (2.00 / 2)

Tanslation: I am a sock-puppet metatroll(c).


Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.
by itsthemedia on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:21:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 3)

It certainly has jumped the shark but for the exact opposite reason than the one you claim.

People who criticize Obama honestly are not the problem. The fact is that MyDD has been overrun by McCain trolls who keep bashing Obama from two different sides.

Obama is at the same time an atheist elitist who scorns the religion of the common folk, and a theocrat who does NOT scorn the religious charities. Obama is either an uncompromising far-leftist arrogant idiot, or a scared pandering centrist. Obama's supporters are the same time "sheep" who follow their leader blindly, and also people who will never hold together till November.

So fucking no -- I don't accept people with such inconsistent claims as honest folk with honest concerns: for such people to be "honest" they'd have to be clinically insane. If you don't see people like "aliveandkicking" as the troll that he is, then the problem is with you, not with the people who correctly identify him as a troll.

Now principled people like kevin who bashed and criticized Obama over his positions are another matter altogether -- to my knowledge nobody ever called Kevin a troll for example. And that's simply because he isn't.

Jerome ofcourse called me a Republican troll and banned my former account merely for arguing that Hillary's lack of judgement regarding Bill isn't any better than Obama's lack of judgment regarding Wright.

That simple thing sufficed to get me banned. Chew on that as a datapoint on how all Obama-bashers (whether Clinton supporters or McCain supporters) tend to get coddled and supported by the powers-that-be in this place


by Aris Katsaris2 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:17:52 PM EST

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 1)

I'm not referring to the legitimate trolls--like you provided, Aliveandkickin. But there are many of us here--including myself, Colebiancardi, and Sricki who have been named as "concern trolls" simply because of the FISA issues and critizing Obama--that is the purpose of the diary. I think most here can easily tell the difference between legitimate Democrats and McBloggers in the context of the argument.


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:24:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (1.00 / 1)

You are a concern troll.

You never have anything good to say about Obama and you hold him to a standard he will never achieve.

Write a diary about how betrayed you feel about Clinton supporting FISA and then you will at least be a better concern troll.


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Sat Jul 05, 2008 at 08:26:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You're discovering (2.00 / 5)

that "unity" is just a codeword for submission? Following Barack's whole career here(in IL) and seeing the attitude of his campaign and his supporters during the primary I saw this coming a mile away. Which is part of the reason I said "no deal" to the "unity," plus I've never liked ponies.


by LatinoVoter on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:32:43 PM EST

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 5)

Who would want to come here if only praise for politicians is allowed.  I don't care who the candidate is or what party they belong to, they can't be allowed to take us for granted and to assume they can do and say anything and we won't say a word. They had better know BEFORE they are elected that they are working for us, and not the other way around.  I won't hire someone if they are not concerned with what their employer wants them to do.


by Scotch on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:32:46 PM EST

What do people want to talk about? (2.00 / 4)

There was a diary about the Colombian hostages yesterday that just sat there, only two recommendations.

But Obama/Not Obama diaries dominate the rec list. Then people complain that only candidate diaries make the rec list. Then people complain there are too many trolls. Then people complain all the good trolls are gone.

It's like people only want diaries that say "Obama is great." How does that provoke discussion?

What do you people want to discuss?


by catfish2 on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:45:48 PM EST

Re: Has MyDD jumped the proverbial shark? (2.00 / 1)

It's funny how most of those who seem to be criticizing Obama for becoming a centrist or moving to the right are the same ones who criticized him during the primary as being too liberal. At least, it would be funny if they weren't so dead serious about it.


"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." Samuel Johnson
by MS01 Indie on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 05:47:02 PM EST

Re: By serious (none / 0)

 do you mean 'concerned'?


by xdem on Fri Jul 04, 2008 at 06:16:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]