See... Criticizing Obama Means You're NOT a Democrat
It's official. Speaking words critical of Obama means you're just not a "true" Democrat.
I was wandering through Daily Kos and stumbled across this diary . It seems that the moderators at dKos see the need to put their foot down and squash any incipient signs of objective evaluation of Obama's actions.
Some fair-minded, reasonable Democrats and supporters of Barack Obama, in short, are getting tired, even disgusted with what they perceive as ceaseless negativism about the Obama administration. They're tired of the histrionics about how Obama is a sell out, or we should have expected him to be this bad a president, not only because they don't think he's a sell out, but because they reject the underlying premise that he's not doing a pretty decent job. And they get exasperated when they see crap about how Obama is no better than Bush. I share their assessments and judgments, but not their exasperation. Not because they aren't 100% correct, but only because I guess I've come to a greater acceptance that some people at Daily Kos aren't Democrats. They take no joy in seeing the country set on a more positive course under Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress. They're malcontents or worse.
So, what should be done by or for all you fair-minded, reasonable, critical-thinking Democrats irritated with the . [sic]
I love the implication in that sentence. Because of course, anyone with a criticism of Obama is of course not fair-minded and is incapable of critical thinking.
First, the tough love. Trying a bit harder at brushing off the idiocy. Don't let it get to you. And of course remember that some tough criticism of the Obama administration will be warranted, and should not be dismissed out of hand. The administration won't be perfect, and there will be reasons for principled opposition which even if you don't share you should respect.
Second, recognize that most of the doomsayers and nattering nabobs of negativity aren't all people who've "changed" or are Democrats who can't be pleased. Most of them probably aren't Democrats. Sure, most probably voted for Obama. But there are definitely some posters around here—again, a very small, albeit vocal and active group—who really hate the Democratic party. They don't want to see our party and candidates and elected officials succeed. They're more concerned with trafficking in their own poses and purity.
Furthermore, there are people who are conflicted. They're not necessarily bad Democrats, but they're still fighting the primary wars. They want Obama to succeed, but they also won't accept that their candidate didn't win, or think that Obama wasn't the best candidate, or whatever. Those are their issues to get over, not yours, and they're not reflective of Democrats in general, 90% of whom in just about every poll are giving Obama high marks for his job performance, and who believe the country is turning in the right direction.
I found this diary so ironic that I just had to post it here. Especially since we'd just had a thread concerning partisanship that seemed to hit a few nerves.
- Purpleface's blog
- Login or register to post comments

Comments :
That's DK for ya..
Sites like that have to realize that sometimes, they are in a cocoon of sorts. Although most Americans seemingly are taking the let's-wait-and-see approach, its the folks who plug in every day to the ups and downs who are getting impatient with Obama. Me, I'll just wait and see. I'm not ready to pronounce Obama as a success or failure until we at least get a year into this thing.
http://wealthweekly.blogspot.com
Wii FC:2805-8311-8040-2678 Brawl: 2277-7051-2186
I thought...
that the line of thinking:
and other such rank and file bullying were exclusively for partisan Republicans squashing dissent? (snark)
Oh well...
+4
.
I'm the Bugs Bunny of Swords Crossed!
-4 Strongly Disagree - 0 Meh - Strongly Agree +4Well...
NOT a Democrat is fine, they can say that all they want. It's when we get into the NOT an American crapola that I get bothered.
We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
It's silly
But if folks at the far ends of the right and the left are really mad at the president and think he's doing a bad job -- well, that might just be a good sign. We'll see.
A politician is an arse upon which everyone has sat except a man -- e e cummings
"There was a bomb in that baby"
NSFW
But on topic, A minor internet celebrity
has more crude take on people that blindly defend Obama.
In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Those who don't believe that Obama's above criticism
and who shut down, or attempt to shut down people who are critical of some of the stuff that Obama's doing are, imho, little or no better than the "Israel can do no wrong" crowd, or the people who defended G. W. Bush every step of the way. We've just been through 8 years of this crap, and we don't need any more.
I wouldn't draw any conclusions about DailyKos...
based on that diary. Having some knowledge of the backstory that precipitated that screed, I have full confidence that that frontpager was acting entirely on his own, based on his own petty grudges against some users who he has had run-ins with. So when you say this:
I'd ask you if you have any evidence that there is any sort of effort on the part of the moderators of DailyKos to squash criticism of Obama. I scan the site most days and I just don't see it.
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
Technically
Yes, the diary was written by only one front-pager. So technically, that sentence should read "moderator." Most diaries are only written by one person :-).
However, while I've seen a few "Dana is full of it" diaries in response (loved the Houle Hoop one!), I have yet to see any of the other front pagers (aka the management) come out in criticism of what Dana wrote.
Silence from that group is assent and tacit support, I think, or at the minimum, indifference.
Well
I will allow the possibility of silent support from Kos himself, but it would be because he probably appreciates Dana Houle's open disdain for the Dirty Fkin Hippies and all their wacko conspiracy theories and revolutionary rants that drive more respectable types with clout and money away. But to believe that that support is about Obama would be a mistake IMO. Support for Obama is only incidental in the daily struggle for the soul of the site between the "respectable, serious people" and the Dirty Fkin Hippies. You have to remember that Obama didn't kiss DailyKos's a$$ and was never really a favored candidate on the site-- Edwards was that guy. Obama even had less than complimentary things to say about DailyKos. And now he's just a little bit too much Republican-Lite for most of the frontpagers even.
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
Nice, interesting entry.
What particularly would give someone a scent of Republican Lite after taking a wiff of Obama?
Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition From Mediocre Minds...~ A. Einstein
Many things...
In no particular order, these are some of the themes that permeate the arguments of those who would paint Obama as Republican Lite:*
*note that these are not a list of my personal criticisms of the Obama administration
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
Since I don't post on dailykos,
I find other sources and make my own conclusions, which, just as often as not, are VERY contrary to certain other unnamed and unidenfied posters here on swordscrossed. (wink, wink.)