Skip to main content

View Diary: On the false equivalence between "Obama rox" and "Obama sux" (295 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That's just wrong. (14+ / 0-)
    Whereas many of those who believe he Rox are loyal to the person/personality and/or circle the wagons for the Party establishment.
    Where do you pull this bullshit from? Is there a place they grow condescending tripe on trees and you just got back from a vacation in its capital?

    Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

    by MBNYC on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 04:35:12 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  That's one way to express disagreement. (29+ / 0-)

      Of course, you could also try to establish "direct clash," which (in the language of debate) would mean that you directly contradicted one of Kombema's sentences.

      For instance, one can argue that there are other reasons for endorsing Obama than "person/ personality and/or circle the wagons for the Party establishment."  What would those reasons be?

      The debate-language word for your response, on the other hand, is what is typically called "combative interaction."  

      "Exxon’s CEO was recently quoted as saying, ‘What good is it to save the planet if humanity suffers?’, as if the future of humanity could be separated from the ecosystems on which we depend." -- Charlotte Wilson

      by Cassiodorus on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 04:38:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm sorry you don't see this reality, and if so, (11+ / 0-)

      maybe you are also purely a fan of Obama's policies, or not, and have no particular loyalty to him as a person. But there are those here who treat any "insult" of Obama as a virtual personal affront -- as in, "How dare you criticize him!"

      I was just accused of being making "slimy insults" for saying the WH/Obama are looking like asses in their response to the NSA revelations, and deliberately straw man'd with the claim that I'd said Obama IS an ass. That's the kind of silliness I'm talking about, and it exists here, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

      In fairness, if you don't share such feelings as the Obama-the-Person loyalists, then you may just miss the implications, and good for you for giving such people the benefit of the doubt. But I see it, and it's insidious at times. He's just a fucking politician, and he's currently making an ass out of his administration, and damaging the country and the Constitution in the process.

      "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

      by Kombema on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 04:44:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, I see it. (11+ / 0-)

        But with respect, your broad brush misses some finer strokes.

        But there are those here who treat any "insult" of Obama as a virtual personal affront -- as in, "How dare you criticize him!"
        Some, sure. The inverse is also true. The real question is whether or not we can have disputes among ourselves when we're really basically arguing with caricatures.

        I'm right behind you when you say that the NSA scandal is damaging the Constitution and this administration. What I'm not willing to do is denounce this President in toto, or sign off on a statement like "he's worse than [fill in the blank]", when I don't see that as empirically sustainable.

        Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

        by MBNYC on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 04:54:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well, FWIW, I am also not denouncing him in toto (9+ / 0-)

          Yes, there are some, even many things this administration has done right. And, for the record, since many of his fans seem to think if you're upset with many of his policies, then you're just like the Republicans (a Paulbot, etc.), of COURSE he's better in the main than a Teabagger Repug.

          So I think we may be closer in principle in acknowledging the finer strokes, even as we may disagree on the implications of the broader, sum total of benefit or damage that this administration is bestowing on the country. I want to make this about policies, not loyalty to politicians, and I appreciate that you do too.

          "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

          by Kombema on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 05:02:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes. (12+ / 0-)

            I agree. And to boot, the "firebagger" remarks are odious. So are the "authoritarian surveillance stooges" or however it's phrased. The reality is far more complex than the insults.

            I would just really like to have more conversations here like this one, as opposed to variations on a pointless theme of counting who rated what comment with which sinister motive. These don't just offend our collective intelligence, bad enough on its own, they create divisions that we later need to heal.

            I've seen many such piefights since first signing up here in 2006, so there is precedent, but this one seems to go deeper than its predecessors. Hence my concern.

            Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

            by MBNYC on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 05:23:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Now there's a sig line for someone to steal: (8+ / 0-)

              Reality is far more complex than the insults.

              Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

              by Meteor Blades on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 05:42:41 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  With proper credit (6+ / 0-)

                licensed merchandise could be not far behind. Screenplay, TV deals, Broadway, maybe a fashion line. Definitely a fragrance.

                Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

                by MBNYC on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 05:48:37 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Some parts of reality are. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Kombema, poligirl, kharma

                Some are not. One of the progressions I've been noting with horror over the past several years is how politics is getting simpler. That's always a bad thing. Politics when decent, or halfway decent, is complex and nuanced. Politics when simple is a boot in the face.

                Or to quote Watership Down, "These are my teeth so this is my cowslip. These are my claws so this is my burrow."

                Might makes right is real simple, and that's where politics has been going, and it's been speeding up recently. Some people see it; some people don't; some of the people who don't verbally whale on the people who do. Some of the people who do retaliate.

                That's what I see.

                Ou sont les neigedens d'antan?

                by SouthernLiberalinMD on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 07:16:26 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Interesting to note that at least two (5+ / 0-)

                front pagers commented in this diary, which is at minimum clearly a thoughtful one, but neither found it worthy of a respectful "rec'd for discussion" or even a tip.

                In my mind, that plays well into the diary's point about where we stand in relation to each other here on dkos.

                I suppose neither of them wanted to be perceived as reccing the thesis to those who would find that distasteful. I suppose it's understandable, given the dynamics here.

                But maybe this is just me, and how my mind works. I tend to notice these peripheral things.

                In this regard neither the attitude of "Obama rox" nor the nonexistent unity of "Obama sux" will suffice.  We might start to ditch the "Obama rox/ Obama sux" nonsense by clarifying where we in fact stand, rather than obscuring our positions with side-arguments.

                "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

                by ZhenRen on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 09:52:17 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Disagree - very few mind mere policy disagreement (9+ / 0-)

            It's not mere disagreement over "finer" strokes that fuels the schism, as you suggest.  I would humbly offer that it is the overwrought rhetoric coming from the "sux" that puts the "rox" in a defensive posture.

            Does this sound like disagreement over "finer strokes" to you?:

            1.  Obama is a liar and a fraud;

            2.  Obama is a lying POS;

            3.  Obama has presided over nothing but lies and broken promises;

            4.  Obama is a traitor destroying America;

            5.  Obama is shredding the Constitution and ruining the country;

            6.  Obama is a tyrant and a dictator who deserves to be impeached;

            7.  Obama is a fascist determined to destroy our freedom;

            8.  Obama is trying to destroy our rights;

            9.  Obama is much worse than Bush;

            10. Obama is a murderer;

            11. Obama is going through his critics' records to find dirt on them;

            12. Obama intends on using drone strikes against Americans.

            These are not terms culled from right-wing hate radio.  This is rhetoric from the "sux" element.  Go into any recent NSA diary and you will still find virtually all of this rhetoric and worse getting highly-rec'd, particularly rhetoric of the "Obama is a liar, is worse than Bush, and deserves to be impeached" variety.

            So, you'll pardon me if I do not chalk the current disagreements up to mere differences as to the "fine strokes."  A large contingent here has gone off the rails in their express hatred for Obama.

      •  But there were several whole (5+ / 0-)

        diaries about Snowden where anyone who had any critique of Snowden got that same "How dare you!" treatment, as well.

        Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

        by delphine on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 05:33:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Maybe when Snowden is President (7+ / 0-)

          I'll invite you to my "Snowden rox/ Snowden sux" diary.

          "Exxon’s CEO was recently quoted as saying, ‘What good is it to save the planet if humanity suffers?’, as if the future of humanity could be separated from the ecosystems on which we depend." -- Charlotte Wilson

          by Cassiodorus on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 05:44:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ok. But until he is president... (4+ / 0-)

            let's just shut the fuck up about him. Deal?

            Please pretend that I don't give a shit.

            by Jim Riggs on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 06:01:23 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yay!!!!!!!! (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MichiganGirl, Catesby

              Thank you.

              It's been like a couple arguing about whether the UPS guy is good or evil after he drops off the blow up doll the husband ordered without informing the wife.

              No one wants to talk about the plastic in the room.

              Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

              by delphine on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 07:02:19 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Why? Snowden has arguably had more influence on (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              poligirl, kharma

              public debate about Constitutional rights and government surveillance, the Patriot Act, and any number of other issues, than anyone in a generation or more. Why so reluctant to talk about his and other whistleblowers revelations?

              "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

              by Kombema on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 07:05:40 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I have no problem discussing his revelations, (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Kombema, delphine, MBNYC, Yasuragi

                I am just personally of the opinion that once he made those revelations he personally ceased to matter all that much.

                In my opinion he was never the story, nor should he have been... The information he leaked? Yes, that was important, but Snowden?

                Not so much... He's a guy that let everyone know about some important information... the information should be the story, not him. I could give a rat's ass about him.

                My two cents.

                "It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and through rebellion." Oscar Wilde, 1891

                by MichiganGirl on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 08:24:19 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Agreed, for the most part -- though I do care abou (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  PhilJD, kharma

                  the administration's heavy-handed persecution of him as a whistle-blower. That's the OTHER big story he's related to, in addition to the NSA revelations.

                  "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

                  by Kombema on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 08:41:00 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Show me. Typically the accusation is falsely (7+ / 0-)

          accusing someone who believes what Snowden did was good and right, and labeling it as Snowden "worship." I.e., making it about some cult-like personality thing. This is the problem: A lot of the Obama fans, and/or Obama policy fans, want to make it all about "worshiping" Snowden or Greenwald, or in the more uncharitable bullshit accusations about admiring Ron/Rand Paul or similar nonsense.

          For critics of the NSA policy, it's ABOUT THE POLICY, and if Obama is the doubling-down advocate of such carry-over (and new and improved) policies from the Bush Administration, the objection usually isn't just that some over-the-top comment may be made about Snowden (being a commie-loving Paulite traitor, blah, blah, blah), it's to the misdirect away from the reality of his exposing this spying shit, in an attempt to personalize it and smear the critics with some asinine guilt-by-association shit (as that worthless POC diary about Assange tried to do last night, tying NSA critics to Assange and from there to Drudge and Paul).

          As Cassiodorus might say: A series of classic debate logical fallacies, including straw man, ad hominem, red herring, and non-sequitur, among many other cheap debate tricks.

          "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

          by Kombema on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 07:02:54 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  This is such a strange time (6+ / 0-)

            If you support Snowden, we say it's a cult of personality.

            If I support Obama, you say it's a cult of personality.

            If you support Snowden, according to you, we sling uncharitable bullshit accusations at you.

            In the same sentence you decry us calling you "worshippers", you call us "Obama fans" or "Obama policy fans".

            Hmm, so if you can support someone without worshipping them, then why is it that we can't support Obama without being called worshippers?

            I support Obama.  I'm a critic of the NSA.  Why is this so difficult to comprehend?  That we can support Obama AND criticize the NSA, and therefore there IS NO ROXX SIDE.

            Because the "roxx side" is supposedly made up of people who think Obama can do no wrong and therefore we are blinded to what's wrong with the NSA.

            Diary after diary about Snowden being a hero, but no diary about Obama being a hero, and we're the worshippers?

            Bottom line, is that just about word for word we can say the same thing you just said, with just as much hurt, as much fervor.

            Go to every diary starting with "Yawn you fucking idiots" and you will find them rife with those exact comments:  If you aren't ready to condemn Obama and wholly embrace Snowden, you don't care about the 4th Amendment.  You're an apologist.  You're like bush, you're like a Hitler follower, you're willfully ignorant, blah blah.

            I mean, I saw those comments so many times, and I've been in the minority and bashed so thoroughly by "your" side,  that I'm completely amazed that you actually think that happened to you and can't see it happened to us.

            I'll find any number of examples just to finally prove it.

            I shall return.

            Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

            by delphine on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 10:23:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  A "fan" doth not make a "worshipper." Not sure (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Cassiodorus

              what the problem is. I'm a "fan" of the Bill of Rights, and of Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, and of a sports team or two. So if you're an "enthusiastic supporter" of Obama, then you're a fan, no?

              And in my taxonomy, I do not put honest critics of the NSA programs in the "Rox" side -- but primarily people who ardently defend it because Obama's doing it, and who reflexively and derisively attack critics of NSA and the president.

              "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

              by Kombema on Sun Aug 18, 2013 at 12:17:50 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Here you go. (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Matt Z, MBNYC, guyeda, Yasuragi, Hammerhand

            First, search for a diary called "Yawn You Fucking Idiots".

            For some reason, my mouse will not copy comments for me to cut and paste.  You'll find all of this in that one diary.

            This should answer the decades old question About how the Germans could so blindly follow Hitler.  Before it was fear, it was the cult of personality.  The Obama cheerleaders make it perfectly clear how an out of control, drunk on power president gets a pass to pursue any authoritative [sic] agenda he so desires.
            That one got 35 recs and 35 HRs.  

            That diary includes "Line up for showers, you dumbasses" as well.

            "the fact I am referring to is that a tyrant's agenda can only be advanced through the support of his ardent supporters. . . . I am an expert and accomplished scholar/researcher on the Nazi era.  Can I help it if I see maddingly [sic] similar comparisons?"
            Then there were folks (some that are in this diary) who actually tried to say it was okay to use the nazi reference as long as we weren't calling anyone hitler but only comparing us to Germans in the 30's.
            "Cowards."
            "They're worse than idiotic"
            (followed by accusing people of selling their freedom - mind you no one defended the NSA, they just took umbrage at being called fucking idiots because their hair wasn't on fire - being willing to sacrifice our freedom, reflexively defending our party) - this comment got more than 350 recs!
            Followed by this, regarding why people "defend" the NSA (which again, no one did, but they commented in the diary)
            People who do it because they are paid to do it . . . I difficult economic times, it's probably easier than ever to find people to do it."
            This got 177 recs!
            "People seem to take offense at that charge here.  Why they think the other possibilities are better is a mystery to me"  In other words, it's better to be called a paid shill than to be a fucking idiot?
            88 recs.

            Followed by:  

            Occam's Razor seems to indicated that they're just "good Germans", you know what I mean?"
            15 recs
            "Do you think this economy is an accident?  Drones (Obama supporters) are easier to find when more are hungry"
            67 recs
            "They don't want educated commentary.  [i.e., the hitler follower reference] They want to hide what scares them"
            20 recs

            Anyway, know that from the start, anything less than a full embrace of Snowden and full rejection of Obama was considered to be "yawning" "shilling for the NSA", drone-like behavior, and illustration of how Hitler came to power.

            This was the diary that set the tone:  anyone who wasn't buying the hyperbole was called a scared Obama cheerleader who didn't care about NSA abuses and/or who was a paid NSA shill.  And that stuff got reccd!

            I posted only a few times in there, mostly "Why do you have to label people" sort of comments.  I was shocked. Ironically, I got dinged for using terms like "hair on fire" and "unreasonable" in a diary called "Yawn You Fucking Idiots".  

            The type of insults slung were as bad or worse than if the diary had been about Bachmann or Limbaugh, seriously.

            Every diary since then has gone to the same place - lumping people together and sticking false, dismissive labels on us.

            People reccd a comment comparing us to Hitler followers!

            That's why it's surprising to me to hear your comment.

            Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. Barack Obama

            by delphine on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 11:34:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  anti-intellectual (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CroneWit, poligirl, run around, Kombema

      fits right in with ad hominen and personal attacks on the messenger.   You condescendingly lectured your audience in your last diary as if they were too stupid to use their forks.

      Don't bother to respond because I don't feed the squirrels.  

      What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

      by dkmich on Sat Aug 17, 2013 at 05:25:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site