Skip to main content

I truly don't mean this diary to be inflammatory.  I intend it to be reflective.  Just as when something goes wrong, it may deserve discussion, so should there be discussion when something goes right.

I may be wrong in this, but in my memory four people have at various times held "the franchise" in Obama-related photo diaries during my time on this site: Al Rodgers, Muzikal203, and blackwaterdog in the past, it is now looks like this is the time for ThisIsMyTime.  Al posted diaries called Hope and Requium this week; Muzikal is presumably mired in first-year-associate work, and BWD has of course gone elsewhere.

Did you notice something about this week's photodiaries?  Did you hear the loud sound of no controversy?

The photodiaries have become an increasing point of intrasite conflict during the Obama Administration, so I was interested that, this week, the dog did not bark.  So far as I noticed, everyone (me included) thought these diaries were entirely welcome.

I can think of a few reasons for this.  Two are obvious; one might be less so, and it is what occasions this diary.

First, of course, the events of the past week have been shocking and most of us have craved unity and healing, which President Obama has offered wonderfully.

Second, people hereabouts were thrilled to see Al -- who clearly has some healing powers of his own -- come back to us this week.  His last diary before the above pair was in for Veterans Day in 2009.  He has certainly been missed -- but I think that staying around or not is purely up to him.  It was an act of class and grace to come back here this past week and I'm sure many besides myself appreciate it.

I am an occasional critic of President Obama, while continuing to believe that in some ways he is our greatest President since FDR.  (He's certainly the first ever to have a truly modern sensibility, being multicultural and a "sensitive guy.")  When I criticize him, it's because I disagree on the issues (FISA/habeas, some economic issues) or because I want to help set up a powerful wave at his back, keeping his spine straight, to counter the waves coming at him from opponents who want to crumple him.  Reasonable people can (and do!) disagree on particular approaches, but ideally people can generally come to agree that he is trying (as are we) to accomplish great things in a difficult political environment, and there's no clear recipe book for doing so.  This isn't following a simple recipe in grade school chemistry; it's more like developing cold fusion.

So, anyway, while I eventually decided to leave blackwaterdog's diaries alone, I had and have some sympathy for those who wouldn't.  Like those defending the diaries, the vast majority of them are fundamentally good people who have come to think that the battles we fight here on DKos, where someone is always wrong on the internet, are so consequential that they must be fought with hammers and tongs, until fur and feathers and tooth enamel fly.  Hell, I even fought with Muzikal at times (and not at others) over a milder version of the conflicts of 2009-2010.

So I write from the perspective of someone fairly sensitive to what some see as the problems with diaries.  And my reaction to Al's diaries was, to crib from Rep. Giffords's doctors, 101% positive.  Why?  Well, click those links in the diary intro and stare at them for a while.

I'll wait.

Did you notice that the pictures speak for themselves?

I did not, reading the diaries, feel like I was being induced to feel only a certain way or that any dissenting views I might have were illegitimate.  It was just seeing, and taking solace in the photos to the extent I chose.  I felt entirely uncoerced and able to enjoy (no matter any disagreements) the visual reminder that this man is President (rather than any conceivable current Republican) and that this woman is First Lady.  I felt no need to "but, but, but!"  There was nothing to fight back against.

My youngest daughter, not yet a citizen, has taken to singing the American national anthem simply for the pleasure of it (or maybe just as a break from Lady Gaga and Katy Perry.)  She has found beauty in that clumsily worded poem that I had not recognized for many years.  I don't think that the words matter all that much to her, but I think that the music -- the auditory equivalent of the images in picture diaries -- spoke to her.

The pictures in the photo diaries usually speak to me as well.  The titles -- well, the last two were President Obama, Thank You For Your Leadership! and How Dare He Sign The 9/11 Health and Compensation Act in Kailua, Hawaii, and even when I agreed with the premise, they struck me as an invitation to rumble.  They implied, to me, that to enjoy the diaries was to take a particular position with respect to a wide variety of controversies regarding the President and his Administration -- and, being a Democrat, the first thing that did was make me want to think of how I disagreed and what conclusions I did not want to be taken an endorsing.

"Don't tell other people how to write their diaries" is a good rule of thumb here, but the photodiaries have led to enough virtual bloodshed in the last year or two that I think it's valid to offer a suggestion simply so that people can register their agreement or disagreement.

I think that the photodiaries are best when they are, as Al's were, presented without obvious intent to make any sort of point, so that they can serve as our own "moment of silence (and contemplation)," our own chance to come together not in rancor over our disagreements, but in good fellowship over what binds us.

I urge whoever takes up the franchise, now or next: don't use the photos of the Administration to make a political point or wrangle people to a political view.  Let's just look at them together and be happy that things are better than they could be.  Let's let the images speak for themselves -- and, feeling no push towards any conclusion or position, set aside our arguments there.  It will take both sides to make this work, but I suggest it as a good "new year's resolution" for us as a site.

I thank Al Rodgers, again, for showing us how it's done.  He makes it look easy, and it's not.

Originally posted to Doane Spills on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:39 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  For a diary "arguing against words," this one (198+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    deminva, JekyllnHyde, Ed in Montana, Mimikatz, DowneastDem, jec, CJB, Ray Radlein, hester, houndcat, Debby, cotterperson, meg, Stein, KateG, rubyr, marge, Creosote, Gustogirl, TheMomCat, bronte17, indybend, jiffykeen, mikidee, Larry Bailey, wishingwell, Miss Blue, sidnora, aitchdee, wader, MrSandman, mrkvica, grannyhelen, exiledfromTN, texasmom, peterborocanuck, NYFM, Catte Nappe, AbsurdEyes, kalmoth, Kitsap River, CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream, Timroff, Massman, bloomer 101, Bluesee, radarlady, 3goldens, jrooth, greycat, blueyedace2, Philoguy, bagman, panicbean, Gary Norton, Pam from Calif, GreyHawk, kyrol, lotlizard, sunbro, rb608, WisePiper, The Raven, Shotput8, Pluto, Ekaterin, xanthippe2, Snud, trashablanca, buddabelly, BachFan, ravenwind, Clytemnestra, edwardssl, plum, ferallike, koNko, MTmofo, Son of a Cat, Lefty Coaster, LokiMom, nonnie9999, tapestry, soccergrandmom, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, frankzappatista, RantNRaven, punditician, Picot verde, Hedwig, blueintheface, BentLiberal, marykk, dotsright, camlbacker, threegoal, Flyfish100, edsbrooklyn, ezdidit, Unbozo, davehouck, OIL GUY, rogereaton, Got a Grip, Terra Mystica, bkamr, mayrose, aurabass, OleHippieChick, lineatus, Jake Williams, bluesheep, Drewid, CitizenJoe, Karl Rover, LaFeminista, JGBfan, 1BQ, Rhysling, J M F, aufklaerer, litoralis, ceebee7, greengemini, LinSea, not a cent, bsmechanic, Daily Activist, NWTerriD, Alise, allep10, kevinpdx, DaNang65, Livvy5, French Imp, susan in sc, cassandraX, lompe, TFinSF, stegro, LaughingPlanet, psfinla, gramofsam1, amk for obama, jethrock, UTvoter, Lost and Found, freeport beach PA, Eddie L, Klick2con10ue, JoanMar, gulfgal98, pixxer, Otteray Scribe, Floande, science nerd, Actbriniel, TheHalfrican, Jane Lew, al ajnabee, renbear, gobears2000, angstall, kerflooey, implicate order, opoponax, BlueJessamine, Situational Lefty, beantown mom, wsbuffalo, KelleyRN2, princesspat, molunkusmol, Lorikeet, thomask, dle2GA, Prav duh, merrily1000, Vtdblue, nokomis, Crazy Moderate, Marihilda, RLMiller, Regina in a Sears Kit House, Rashaverak, MichaelNY, Nena20409, Patric Juillet, Siri, SeattleProgressive, Miep, tb92, AnnieR, peachcreek, Free Jazz at High Noon, reginahny, BusyinCA, MartyM

    had too many of them, I know. but I hope they're useful ones.

    I'll set out two comments below and people can rec the one they like.  (I'm not using an anonymous poll because I think that this is a position people ought to want to take out in the open.)  No, I'm not doing this because I need the mojo; my TU status is fine, thanks.

    The first says: "photo diaries ideally do not promote a particular viewpoint regarding the leadership of the President."  The second says "photo diaries ideally may promote a particular viewpoint regarding the leadership of the President."

    Pick one or neither.  (You can also pick both, but that's just weird.)

    Here's to peace and cooperation, in DKos and beyond, in 2011.

    Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
    It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

    by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:38:28 PM PST

    •  non-feline photodiaries are back? Huzzah! (17+ / 0-)

      "See? I'm not a racist! I have a black friend!"

      by TheHalfrican on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:26:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Check out the links to Al's, if you missed them (17+ / 0-)

        They're just ... well, just look.  You won't regret it.

        Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
        It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

        by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:51:28 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Who are we to tell anyone (21+ / 0-)

          how their diary should be? If you want to post pictures, post pictures. Why should we drive people away just because we don't like their style?

          •  There is always the option (17+ / 0-)

            of not clicking on the diary.  I would like to think we are intelligent enough to realize that we can think and comment about the heavy duty issues, while at the same time, enjoy taking a break from that momentarily to recharge with feel good photos.  I hope we are more than one dimensional.  We don't have to be deep thinkers all the time.  I also think one thing that should be considered is that the photo of Obama with his eyes welling up with emotion paints a picture of him as the whole person.  The man that carries the weight that most of us would not be able to carry.  We need to see all sides and place value on those small things that make the whole person.

            •  There's some good discussion below (0+ / 0-)

              If you want other perspectives, most of them (at least from yesterday) thoughtful ones, they're there for you to find.

              Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
              It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

              by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 09:43:42 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I absolutely agree (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Seneca Doane

                I have opinions on what happened with BWD, I recognize the difference between Al's photo diaries and BWD's.  I also think that in at least one respect, the photo diaries are exactly like other diaries, that is that we all have our own opinions, some opinions are stated in what might be considered a rude and nasty tone.
                For those that thought BWD's were a PR campaign, that is for them to decide and I can understand that. I agree with you SD, BWD would make an excellent PR person. Some stuff got a little over the top nasty, I know, but look at some of the other comments on some of the other posts, we all can get heated, depending on the topic.  That is what stirs some of us to action, some of us to trying to think in a different way.
                Al's diaries are typically not the rah,rah that BWD's were, but that doesn't mean that for some his were better or worse, just different.
                I think there are things to simply accept the way they are.  I have checked BWD's pics at her new "home", it continues to be what she did here at the beginninng, I can decide whether to continue to check out the photos or if I want to read her opinions about daily happenings.
                I think there is room for almost everything, though I usually skip over the nasty stuff.  I can be rude with the best of them, but it isn't why we are all here.  We would like to discuss and/or debate what we can do to make sure our voices are heard about what we think is right.  There are nuances with all of us, we each take away something a little different than someone else reading or commenting on the same thing.  

          •  If someone chooses to (4+ / 0-)
            post a photo diary with an inflammatory title, they in the very least ought not to act surprised when it attracts flames.

            I guess you didn't read the last part of this diary.

          •  People leave; they are not driven away (4+ / 0-)

            This is a site that is about political debate, among other things.

            If one posts a diary and it gets rec'd, it will, almost always incite debate.*

            There's nothing wrong with that.

            People who aren't prepared to have their ideas debated, even if those ideas are expressed in photographs and captions, are responsible for their own inability to deal with the format of this site.

            As Harry Truman once said, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen!

            ______________________

            * Though this diary notes an interesting exception for the recent Al Rodgers photo diaries, I think these reflect very unusual circumstances.

            •  You're making me argue against myself! haha (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              BleacherBum153, 3goldens, Vtdblue

              Here's the problem: "among other things."

              One group argues that Obama photo diaries are among the "among other things" that this site is about, so political debate therein is inappropriate.

              Another argues that Obama photo diaries are, in context, "debate" in that they contain debatable ideas and push a point of view, so "heat" is appropriate.

              These are both legitimate takes; I agree with neither fully.  What I'm trying to say is: there are ways to do them that render them more as "other things" -- places for simple contemplation -- and less places for debate.

              Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
              It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

              by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 09:49:01 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Any point of view is legitimate. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Seneca Doane

                No point of view is above debate.

                And while I think the notion that photo diaries aren't subject to debate is ludicrous, of course people are free to make that argument. What they're really not free to do is to expect that argument to go unchallenged.

                In fact, most of those objecting to debates in the comment threads of photo diaries don't make a nuanced argument that photo diaries are somehow above debate. Rather, they tend to argue that if you don't like something, you should just ignore it (or not click the link). That's a much more general argument against political disagreement. And, again, it's a perfectly legitimate point of view. But it falls far, far short of the majority opinion around here...let alone a site rule.

                Or to put this another way: nowhere in the site rules does it say that anything is beyond debate (with the exception, perhaps, of a few conspiracy theories and some rightwing talkingpoints).  And to get back to my original point: people who don't like this fact are not being driven from the site. They choose to leave because they don't like dKos....which is of course their right, too.

                •  The Root of the Photo Diary Problem (7+ / 0-)

                  Here's what I think the root of the meta-problem with photo diaries is.

                  Most photodiaries are about people getting together and feeling good about something. In a non-pejorative sense, the images in these diaries are propaganda, that is, they're information designed to produce a common feeling on the part of their audience.

                  When that propaganda is successful these diaries don't provoke flame wars. Al Rodgers's recent diaries are a great example. As I suggest elsewhere in this thread, the key to those diaries success is not so much the manner in which Rodgers's presented his photographs (Seneca Doane's interesting argument about them) as the message itself: this was propaganda that worked because with very, very few exceptions, people on this site universally agree with the message of those diaries.

                  But for many photo diaries this is not the case. The message is not a point of unity, but a point of disagreement. And while the images tend to be well-designed to provoke positive feelings (e.g. handsome pictures of our President and his family), they seem to those who disagree with the message to be a form of subject changing rather than real political argument.

                  So the critics criticize in the comment threads.

                  And this tends to provoke a severely negative reaction from those who promote these diaries, because the very purpose of these diaries is to feel good about something and the very existence of criticism on them interferes with that purpose (which makes it rather unlike criticism in other diaries, whose goal is more clearly to have a discussion about an issue, often of controversy).

                  Photo diaries are, thus, a kind of perfect meta-storm.  They are--almost by design--emotional rather than rational arguments.  This infuriates those who disagree with them. The disagreement, in turn, infuriates those who like these diaries because its very existence seems to undermine the purpose of the diaries.

                •  I think what your missing here (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Seneca Doane

                  is the difference between debating (or attacking, perhaps) THE VERY EXISTENCE OF THE DIARY and the fact that the poster dared do it, and debating specific issues that the diary might bring up.

                  The first is what continually raised my blood pressure.  Comments by the yard arguing/screaming/throwing insults at the diarists for their horribleness in having the gall to post all the "pretty pictures."   Now, that may have been prompted, as Seneca suggests, by the title and other words of the diarist.  All I know is, I saw hundreds, perhaps thousands (because I'm such an obsessive reader) of people throwing hissy fits about those miserable "pretty pictures."

                  My take, of course, is, as I believe Seneca noted, that they were a welcome respite from the rest of my political life.  They weren't the be-all and end-all of my political life.  But it seemed to impossible for some angry folks to "get" that.

                  •  I'm not missing this... (4+ / 0-)

                    ...I'm just describing it differently.

                    And while the images tend to be well-designed to provoke positive feelings (e.g. handsome pictures of our President and his family), they seem to those who disagree with the message to be a form of subject changing rather than real political argument.

                    Just as a thought experiment, think of carefully calibrated photo ops involving our last president...or (to choose someone better at this) Ronald Reagan.

                    If I were to put up a diary on, say, the anniversary of Ronald Reagan's birth, full of unquestionably handsome pictures of Reagan, I'd be lambasted for it (and I think for good reason, too).  

                    As it turns out, plenty of really terrible politicians photograph very well, and plenty of good politicians photograph poorly (Dennis Kucinich, I'm looking at you!).

                    We happen to have a President who photographs very well. And in moments when everyone around here likes what the President is doing--e.g. this week in Tucson--those attractive photos come together with site sentiment and we get those recent Al Rodgers photodiaries and their comment threads.

                    But when our President is engaged in more controversial (on dKos) political actions, pretty pictures of him really do feel to the critics like passive-aggressive subject changing.  

                    Substituting attractive images for substantive policy (or democracy itself) is also a feature of many modern authoritarian regimes and movements. And though I honestly don't think that attractive photodiaries of the president have such authoritarian intent, for some of us their visual rhetoric is unsettling.

                    None of this justifies screaming or throwing insults (nothing does).  And to the extent that the complaints about comment threads on photo diaries concern tone, I think those complaints are fair.  

                    But IMO politely pointing out, in the comment threads of such diaries, that pretty pictures are a pretty poor political argument is absolutely justified.

                    •  Here's a more current example, highly plausible (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      GreenSooner, Terra Mystica

                      Imagine a photo diary of smiling American service members helping build schools (or whatever) for smiling children in Afghanistan.  Yes, the heart may sing when viewing the photos, and yes, what's depicted in those photos may itself be well-intentioned and decent and good.

                      But I'm sure I'm not the only one who might think: "for God's sake, why are you showing something that fails to represent the brunt of what we're doing in Afghanistan, and which suppresses criticism of our being there at all by making us seem like primarily secular missionaries?"

                      (Substitute in "Iraq" if it works better for you.)

                      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
                      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

                      by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:19:20 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Trying starting a debate in the (0+ / 0-)

                  IGTNT diaries and you'll end up with your beak on the back end of your head, like Daffy Duck.  They don't brook debate there, for reasons they explain quite well.

                  My sense is that Obama photo diaries have wanted that same deference.

                  Most of the rest I agree with.

                  Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
                  It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

                  by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:14:44 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  There are so many debatable assumptions (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            3goldens, Im with Rosey

            in that short comment that I don't know where to begin.  With some questions, I guess:

            Who is "we"?
            Who do "we" have to be?
            Was it "drive away"?
            Was it "just because"?

            Don't answer those last two; people are already going to town with them below.

            I find your analysis of the issue reductive.

            Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
            It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

            by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 09:42:40 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Completely agree with your sentiment. (16+ / 0-)

      I have recced Al's photo diary precisely because it was presented without bias.

      By definition, a government has no conscience. Sometimes it has a policy, but nothing more. Albert Camus

      by Patric Juillet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 03:30:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Images have bias. (10+ / 0-)

        The notion that a photograph doesn't contain a point of view is simply false. Photographs are made; they don't just happen.

        I think the reasons that Al's recent diaries did not provoke flame wars is that the bias (or, less pejoratively, point of view) that they represented is almost universally shared around here.

        I rec'd this diary because I think it's interesting and well written. But at a certain level I disagree with its analysis of the recent Al Rodgers' diaries.

        What made them uncontroversial was the sentiment they expressed, not their lack of sentiment. It was their content, not their form that made them points of unity around here.

        •  Exactly. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          GreenSooner, sorval, Seneca Doane

          Now if he were to post pictures of Obama during the SS debates, it may have a different reaction.

          "I'm measuring everything the Democrats and President Obama do, not against what I WANT, but against the status quo." --RASalvatore 9/16/10

          by smoothnmellow on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 09:13:16 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I did identify three reasons why (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          1BQ

          I thought Al's diaries were different.  I'm interested in the one I focused on because it's the only one that one can decide to change.  We will have similar situations in the future (no matter what people thing), mostly not in times of such tragedy, so this is a chance to focus on that one.

          Yes, photographs (and their arrangement) do (or at least can) present a particular viewpoint.  I'm presenting a dichotomy where there is actually a different in degree.  It would be better, no doubt, to say that Al's are below a certain threshold (for me, at least) in these respects while others have exceeded them.

          Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
          It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

          by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:34:56 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Not enough words, Seneca. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      3goldens, Seneca Doane

      Words are all we have here, and you always make them count.

    •  I suggest that you write a new diary (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Red Bean

      making the same points but with only pictures and no text.

      It's a great challenge but I'm sure you can do it!

    •  'ideally', and (9+ / 0-)

      without posting pictures of Bush in front of Mission Accomplished banners to prove my point, it could depend upon which President we're talking about here.

      In addition, the intent of the poster of the diary is important: I've not felt intimidated by Al's diaries or postings.

      Can't say that for some of the other ones I've seen.

      If the purpose of this diary was to 'heal' the community, I think it's off the mark. To me, it highlights the problems with certain posters and their agenda.

      But what the hell, your mileage may vary.

      Carry on.

      •  The purpose is to note how two sets of efforts (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Im with Rosey, Vtdblue

        in the same genre take different approaches with different effects (on me and, I suspected, others) so that we can discuss them more intelligently.  It's not kumbaya, but I think/hope that in the long term it promotes healing.  (Or at least that it can.)

        Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
        It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

        by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:38:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's not really that complicated (8+ / 0-)

      If you post photos without creepy cult-of-personalty paeans or sweeping dishonest attacks on critic or sweeping dishonest attacks on the American populace when they fail to see Obama's magnificence or praise from conservatives as alleged evidence of progressivism or self-indulgent and dishonest claims of victimization, then few, if any, people will object.

      We know where we are. We'll willing to accept a certain degree of pro-president propaganda.

    •  Thanks for your thoughtful effort to sort (16+ / 0-)

      through this. However, I think it's important to point out that no photograph of a public figure is politically neutral. Tricks of lighting, composition, and all kinds of elements of dress, context, facial expression, body language, etc. already charge an image with a range of elements that people pick up on when that photo goes out into the world.

      Think of the no-flag-pin-hand-not-on-heart froo-frah of one of Obama's campaign appearances with the other candidates during the primaries. It was a photograph that documented that moment, enabling it to be distributed, debated, and (we would say) distorted by Republicans for political game.

      Same with John Kerry in the hazmat suit; Kerry hunting; Bush and the Mission Accomplished sign (which had an unexpected afterlife for his supporters); Obama in a bathing suit; Obama wearing shorts and flip flops (on vacation!); and even the way that more sober, carefully pre-arranged appearances are set up for the benefit of the photographer. The internal elements of a picture are important, and the broader context of how a photo is taken up and interpreted by the public is important.

      It's sufficiently important that there is an entire blog community of photojournalists who spend their time parsing the secret language of "pictures without words." One of the most important photo blogs here is Bag News Notes, which has been up on the dKos masthead for years.

      So I guess what I'm saying is that I think we need to be careful about assuming that if we take out the words and just have the pictures, that those pictures won't be laying out a tacit political narrative of their own. What is the cumulative effect of having photo after photo -- even uncaptioned -- of Michelle and Barack Obama smiling, wading into crowds, and receiving adulation, filtered through flattering lighting and camera angles?

      On the other hand, what is the cumulative effects of those crudely photoshopped images of Barack frowning, glowering, or pointing his nose in the air, when NewsMax teaser ads or other wingnut pedlars put them up again and again and again? And I haven't even mentioned the most egregious doctoring -- the alteration of his skin tone, the subtle, insidious stoking of racialized fear by presenting him as more "Other" than mainstream photos would have us believe.

      There is simply no neutrality to the political image, no matter how much we would like to believe that pictures "speak for themselves."

      Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of nonthought. -- Milan Kundera

      by Dale on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 04:45:38 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd like to see this (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Seneca Doane

        in a diary of its own.

        When egg laying drops off, food is withheld to send the birds into a forced molt followed by a round of egg laying before being killed.

        by Red Bean on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 08:08:04 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, you're right -- but it is a matter of degree (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Marihilda

        I thought about getting into Bag News Notes in the diary, but it distracts from the point.  Even though no (or few) visual representations are neutral -- which I grant -- there are still ones that are more or less so.  Each of us has a threshold that leads us to find a visual representation too manipulative -- or that doesn't flip that switch.  (Or, to be fair, somewhere in between.)  While one can say that "everything is political," I don't think this should hamper our ability to say that some things are more politically reactive than others.

        And this would make a good diary of its own, as said below.

        Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
        It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

        by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:44:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Contemplation... (6+ / 0-)

      That is what I got from Al Rodgers' photo diaries this week.  I could not put my finger on it until I read your diary today.

      The pictures speaking for themselves allow each of us a moment of quiet reflection and contemplation as to how they personally affect each of us.  

      Thank you for this diary today.

      The United States is not just losing its capacity to do great things. It's losing its soul.--Bob Herbert

      by gulfgal98 on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 04:56:58 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  photo diaries ideally (10+ / 0-)

    may promote a particular viewpoint regarding the leadership of the President.

    Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
    It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

    by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:39:34 PM PST

  •  Your 'gone elsewhere' link goes to 'Requiem'. n/t (4+ / 0-)

    "Go well through life"-Me (As far as I know)

    by MTmofo on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:43:48 PM PST

  •  Did you ever think that no one (8+ / 0-)

    actually gives a shit anymore?  That might be it.

    If you lose your disc or fail to follow commands, you will be subject to immediate de-resolution. That will be all.

    by SpamNunn on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:44:09 PM PST

    •  Or We Had a National Tragedy and People (49+ / 0-)

      backed off for a respectful period.

      Can't distinguish in the short term.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:46:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Sure -- but I don't think so (8+ / 0-)

      Thanks for stating your opinion, though.  People who agree now have a comment to rec.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:47:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, they do. (0+ / 0-)

      If you lose your disc or fail to follow commands, you will be subject to immediate de-resolution. That will be all.

      by SpamNunn on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:53:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I wish you were right, but, alas, it'll end by (8+ / 0-)

      Tuesday and, sadly, Al will abandon us for another 2 years.

      Nonetheless, after reading Al's last two diaries, I did remark to my sister how I did in fact notice the difference in the tone of his diaries vs. BWD's (whom I love dearly) - not that she was at all...I don't know, ummmm. But, the presentation is different. Al coming back reminded me of why he became the first diarist on this site that I became to love in the first place.  There's just something about the way he presents his stuff that just hits me hard. His seemingly simplistic commentary is just enough to satisfy and capture the right tone and my mood.

      I hope he sticks around this time because I miss him dearly, but I have a feeling that after Tuesday he'll be persona non grata around here until election day 2012 and won't be back.

      •  What's happening Tuesday? (30+ / 0-)

        Is Al going to burn the flag?  Post his love for To Kill a Mockingbird?

        I'll tell you that as someone who sometimes rankled at BWD's diaries, my lack of reaction to Al's was in large part because I didn't think that my liking them was going to be taken as an endorsement of certain policies and positions with which I disagree.  That's it.  I didn't feel (as with TIMT's this week) that I was signing on to "thank you, Mr. President, for your leadership" in general (although I do!) or that the particular deals he made were right.  It was just: I salute the man, period.  Reading those diaries was like singing the national anthem to me: pretty uncomplicated and an opportunity for good fellowship.

        That's what it looks like on my side of the trenches, anyway.

        Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
        It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

        by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:05:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  He's gonna show Pres. Obama burning a flag, duh! (6+ / 0-)

          No. Something will happen tomorrow or Monday, or certain folk will go back to something that happened last week or very early 2010 - that, btw, had nothing to do with the President - if nothing more than to incite a wee bit of interest." I don't know right now what it'll be, but rest assured, it will be something.  It's always something.  Whatever they come up with will be the talking point that certain folk here will use to slam President Obama from here until whenever and, unfortunately, by Tuesday things will be back to what has become the normal tone about the President on DK.

          Al, I predict, will not be welcome.  

          As Al said with all humility, he will only post something that he believes is worthy of our attention. I will patiently await for him to make such a determination

        •  I kind of agree with you, in that (24+ / 0-)

          I can see what you mean, and see the differences in approach.

          I think my take on Obama is probably pretty close to yours, as you put it up above in the diary text.  I'm hardly a fangirl, and there are specific policies or stances I disagree with, but I also think he's accomplishing more, and going to represent a bigger change, than sometimes our conversations here can reflect.  I guess time will tell.  And in the meantime we should push him, and our other political reps - just with the caveat that the pushing should be strategic and should help, not just tear down and make victories harder.  I guess I think the means is important in achieving the end.

          Anyway - back to the pictures.  I agree Al's diaries have a different feel - I loved Requiem.  But I suppose I'm less sensitive to the political tone.  Just like I can read some very critical diaries here which clearly want me to feel a certain way, and I can still decide at the end of absorbing the information given whether a good case was made, whether I agree with the position, and whether any proposed action makes sense.  Just so, I can read a diary by BWD and be grateful (particularly with my challenges of physical distance and crappy internet connection speed) that I get a good round up of "pro" Administration stories and pictures, and I can take from them what I want, read the links and reflect at the images, and still retain the ability to think for myself whether things are good, things are hyped, whatever.  I don't have to feel any specific way.  

          I like balance.  But I don't have to have balance in one particular diary - heck, we almost never do around here.  I can get balance by reading many, right?  It's easy enough to find the critical ones and see all the areas where more can and should be done.  I don't need to demand one particular photo diarist give me the negatives too, any more than I need to demand someone writing on environmental stuff or FISA, or wahtever turn around and say, but, but, but Obama's absolutely wonderful on some other topic.

          I guess I've just never understood the vitriol around those and frankly, if I'm honest, I've sometimes reacted to it as if it's petty intolerance of different viewpoints.  I just still cannot grasp what is so destructive about them, even if one disagrees about whichever half-full, half-empty (or even fully empty, fully full, hah) view is promoted of the Administration's performance.  I like information.  Even pictures.  I'm too old and cynical to be swayed by something as silly as a picture of a smiling face.  I have a mind and I can make it up for myself.  But I do like to know (and see) what is going on.  Good, bad, and all the huge range of gray in between.  And if I could see it without pointless destructive infighting - that would be too fantastic to even allow myself to contemplate!

          (Sadly, in Kathmandu no longer.)

          by American in Kathmandu on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:05:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Thoughtful as always, AinK! OK, let' see (7+ / 0-)

            I don't participate in the vitriol -- and, after a while, rarely in the diaries at all, as memory serves -- but I think I understand what it was about.  Here's my take:

            People who feel that Obama is on the wrong track (on some issues) or gives in too easily to Republicans too often, or just that he needs to have his feet kept to the fire to do as much as he can have a negative reaction to those diaries because they feel that they are effective.  And, in fact, they probably are: using photos to elicit emotions directly, rather than relying on argument, is an effective way to influence opinions.

            Such people may feel that giving Obama a wider berth, allowing him to stray further from progressive approaches without criticism, leads to worse policy outcomes.  So something that induces people to love Obama unconditionally -- as these becomes dangerous, because it makes it easier for him to capitulate to the hard bargainers from the right if we're not going to go nuts about it.  And we're one of the few places where the Left (not solely, but largely) congregates in numbers large enough to generate synergistic effects.  If DKos doesn't care about something that affronts the Left, one might think, the Democratic Party can safely do whatever they want.  (I'm exaggerating, and not endorsing this view entirely, but that's the basic idea.)

            So, they see their role as mucking things up by making the emotional impact of the diaries negative.  So we get meta fights and pissing matches.  The funny thing is that if these diaries were appearing outside of DKos -- for a TIME or Newsweek or WaPo or CNN audience -- even many of the critics here would be fine with them.  It's not that people don't want others (especially Independents and such) to like Obama, its that they don't want the critical function of DKos to be blunted by uncritical adoration.  It's doing it here that's the problem.  On the other side, Obama fans act like they're trying to win -- and losing -- swing voters here, when almost everyone here no matter what their position on these policies will ultimately support Obama pretty much no matter what, given the alternative.

            So, as I've suggested, there's right (and sense) on both sides, but because Obama fans try to evangelize, using this very effective means, where it's mostly unnecessary, those who want to pressure Obama react like our power to influence him is under attack.  I truly do sympathize with both positions -- and think that both are pretty much overreactions.

            I do not think that most Obama critics think that a diary like the Al Rodgers ones is "dangerous," though.  We want people to like Obama; we just don't want to be told that our criticism is a betrayal of him, and that we should just shut up and trust his advisors (who are with him in what, if past history is precedent, will eventually be acknowledged to be a bubble.)

            If this analysis is right, then it follows that simply celebrating what is good about Obama emotionally will not cause much trouble, but that trying to leverage that emotion into silencing criticism will backfire.

            If this makes sense, thanks for eliciting it!  (If not, um, oh well.)

            Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
            It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

            by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:31:47 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  In a nutshell (25+ / 0-)

              I felt like many of us went to BWD's diaries to get a taste of the positive side.

              Much needed, all too often.

              Plenty of critical stuff that wasn't leavened by appreciation - why not appreciative diaries without a lump of negativity?

              I never understood why hers were supposed to have "balance" when nobody else was held to that standard.

              "An uprising of the reasonable is our only chance." - Keith Olbermann

              by Diogenes2008 on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:16:03 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  As I think I said a couple months back (5+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Sychotic1, 3goldens, lotlizard, koNko, Hedwig

                I used them as an occasional recreational drug, for exactly the purpose you say.

                The thing is: making them more PR than photojournalism (as Al's are) itself precluded the "without a lump of negativity" because people felt manipulated.

                If nothing else, it's ironic -- and but I think there's also a lesson there.

                Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
                It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

                by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:20:36 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  PR? (25+ / 0-)

                  Celebrating accomplishments?

                  Call it what you want, but I found it a nice break from the constant drumbeat of negativity.

                  Some of us enjoyed them, although I didn't go in as often towards the end because the pie-fighting destroyed the positive mood.

                  It was almost as if some couldn't handle the idea of celebrating this administration's accomplishments.

                  There has to be some balance - not in a single diary, perhaps, but site-wide... and when we attack one side of the spectrum, the balance is lost.

                  That's how I feel about it, and I stand by that.

                  You can call it whatever you want, but I call it celebrating the achievements of a decent man and his administration.

                  And if I remember correctly (I could be wrong) Al Rodgers got some similar treatment back in the day - which may be why he stopped commenting in his diaries - or didn't comment as often.  And then stopped writing them for a while.

                  The rose-colored glasses of history are difficult to remove, sometimes....  ;)

                  "An uprising of the reasonable is our only chance." - Keith Olbermann

                  by Diogenes2008 on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:24:52 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  There are ways and there are ways of doing it (4+ / 0-)

                    I've given my take.  Repeating it will bore everyone, me included.

                    Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
                    It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

                    by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:33:57 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  It was the pagan idolitry (4+ / 0-)

                    That got to some people sometimes and was, in a way, the catalyst of flame wars attsched to her diaries.

                    When someone says, in effect, "these are great acomplishments and if you don't think so you're a clueless idiot" verses "today the President visited Prague and was met by a cheering crowd" it tends to polarize opinion.

                    In fact, the tendancy to idolize leads directly to feelings of betryal when Superman turns out to be just Clark Kent.

                    So after a point I looked at the photos in her diary skipping the narrative and comments; often the photos speak for themselves.

                    What about my Daughter's future?

                    by koNko on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 05:10:03 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  If you go to BWD's page now at the top (6+ / 0-)

                      is the following quote:

                      "He's got a backbone like a ramrod, a brain bigger than his skull and a heart that just keeps beatin’" (Joe Biden)

                      Framing images inside such effusion of sentiment makes some people resistant to looking at the images for what they might be worth.

                      I went to BWD's diaries seeking to feel better and came away feeling worse. It was exactly because they came across as platitudinous. The air of unreality and raw adulation in the diary gave me the suspicion there were no real accomplishments. Of course I knew better but I felt bludgeoned. It seemed senseless to comment in this atmosphere and I always wondered why people bothered.

                      I much more appreciated the diaries in support of Obama that actually listed the accomplishments, big and small, of this administration, many we might have missed in the news. In fact I would support someone doing just that here at Kos on a regular basis.

                      Al Rodger's beautiful diary Requiem is not about Obama and his rise to the occasion. It is about something bigger.

                •  well, but maybe it reflects as much (27+ / 0-)

                  as anything else, different personalities.  Some people feel fired up to fight by the enormous challenges that we're facing.  Some get energized by getting together with like-minded souls to go through all that is lacking and all that needs done.  And what I see as "negative energy" could for them be exactly what's needed to be the most productive.

                  For others - and I'm probably in this camp - I tend to mistrust angry negative energy.  While I can see its usefulness in highlighting the "what" of our agenda, and I use those diaries for that - to educate me to what's going on, and what we need to be focusing on, or where firm engagement is needed, at the same time I don't think it often leads to the best discussions of the "how" when it gets too negative and emotional (and often bringing its own pie fights about whether it's fair or not, and whether things like the 'corporate sell-out' or whatever other name-calling of the day is helpful or even accurate.  And, when I'm the most depressed about what's going on, I need a healthy dose of the positive energy to get fired up to go back to tackling the other stuff where I'm disappointed.  I see those things as fuel for my own political engagement, not as a drug to make me passive, quite the opposite.  And I'd probably be happy if people in those diaries wouldn't keep implying that I'm a mindless idiot, a cheerleader, or that just because they are scared I won't be able to criticize Obama anymore after looking at a few pictures, that it means it's actually so.  People are different.  I don't go into a slinkerwink or bobswern diary and start ranting about how no one upset in there can possibly be a good advocate for Democratic policies because they're so mad.  That would be, well, stupid.  Right?

                  So, unlike some of the critics in the BWD diaries I would never dream of telling someone writing such diaries that they're unhelpful and they shouldn't write them.  Bobswern being a good example - no offense to him, but I never read his stuff, I find he slants too much for my taste, and I find the comment sections just unbearable as a rule - to not write them.  I simply either stay away, or I read them for what I can gain, and then go on my own way to think things through.

                  I suppose I just tend to be a live and let live, take what you need from things, and let others have their own agenda or needs, or ways of getting motivated, sort of gal.  I just wish others would accord me the same, well, respect?  When we engage like you do here I have no problem at all, and you know I love your stuff.  But the intolerance often shown and the nasty aspersions or whatever, are just not at all helpful, from wherevert hey come.

                  (Sadly, in Kathmandu no longer.)

                  by American in Kathmandu on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:16:43 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Well-said (0+ / 0-)

                    I'd say more, but it's 1:25 a.m. here and I'm on my last legs for the day.  By replying now, though, I'll be able to find it more easily tomorrow.  Good afternoon (or so?) to you!

                    Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
                    It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

                    by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:24:18 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Agreed (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JanetT in MD, dmh44, Seneca Doane, FORUS50

                    And well-stated. You speak for me, as well.

                    I guess the way I look at it is that after a hard day, everyone needs a break.

                    Sometimes people go to a spa to relax, to unwind. How relaxing and re-energizing would a spa be if people came in and started throwing rocks at you?

                    I gained positive energy from reading BWD's diaries - and from Al Rodger's diaries as well. I needed that time to gather myself and get ready for the next battle.

                    But then we had people who said that we shouldn't be allowed that spa time... that space that allowed us to rest, relax, appreciate, and remind ourselves of what it is we're fighting for. For some of us, if we never see the results of what we're working toward, or if we're not allowed to enjoy them, it's hard to keep morale up, and much harder to figure out why we're even here to begin with.

                    Daily Kos was so deeply negative for a time that I came here only sparingly. I need a little bit of positive news to inspire me, and to keep me going - and if that is denied me by those who feel it is distasteful (to THEM)... what's the point?

                    Everyone has their own opinion of what BWD brought to the table. I found her diaries to be a refreshing reminder of what's been accomplished. That was my opinion. Evidently some have decided that their opinions outweigh mine, for some reason. I'm not sure why that should be the case.

                    And as far as some of the negative diaries - they have a right to exist as well. I disagree with many of them, but I do not deny their right to be here at Daily Kos.

                    As to the charge of PR that I've seen here and there - what the hell is wrong with a little positive PR?? We sure get enough of the negative stuff EVERYWHERE. We complain about the President's messaging, but when BWD did a little positive messaging on his behalf, it got slammed down. How about a little consistency, people??

                    This is why I don't come to DKos as much anymore... I need that positive energy, and it's getting to be harder to find.

                    One last note - as I said, these are my opinions. Your mileage may vary. But they are equally as valid as anyone else's here.  

                    "An uprising of the reasonable is our only chance." - Keith Olbermann

                    by Diogenes2008 on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:51:23 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Nothing's necessarily wrong with a little (0+ / 0-)

                      "positive PR."  Now look through comments to see how many people won't even acknowledge that those diaries were "positive PR."  That's when I get worried.

                      I'll put this example to you too.  And if that doesn't make you think that maybe something could be wrong with positive PR, let me ask you this: what about a similar photo spread of the Saudis building boys-only madrassas in Afghanistan?  Heart-warming, I'm sure!

                      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
                      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

                      by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:28:00 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

              •  I didn't feel it had much to do with (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                slinkerwink, Sychotic1, 3goldens, ohmyheck
                a "taste" of the positive side. BWD diaries represented a fantasy world where the President was worthy of hero-worship and everyone treated him as a hero so above reproach that no hard question could or should ever be asked. Certainly that attitude carried over to many other diaries by supporters who labeled (and even now still label) even the smallest and most tangential criticism as "bashing", making reference endlessly to imagined "Obama=Bush" and "Obama sucks" diaries.
                •  Imagined? You have to be kidding. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  dmh44

                  making reference endlessly to imagined "Obama=Bush" and "Obama sucks" diaries.

                  They couldn't be more clear.

                  •  I know it was a lie (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Seneca Doane
                    because unlike you, I looked it up when I was told about the hundreds of "Obama sucks" diaries that had been written and were in the archives. I tabulated what I found. In fact, I believe the number of references I came up with was 500.

                    I ended up examining the most recent 200 to see exactly what I found.

                    Most references had nothing whatever to do with "Obama sucks". The phrase was not even found in the diary. It was an artifact of a search engine that found "Obama" and "sucks" in the same diary and decided it was the equivalent of "Obama sucks".

                    Next was, yep, diaries by Obama supporters mocking all those "Obama sucks" diaries. Yep, plenty of diaries intended to tear apart the community with flame wars and expel dissidents. Good work to all of you who posted those diaries, creating a meme from nothing. Because I found no diaries using the phrase "Obama sucks" as a careless slur against the President by critics. Not a one.

        •  Compatriot vs Loyalist? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Seneca Doane

          The first can disagree without coming to blows.

          What about my Daughter's future?

          by koNko on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 04:18:56 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Or that a bunch of us have just stopped clicking (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sychotic1, 3goldens, ohmyheck

      on reclist titles that look like they're going to consist of nothing but a bunch of pictures.

      I come here for the words.

      "The great lie of democracy, its essential paradox, is that democracy is first to be sacrificed when its security is at risk." --Ian McDonald

      by Geenius at Wrok on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 05:49:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Al's okay by me. (14+ / 0-)

    But I don't bother with photodiaries anymore.  Not even Al's, although I agree that he (unlike some) is not trying to be a propagandist.

    Only Nixon could go to China; only Obama could dismantle Social Security.

    by Mehitabel9 on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:47:04 PM PST

  •  PoV (13+ / 0-)

    I never really got the feel that BWD's photo diaries were taking much of a viewpoint in the photos themselves. They just seemed like a dump of Pete DeSouza's RSS feed.

    Then again, I rarely spent much time in them, either, mainly because they seemed to me like a dump of Pete DeSouza's RSs feed. Which I can get easily enough at Flickr.


    "I play a street-wise pimp" — Al Gore

    by Ray Radlein on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:48:36 PM PST

  •  I enjoy the photo diaries because I get to see (45+ / 0-)

    images that I would not otherwise happen upon, let alone seek out.

    It's pathetic that BWD was hounded from here.

    "Go well through life"-Me (As far as I know)

    by MTmofo on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:50:25 PM PST

  •  IMHO Photo diarists may do whatever they wish. (14+ / 0-)

    I prefer objectively descriptive captions and don't mind a bit of cheerleading, but if I find them sarcastic, I simply overlook the words...or go elsewhere.  I do, however, appreciate your suggestion for minimizing potential controversy and am glad to recommend your diary as food for thought.  Thank you, SD.

    Dance lightly upon the Earth, Sing her songs with wild abandon, Smile upon all forms of Life ...and be well.

    by LinSea on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:54:38 PM PST

  •  this blog was started as a response (38+ / 0-)

    to the Bush administration. I wasn't here then, but it's long been clear to me that helping to get a Democrat elected as President (not to mention a very smart Democrat with brown skin), was going to be a big sea change, one way or the other.

    People were used to there being an enemy. People are often used to their being an enemy.

    This week, we got our enemy handed to us on a plate. The promoters of hate speech cannot assume they had nothing to do with what went down on Tucson.

    It would be helpful to keep working on seeing who the real enemy is, and it ain't crazies and it ain't Obama.

    "One should always be a little improbable." - Oscar Wilde

    by Miep on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 08:56:30 PM PST

  •   "I truly don't mean this this diary to be (0+ / 0-)

    inflammatory."

  •  Most have given up on Obama is my guess. (9+ / 0-)

    The photos are poignant of what could have been and never happened.  People are beyond them now.

    They see Obama for what he is, Reagan light.  Tax cuts for the rich, funding and benefit cuts for Social Security and Medicare, $1T massive military spending budgets, meaningless wars, increased oil use, increased oil trade deficits, increased oil based greenhouse gases, increased environmentally disastrous offshore oil drilling, increased US national security risk from increased oil use, increased health care costs, increased deficits and debt, increased income inequality, attacks on teachers and public education.

    And then we get the sad pictures of what might have been, watching Obama's last days in office as US continues to tank and we know Obama is not up to the job. That his policy and political incompetence insure a GOP president in 2012 and another four years of disaster for US, health care costs out of control, oil use out of control, military spending out of control, deficits/debt out of control, Social Security and Medicare destroyed.

  •  Tipped for xkcd reference. (8+ / 0-)

    I'm gonna go eat a steak. And fuck my wife. And pray to GOD - hatemailapalooza, 052210

    by punditician on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:01:10 PM PST

  •  Oh and that's dumb. (5+ / 0-)

    If people want to use photo diaries to make a point, then do so.

    If someone else wants to use photo diaries to NOT make a point, then do so.

    I'm gonna go eat a steak. And fuck my wife. And pray to GOD - hatemailapalooza, 052210

    by punditician on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:02:24 PM PST

  •  I love photo diaries (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, koNko, Hedwig

    Lifted from Red State.  There's no way to counterbalance this:

    Photobucket

    >Photobucket

    Photobucket

    If you lose your disc or fail to follow commands, you will be subject to immediate de-resolution. That will be all.

    by SpamNunn on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:02:40 PM PST

  •  Al's diaries are basically positive; (17+ / 0-)

    BWD's, on the other hand, seemed obnoxious to me. They weren't just pictures, they were pro-admin spin presented in a way to jerk the chains of the disenchanted here.

    Add to that BWD's comments in other spots that had the same tone. BWD and Al do not share the same approach.

    Al does a very good job. I wonder where he went. His diaries at this time were appropriate.

    Te conozco bacalao, aunque vengas disfrazado - Hector LaVoe

    by mightymouse on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:03:36 PM PST

  •  It's not inflammatory (16+ / 0-)

    Neither are most of the photo diaries.

    As long as you don't read the comments. Which I usually don't.

    Lets be fair, most don't come here for positive reinforcement. Many do so because they're pissed about something. That's fine. It would be nice if some might realize that not all of us are 100% angry 100% of the time.

    And yes, I'd agree there is a tactical difference between many of BWD's diaries and Al's. But that's because they're two different people with two different perspectives on things...even if they mainly are both interested in posting photos....mostly.

    Good luck with the late night meta...watching Cee Lo Green on SNL and drowning my sorrows after the Ravens second half today... :(  ;)

    Garrhgsfsafasd! or...where the heck is Lieber?

    by Hedwig on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:06:08 PM PST

  •  Great sentiment. In the run up to the speech on (17+ / 0-)

    Wednesday, my main comment in talking about it was that I wanted a

    "BWD moment"

    And certainly that is something we all want to feel.  Because it feels GOOD.  Like there is good and RIGHT in the world, instead of what we are treated to by Fox et al all the time.

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White

    by zenbassoon on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:07:35 PM PST

  •  The continuing corporate sellouts were all (4+ / 0-)

    under the radar this week.

    Wall Street owns all three branches of government.

    by The Dead Man on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:09:54 PM PST

  •  I have enjoyed each of the diarists that (40+ / 0-)

    you name...they do take different approaches but I've always felt that there is room here for all different points of view.

    I was saddened when BWD could no longer post without controversy.  I will probably never understand it.

    Each one of them has done a fine job and I for one appreciate all their efforts.

    What if the hokey pokey is what it's all about?

    by Julie Gulden on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:11:45 PM PST

  •  Well said. (14+ / 0-)

    This week's photos of President Obama were actually a footnote to the events.

    They were not the event, itself.

    There was no forced focus or perspective. It was not a press release or a promo piece. The photos were merely part of the exhibition of humanity on parade in America c.2011.

  •  Without saying which ones (13+ / 0-)

    I thinks some of the diarists who've done photo diaries might've had an underlying motive, that being a bit of cheerleading.

    There's nothing wrong with that in and of itself, but we've been through some choppy waters, so to speak, with some of the decisions made by this administration that many perceive ran counter to some campaign promises.

    Some people have remained almost 100% supportive of Obama throughout, but some have felt very let down from time to time and when you feel that way, you might not want to see a sort of "Pep Rally" diary because, well... You may be angry.

    I think Al's photo diaries lean a bit more to the photojournalistic side -- as opposed to having at least an implied cheerleading motive behind them.

    That, coupled with the seriousness and tragedy of what happened, as well as Obama's skill and oratory prowess at the memorial, left little room for people here to question whether there might be any ulterior motive other than showing everyone what happened that day.

    Just my .02 cents.

    This ain't no party. This ain't no disco. This ain't no foolin' around!

    by Snud on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:20:16 PM PST

  •  I enjoyed BWD's diaries very much... (26+ / 0-)

    and was upset when she left.  I entered politics because of Barack Obama, I came to this blog because of Barack Obama, and I remain here because of him, and any picture threads or encouraging words are very welcomed by me.

    To do everything I can to make sure our economy is growing, creating jobs, and strengthening our middle class. That's my resolution for the coming year.

    by BarackStarObama on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:20:38 PM PST

  •  To me, there was a very distinct difference (27+ / 0-)

    The photo diaries this week were touching, poignant, and healing.  They were intended to soothe feelings.

    The "other" photo diaries are just too much hero worship.  I don't need to see pictures of the President standing alone looking presidential like he is a rock star.  That creeps me out.  I didn't vote for him because of his looks.  I don't want to swoon and squeal when I see him.  That's just inappropriate and frankly I think it is disrespectful to the position he holds.  Just my opinion.

    I'd rather die than give you control ~ Trent Reznor

    by JustJennifer on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:20:49 PM PST

    •  that captures (8+ / 0-)

      what I usually felt as well.

      BUT, I didn't begrudge others,
      if they enjoyed the photos.

      To each their own.


      Also they (photo dairies) felt a tad too cliquish for me.

      Almost always an instant Rec List for photos
      while hours of research in other fine diaries,
      fade away with barely a half-dozen comments.

      aka "cliquish" -- I guess that means "community" to some.

      seems cloistered to me.


      But to each their own.

      I'm not the most social cuss, anyways.
      lol


      Where's the Note?    -- SEIU

      by jamess on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:40:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I am hardly ever here these days (0+ / 0-)

        but jamess, I have considered it an honor and a privilege to recommend your diaries. Glad to be a small, mostly silent, member of your clique.

        I loved Al, used to go to The Field to see his stuff. Gladly recc'ed his work. I'm glad he came back here for a bit.

        I didn't know the other photodiarist was gone from here, but then, I stayed out of her entries after I was called a 'b!+ch' for not participating in her lovefest.

        I hoped DK 4 would have a photocollage section so those didn't take up slots on the rec list.  I guess now that would be unnecessary. I don't have HR privileges anymore because I don't diary and I rarely comment. Once upon a time it mattered.

  •  This week Al's diary in particular (10+ / 0-)

    served a purpose. It didn't seem to be one of those "look at how majestic he is" diaries but rather spotlighted the mourning ceremony and the citizens of Tucson as well as the President. You're right in that it wasn't pushy, it allowed me to just process the visual images without additional emotional prompting. I liked that.

    JekyllnHyde had a great cartoon (as always!) posted to MB's Introspection Diary. Al's Requiem diary felt like that cartoon to me. Sometimes just dropping the rancor and taking the hug is exactly what I need to do.

    Of course the next day, I was upset about the subpoena issued to the Icelandic member of Parliament but hey, it was nice while it lasted :)

    "Compassion is the radicalism of our time." -- Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama

    by Siri on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:23:06 PM PST

  •  Never saw what the big deal was one way or the (27+ / 0-)

    other about the photo diaries.  Maybe I'm just more visually oriented, so the words didn't matter that much to me.

    Even when I wasn't very happy with our President, I couldn't help but feel relieved that we had photos of him instead of McCain in the Oval Office. And yes, with how badly things are going in this country, I have no illusions about how much worse it could would have been. Palin is an annoying, minor presence, and not a world disaster held at bay by a 74 yo heart. And, I shudder to think about the Supreme Court.

    Of course, I want more, but seeing Obama in that office ... I can still muster some hope; whereas, given the alternative, I would have been left with no hope at all.

    Thank you for your diary.

    •  asdf (4+ / 0-)

      Even when I wasn't very happy with our President, I couldn't help but feel relieved that we had photos of him instead of McCain in the Oval Office. And yes, with how badly things are going in this country, I have no illusions about how much worse it could would have been. Palin is an annoying, minor presence, and not a world disaster held at bay by a 74 yo heart. And, I shudder to think about the Supreme Court.

      So true, and so important. There are times I come close to forgetting this temporarily. I hope there never comes a day when we forget it en masse.

      "These are not candidates. These are the empty stand-ins for lobbyists' policies to be legislated later." - Chimpy, 9/24/10

      by NWTerriD on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:25:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Um (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wwjjd

    <iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/18398436" width="400" height="300" frameborder="0"></iframe>

    Your Head. from wreckandsalvage on Vimeo.

    "An exact science is one that admits loss" -- Genesis P-Orridge

    by jethrock on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:27:01 PM PST

    •  I enjoyed that (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jethrock, wwjjd

      If you were trying to torture me, thanks for using the Comfy Chair!

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:30:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I just realized the embed didn't work. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Seneca Doane, wwjjd

        Damn.

        Cheers.

        "An exact science is one that admits loss" -- Genesis P-Orridge

        by jethrock on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:33:08 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Here's a YouTube tip: (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jethrock

          The <iframe and </iframe> tags in the code you posted above reveals what the problem was.

          When you go to the "embed" box on YouTube to copy over the embed code, make sure the "Use iframe embed code (beta)[?]" box listed below is unchecked. It's the last one listed beneath the "Include related videos" and "Enable privacy-enhance mode [?]" boxes. You'll only see those boxes when you click on "embed" to get the code. If the "iframe" box is checked DKos won't recognize it although it seems fine in preview.

          Not this mind and not this heart, I won't rot • Mumford & Sons

          by jayden on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:55:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Curious (18+ / 0-)

    If I wrote a diary that described, in 1K words per picture, each picture and why I thought it was good to describe that picture, but did not include it, would you be OK with that?

    So, what you're saying is that, on a political website, there are certain things, namely collections of pictures, that must be devoid of any political meaning?  

    Would you be OK with an article titled "President Obama, Thank You For Your Leadership!" that described why the person was thankful?  How about one titled "How Dare He Sign The 9/11 Health and Compensation Act in Kailua, Hawaii"?

    they struck me as an invitation to rumble.  They implied, to me, that to enjoy the diaries was to take a particular position with respect to a wide variety of controversies regarding the President and his Administration -- and, being a Democrat, the first thing that did was make me want to think of how I disagreed and what conclusions I did not want to be taken an endorsing.

    What about a diary describing how you think about photo diaries?  Sorry to go super-meta, but what really struck me as annoying about the way BWD and the others with photo diaries were treated was that people did not have to look at them.  If they didn't like the photos, then they could ignore the diaries.  If they thought the diaries were in poor taste, then don't recommend them.  Photodiaries are not something to get worked up about.

    I liked them.  I even like it when someone talks about how good of a job Obama is doing.

    I want our democracy to be as good as Christina imagined it. - President Obama

    by anonevent on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:27:40 PM PST

    •  Fair argument (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mrkvica, Sychotic1, 3goldens

      Sure, let's go supermeta.

      Can we agree, first of all, that they appeared to be in the genre of (unpaid, in this instance) public relations?  I'll assume for now that you will.

      Now, let's say that my right-wing Congressperson, in his next PR newsletter, sends out a photo (maybe only to Democrats and Independents!) of him smiling next to Gabby Giffords.  On the one hand, it's just a photo.  On the other, he might be trying to get people like me to transfer the positive emotions I have for her to him -- to get him to be seen, as she is, as a moderate and a healer.

      If he did that, I'd feel a strong desire to go, "hey, wait a minute, you never do anything bipartisan that's worthwhile!"  If I knew that people would tend to buy the unspoken implication of the photo, my reaction would be stronger.  If it was captioned "Reps. Miller and Giffords stood against violent extremism on all sides of the political spectrum, I'd be really, really pissed -- because I know that photos and captions express ideas effectively, past our defenses, and I know they know it too.

      If you're with me so far, it's worth continuing; let me know.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:38:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I love all photo diaries (22+ / 0-)

    be it off Obama, or just nature shots.

    But if people don't like Obama photo daries, then don't click on them.

    RIP Pike Miners We will never forget

    by GlowNZ on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:30:13 PM PST

    •  Photos (6+ / 0-)

      were never the point of contention for me or for most i believe. I am very admiring of the President and his family etc. and enjoyed the photos. It was the feeling of being bitch slapped by the diarist because I have differences with the Presidents performance. I'm not a racist or a hater. Not even close. But it was clear that in the eyes of more than a few you either "were" or "weren't" and any criticism of the President put you squarely in the "were" category.

      I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it. B.H. Obama

      by Klick2con10ue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:02:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Well (5+ / 0-)

    Since I myself have been a petty and projectionary photodiarist in the recent past, I don't feel like I should comment on the topic any further. But oh, I just can't resist.

    Namely: I didn't mind those two Al diaries because they were just photos and captions—no superfluous copy—letting the viewer draw their own conclusions and make their own interpretations, instead of having those interpretations already ready-made for them. Many (but not all) of the previous photo diaries seemed desperate to celebrate something/anything, thus projecting a reactionary insecurity along with the exuberance. Of course, that is my own interpretation and the diaries were probably not intended that way. The diarists diary what they want to diary, and I see what I want to see.

    But really, this shouldn't matter. These are blog posts we're dealing with, ephemera after all—especially mine. They have no inherent meaning and have the life-span of fruit flies. They are definitely worth mocking, but I've come to believe they're not inherently offensive.

  •  I like all photo diaries. So shoot me. :) (24+ / 0-)

    One bitter fact is two bit hacks populate the third rate fourth estate who are truly the fifth columnists.

    by amk for obama on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:32:34 PM PST

  •  I very, very rarely recommend those (12+ / 0-)

    diaries, partly because they do turn into silly pie-fests.  

    The art of letting pictures speak for themselves is difficult to master, as Al has done.

    "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

    by Geekesque on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:33:33 PM PST

  •  I really liked BWD's dairies...... (15+ / 0-)

    Not because I'm a big Obama fan (I'm not), but because the pictures that she posted made him more human, and more real for me. It was interesting and uplifting to see him interact with other people, particularly if he was giving awards to ordinary Americans and that sort of thing. It was good to see him in all different positions, with children, with Michelle, and with that infectious smile on his face.

    On the news, in the blogs it's just words and the emotions attached to the words. It can make it a very impersonal type of situation. The picture diaries help balance that out.

    I haven't looked at anyone elses pic/diaries, but I will in the future!

    I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Thomas Jefferson

    by Lucy2009 on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:37:58 PM PST

  •  Deoliver47 said it best... (31+ / 0-)

       Photography, art, visual media tell stories just like words, and words use "emotional reasoning".  It's why we teach them as academic disciplines.  It's why there is the saying "a picture is worth a thousand words".

    //snip

       A President, and a Presidency is often a symbol, or a set of symbols.  You can read those symbols many ways.

       ...for some, those photos represent far more than simply Barack Hussein Obama.  For many people the symbolic, and historic election, and what that means for them far outweighs  a need to at that moment shrilly parse his every move.  To savor the culmination of what has been a long time coming, on the backs of millions, is a brief respite from the days misery.  

       One can be critical of Presidential policies and still maintain a sense of quiet pride in seeing the man hold this office with not only dignity, but the respect of people around the world who acknowledge that the United States has finally come of age.  

    If you don't like them, don't enter the diaries. It is that simple.
     

    ...We have many more issues that bind us together than separate us!

    by ThisIsMyTime on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:41:36 PM PST

  •  Photo diary meta (15+ / 0-)

    Since you are going meta on photo diaries, why not take it all the way back? Remember the controversy over OPOL's early diaries? I think you were heavily involved with that.

    Remember how the site nearly imploded that he was posting other people's photos and the insistence he had to modify them? So he did, and created a whole new OPOL artform and the controversy died away pretty much over his work. And it all worked out well for OPOL and his fans in the end.

    Al, BWD and the other "photodiarists" you mention don't seem to use any original photography in their offerings. They are all cut and paste. There are variations in style and presentation but the basic content is the same. It can easily be found at other sites.

    In my opinion it is all about personal preference for the particular personality of the diarist. Some feel soothed by the cut and paste of Al, because he's been here longer, because he's an old timer, whatever. Others may prefer BWD, because they are of her DK "generation."  

    In other words. I don't think the issue is very deep, which is perhaps why it leads to so much meta.

    The price of empire is America's soul, and that price is too high. ~JWF

    by cosmic debris on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:46:54 PM PST

    •  Yeah, I was heavily involved in that (5+ / 0-)

      though when I first raised the criticism, it was because what he was doing at the time really did (in my opinion then, as someone dealing with Intellectual Property law) seem clearly over the line.  And he did change as a result, and it was fantastic for his artwork.  And we became friends.  We have very different styles, and we disagree on things still, but I know that we're "joined at the roots" (in Scooter Libby's phrase) and that his way of doing things will reach people that mine won't -- and possibly vice versa.  I still hope some publication (like Newsweek?) snaps him up.

      I think the difference is between, etc., photo illustration and PR, but I've said my piece above and reasonable people can disagree.  I can say that I don't think that Al's kind of diaries would lead to controversy, even though they elicit "patriotic" feelings towards Obama.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:03:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I still remember you and OPOL (4+ / 0-)

        hugging at YK in Chicago. It was as though cats and dogs... wait.... hahah

        Thanks Seneca. Having been part of it all myself I thought it was important to include that bigger picture, so to speak, historical context.

        I have been getting into photo diaries a bit myself, but have been trying to stick to original content. It's more of an indie concept I think than the mainstream approach of the others you reference. It works for me.

        By the way, I hope your health is still going well. Take good care.

        The price of empire is America's soul, and that price is too high. ~JWF

        by cosmic debris on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:09:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  here's your sign: it was the bomb throwing (23+ / 0-)

    The pushback to the photo diaries wasn't to the idea of photo diaries, but the bombs that were thrown by zealous Obama supporters in the process.

    The arrogance of being president while being black
    by blackwaterdog

    I expected that his winning the Presidency would bring out some ugliness, but it's been far worse than i imagined. The racism coming from the Right is obviously clear and shameless, but there's also some hidden and maybe subconscious and disturbing underline tone behind some of the things that I read here and throughout the Left blogosphere, even before the end of Obama's first year - 'He's weak, he's spineless, he's got no balls, primary him in 2012'. It'll be dishonest to deny that.

    Make inflammatory statements in diaries, get pushback.  Don't make inflammatory statements in diaries, and they're a lot more harmonious.

    Huh, intereting.

    "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

    by Uberbah on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:53:50 PM PST

    •  No reflection here, I see. Same ol' same ol'. (9+ / 0-)

      Maya Angelou: "Without courage, we cannot practice any other virtue with consistency. We can't be kind, true, merciful, generous, or honest."

      by JoanMar on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:57:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I get your point,,, (15+ / 0-)

      but your example isn't really a good way of proving it.

      Because I see nothing in that statement that wasn't factually correct, nor anything that was remotely threatening to anyone's point of view.

      Those of us who know Al well are certainly aware of his leanings, he doesn't need to express them in his diaries. Hence, he doesn't.  

      But you are right that he does know when a stand-alone picture is enough said.  His is the master, no question.  

      PS.  I must disagree with those accusing him of being simply cut-and-paste, as Al has posted a million pics over the course of time here that I have never seen anywhere else.

      Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore. John Prine -8.00,-5.79

      by Miss Blue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:58:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  BWD had just accused the left of widespread... (10+ / 0-)

        ...racism, without bothering to back it up.  How is that not a good example?

        Those of us who know Al well are certainly aware of his leanings, he doesn't need to express them in his diaries. Hence, he doesn't.  

        Wasn't going after Al here, just pointing out why photo diaries had met with pushback in the past.

        "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

        by Uberbah on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:06:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Wow (23+ / 0-)

          I sure the heck did not interpret that comment the same way you did.  I see an accusation of a small number of dissatisfied lefties who may have a reason other than the stated one of disliking Obama.  Racism, leftover Hillary sentiments, fake Democrats, etc and whatever.  And I'm just as sure that that is probably true.  The blogoshpere is a minute fraction of the voters and the left is an even smaller fraction and the dissatisfied left is even a smaller fraction.  Now we're into microbe territory.  So to interpret that remark as saying there is widespread racism from the left is not comprehensible to me.  

          Guess we'll have to just agree to disagree, as I just don't see it.  

          Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore. John Prine -8.00,-5.79

          by Miss Blue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:14:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The other person is just making shit up. (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            taylormattd, Cedwyn, princss6, JoanMar, moonpal

            He or she doesn't actually see it that way either. He or she is just trying to paint a persecution dramarama.

            I'm gonna go eat a steak. And fuck my wife. And pray to GOD - hatemailapalooza, 052210

            by punditician on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:40:14 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  It's really not that hard. (10+ / 0-)

            You make a disparaging statement against a large group of people, it generally behooves you to back up that disparaging statement.  Otherwise you're straight in Fox News "some people say" territory.  And that's one of the diaries that she hasn't deleted.

            Just for once, I'd like the supposed anti-racists to move past the security racial theater (thanks wwjjd for providing an example downthread) and show that there's some kind of there there before they go there.  Where are the Democrats demanding to see Obama's birth certificate?  Where are the rec listed diaries on Dkos (or FDL, or mydd, etc etc) wondering if Obama is secretly a Muslim?  Where are popular diarists calling Obama a "very, very urban" politician?

            "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

            by Uberbah on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:40:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well,,, (19+ / 0-)

              I will say that I cut BWD a LOT of slack.  I think she was treated horribly by this site and forgave a lot of her behavior in reaction to how she was treated.

              And please don't say she started it, because she didn't.  Period.  That is the facts, sir.  

              There were folks who objected to these harmless pic diaries and instead of just removing themselves, insults started flying.  Or threadjacks.  And she took far more abuse than she deserved.

              And before you are thinking I am/was one of her fans, I am/was not.  I looked at most of her diaries, especially the early ones, and stayed out of the comments.  But I read them, and they got ugly.  And believe me when I tell you, it wasn't she who started the ugliness.  

              Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore. John Prine -8.00,-5.79

              by Miss Blue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:48:17 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Uh, no. (14+ / 0-)

                And please don't say she started it, because she didn't.  Period.  That is the facts, sir.  

                You mean like when she accused those insufficiently supportive of the president of treason in a now deleted diary?  BWD would throw out such cute little barbs against Obama's critics, and would get pushback from that.  Those are the facts, backed up by basic chronology.

                I think she was treated horribly by this site

                Having each and every one of your diaries shoot to the top of the rec list is being treated "horribly"?

                "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

                by Uberbah on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:04:09 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oh cmon (13+ / 0-)

                  If you're going to be obtuse, we are done.  

                  I started this little convo by saying I saw your point.  And I do.

                  But since then, there has been not one inch of give on your part.  Your agenda seems to be to bash BWD and I am not going to play.  

                  Rec list doesn't mean shit if there are 100 out of 300 comments telling you to get lost.  Slinkerwink, anyone?  She's taken a shitload of abuse as well, and she still makes the rec list with almost every diary.

                  You don't like BWD - fine.  Please just state that openly next time so nobody else wastes their time trying to banter about it with you, like I just did.

                  Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore. John Prine -8.00,-5.79

                  by Miss Blue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:10:07 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Oh, too bad. (7+ / 0-)

                    If you're going to be obtuse, we are done.  

                    Choice of ad hominems over links or evidence of any other kind: noted.

                    But since then, there has been not one inch of give on your part.  Your agenda seems to be to bash BWD and I am not going to play.  

                    Unfortunately for you, this not a show on CNN where climate change ostriches funded by the Koch brothers get equal time with scientists with decades in the field - I don't have to give anything when the facts are on my side.  And just like Republicans who, to this day, blame Clinton for Ruby Ridge (happened months before he was even elected president), there's an indisputable chronology of what happened first:

                    Enough with the threats already!
                    by blackwaterdog
                    Tue Apr 20, 2010 at 03:01:58 PM PST

                    To stay home in November in order to "punish" the Dems because they are yet to deliver on everything they promised, and as a result let the party of Mitch McConnell, Sarah Palin and the teabaggers to retain power - is not only childish, it's almost a treason.

                    Turns out that I was mistaken about something: that wasn't one of her deleted diaries.  BWD was a bomb thrower (notice the 'where's my pony' straw man next to the accusation of a capital crime), and that's just a fact you'll have to deal with now that the proof is right there in front of you.

                    Rec list doesn't mean shit if there are 100 out of 300 comments telling you to get lost.

                    And when did this happen, exactly.  Diaries accusing others of treason don't count, for obvious reasons.

                    Slinkerwink, anyone?  She's taken a shitload of abuse as well, and she still makes the rec list with almost every diary.

                    And as soon as you can point to Slinkerwink of behavior like, say, accusing those unsupportive of the public option of treason, you'll have a great comparison here.

                    "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

                    by Uberbah on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:26:09 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

          •  Huh? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Miss Blue, princss6

            The blogoshpere is a minute fraction of the voters and the left is an even smaller fraction and the dissatisfied left is even a smaller fraction.

            Come on! Come on! We rule!!!! :)

            Yeah, I've never assumed that a consensus on the GOS was a general consensus. We sometimes get it right. Sometimes not.

            Garrhgsfsafasd! or...where the heck is Lieber?

            by Hedwig on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:37:22 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  It wasn't a "bomb." It was the TRUTH! in that (4+ / 0-)

      case, which some folk obviously couldn't handle! If you had decided not to be so inflammatory yourself here, I could have  probably otherwise agreed with your ass.  BWD was more FU Hater Ass Bastard Mother Fuckers (which I didn't and still don't blame her most of the time for doing - like here! -- Your commentary history suggests that you believe it's ok for bullshit to only come from one way, so [censored!]). Whereas Al is and has been more like "Feel the moment, be one with the moment, understand the moment" with his presentation.

    •  no, the pushback (14+ / 0-)

      was from people like you who trashed the shit out of her, calling her things like cultist, etc.

      Show me on the doll where Rahm touched you.

      by taylormattd on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:31:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  he's weak, he's spineless, he's got no balls (17+ / 0-)

      THOSE were inflammatory comments IMO.

      my recollection is that BWD started out neutral and for some reason attracted a lot of criticism, that she then responded to, and then people criticized her even more for responding to the criticism, until it spiraled out of control.

      but i will still never understand why people could not enjoy the earlier diaries for what they were, and why comments like the one in my subject line were considered OK while pictures of the president interacting with people in a positive way were not OK.

      "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
      "You can't spell crazy without R-AZ" h/t rb608

      by TrueBlueMajority on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 04:02:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Those comments may be offensive to you, (6+ / 0-)

        and even hyperbole, but those comments were used to express valid ire about substantive policy issues, and whether you feel they were appropriate or not, is one thing, which you are more than welcome to express, but to suggest they are racist driven and not policy driven is pure bullshit, and are nothing but a clear attempt to manipulate through false shame. It is clear that those who attempt that spin, repeatedly who refuse to address the policy critique, and in fact, assiduously avoid even engaging in such critical discourse are not here to further the dialectic and foster true mutual understanding, they are here to stifle and suppress it, so that the hard questions are covered by smoke screen propaganda. Are their hints of racism here? Yes, there are hints of racism everywhere, but is that the driving sentiment on Daily Kos? Not even a little, which is why you can't find any diaries that suggest Obama is a muslem or any other truly racist garbage, because it would get HR'ed to oblivion and such users immediately autobanned. We do not tolerate racism here. In 2008 Daily Kos worked to get Obama elected, and THAT is the irrefutable proof of this community's honor. The policy debate of substantive issues is what all of us need to discuss. The valid criticsms of policy need to be identified and acknowledged in acute and brutaly honest detail. Any comparisons of detailed policy critique to such comments as calling someone's critique "treason" is pure BS.  

        ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

        by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:12:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  no balls is a valid comment about policy issues? (0+ / 0-)

          ohhhhhhhhh kayyyyyyyyy

          "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
          "You can't spell crazy without R-AZ" h/t rb608

          by TrueBlueMajority on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 08:05:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  "No balls" was said in response to (0+ / 0-)

            a valid policy criticism, yes. ie: "people wanted Obama to take a stronger stance on certain policy issues". Was "No balls" an offensive or inappropriate choice of words, maybe ... but then again, maybe not. Clearly not, according to those people who were severely disappointed in Obama's policy positions. But, if you do believe it was an inappropriate choice of words, you are more than welcome to express your feelings on the matter. Please do so. But if you think any REC-LISTED diary was racism driven, rather than policy driven, please please PLEASE do provide a link to it. If not, then you are full of it.

            I challenge you to provide me with a single REC'd diary that was promoting a racist critique and not a policy critique. Please, just one!

            You can't! So, your "racism meme" is pure BS.

            === End of Debate ===

            ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

            by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:25:43 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  "my" racism meme? do I have a racism meme? (0+ / 0-)

              "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
              I support Bob Massie for US Senate

              by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Jan 17, 2011 at 05:32:46 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  The racism meme being promoted by BWD (0+ / 0-)

                .... and all of the defenders of BWD's words here, that is to whom I am speaking. If you are not here to defend BWD's racism meme, then I am not speaking to you, but your comment seemed to suggest that you were. You might want to stay out of comment threads and not post sarcastic retorts if you don't intend to take such positions, because doing so, implies that you are.

                ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

                by ArthurPoet on Mon Jan 17, 2011 at 07:52:52 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  Inflammatory? Of course they're inflammatory. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Robobagpiper

        But they aren't racist, which was her complaint.  Remember this cartoon, which predates Obama's presidency?

        Of course, these pie fights on Dkos were back when we thought Obama was passing conservative Republican policies like Romneycare out of an overwhelming desire to compromise, as opposed to just doing what he wanted in the first place, like extending the Bush Tax cuts and cutting Social Security.

        "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

        by Uberbah on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:31:39 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  That's a bomb? (9+ / 0-)

      "..some hidden and maybe subconscious and disturbing underline[sic] tone behind some of the things that I read here and throughout the left blogosphere..." is a bomb?  C'mon.  It's a statement of someone's viewpoint.  If it's felt to be incorrect that it can be argued against.  A "bomb" is a hell of a lot more inflammatory that what I see you using here as your example.

      "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

      by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 04:54:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  to the poutrage crew (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        foufou, ThisIsMyTime, abrauer

        everything's a bomb

        Judging from picturebooks, apparently Heaven is a partly cloudy place. - Rilo Kiley

        by Cedwyn on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 06:58:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Because, you know (9+ / 0-)

          calling folks "the poutrage crew" so clearly frames the fact that your future words aren't bombs.

          Unfortunately, history matters. When someone goes around flinging labels (like, say, "the poutrage crew") it's difficult for those so classified to read that user's future words as neutral in that regard.

          I'm agnostic in this whole pie-war - don't think I've ever commented in an Obama photodiary. I note this phenomenon on both sides - the tendency to throw labels like that and then be shocked (shocked!) when one's words are seen as inflammatory just makes me shake my head.

          •  you're right (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Triscula, Hedwig, princss6

            i should have just said "to some."  

            Judging from picturebooks, apparently Heaven is a partly cloudy place. - Rilo Kiley

            by Cedwyn on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 08:50:42 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Here's your real "poutrage crew" if .... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Uberbah

              Here's your real "poutrage crew" if there is one here, only their offensive actions are hidden by incidious and unethical tactics.  

              ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

              by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:45:44 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  There's no need for this (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Cedwyn, princss6

                Let's have this discussion without all the venom and accusations.  Cedwyn admitted her error.  That should be the end of it.  

                Let's all do our own part to make this community's debates and interactions something we can be enriched by and be proud of.  Sometimes it's as simple as deciding not to hit that "post" button.

                "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

                by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:15:40 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Your tut-tutting would be far more credible... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ArthurPoet

                  ...if it weren't so very, very selective.  i.e. wagging your finger at AP for pushing back against Cedwyn but lamely giving her an out at the same time.

                  You don't have a complaint here, you have a tactic.

                  "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

                  by Uberbah on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:20:51 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I asked her to stop too. n/t (0+ / 0-)

                    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

                    by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:31:16 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  While absolving her, (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      ArthurPoet

                      which you didn't do for AP or anyone responding to BWD's bomb throwing (which you blew off).  And still no tut-tutting for taylormattd or Joan, almost like you were obviously picking sides or something.

                      Huh, interesting.

                      "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

                      by Uberbah on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:48:17 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

                        I only "absolved" her because she acknowledged that she shouldn't have said what she said.  If AP apologizes for calling me a liar and an "enemy of the truth" then I'll be happy to "absolve" him too.  

                        "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

                        by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 02:02:42 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I would love to absolve you of being an enemy (0+ / 0-)

                          of the truth, as soon as you apologize for lying and retract your falacious statment and admit to using the "selective quoting" to deceive, and promise to cease from engaging in insidiously deceptive games of selective quoting. And so yeah, sure, I would love to absolve you of being a liar, as soon as you stop lying and as long as you own up to the truth of your actions, and promise to comport yourself with honesty from now on .... fair?

                          And for the record, I do not retract my comment about the "poutrage crew" since cedwyn chose to use it to characterize other people in this manner, when she and you are the ones guilty of such, and she nor you apologized for that, did you? ... and so, yeah, it is an accuarate depiction of those who contrive to promote a false outrage using tactics like you have here today of "selective quoting" and unsubstantiated claims of criticisms from the left being racist driven not policy driven. So, yeah, you're outraged, and you just don't want to talk about the policy criticisms, because they"re just not important, but false claims of racism are? You're outrage is thinly veiled behind these divisive games of deceipt.

                          Please!  

                          ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

                          by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 03:00:27 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Hopefully (0+ / 0-)

                            ...maybe when you're feeling more calm, you'll re-read my comments on this and be able to understand what my point was.  I had no intention to deceive.  Using the word "racism" doesn't automatically make a statement unacceptably inflammatory, especially when the person making the statement is careful to qualify it (as my quote was seeking to point out) with words like "maybe" and "some" and "unconscious".  When someone takes steps to avoid broad generalizations and accusations of intent they are actually seeking to mitigate the intensity of their remark.  I just don't find statements about the possibility of there being some racism on the left, and that it could be part of what drives some particularly personal criticisms of the president, to be all that outrageous.  I just don't.  Sorry.

                            That's the crux of my point in this discussion.  Clearly you disagree, and that's completely fine.  I don't need to attack your integrity or your character because we don't see eye-to-eye on this.  I hope you'll realize that the same is true on your end.  My views on this (and my attempts to argue them) don't make me a liar or an "enemy of the truth".  It just means that we disagree.

                            "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

                            by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 07:58:59 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hopefully, (0+ / 0-)

                            when your ego is less prominently driving your comments, you will look back and realize that "selective quoting" to make a point is unethical ... ie, a lie ... and an insidiously deceptive one at that. You made a conscious decision to leave out the word "racism" in your quote, because you KNEW that it would disprove your statement.

                            1. You know it.
                            1. I know it.
                            1. We know it.


                            And, again ...

                            Is there a hint of racism on the left? Yes, of course, since there is a hint of racism everywhere, but is racism what is drivng the criticsms on the left? No. Absolutely not! Policy issues are driving them. And to suggest otherwise, is pure propaganda BS who intent is to divert attention away from the Policy issues.

                            TO WIT:

                            1. Did the progressive liberal left rise up with passion to get an AA man elected president in 2008? Yes!
                            1. Can you can point to ONE SINGLE REC-LISTED DIARY that was a critique diary driven by specific explicit racism and not policy critique? CAN YOU? CAN YOU? CAN YOU? NO!

                            Will you provde the link? If not, you are, yet again, furthering a false propaganda meme whose intent is to stifle and to suppress criticism.

                            And btw, I am a 35+ year advanced practitioner and teacher of Martial Arts and have lived the rigor of a life path few imagine ... and as such, I assure you, Triscula, whomever you are, in the heat of the fiercest of battle, either verbal or otherwise, I am indomitably calm and unperturbed. Do not mistake fierceness of words, for lack of calm. Just because I am disgusted with your insidiously deceitful tactics, and have no problem expressing my distaste with suchin the most direct of terms, doesn't mean that I am not calm. So please do save your condescending remarks for someone else.

                            ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

                            by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:45:49 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

        •  Let's not do this (5+ / 0-)

          Even if one person seems determined to drag the conversation into the battle pit we don't have to join them.  There's no obligation to take the bait.  We can all take responsibility for guiding discussion and debate into informative, civil, revealing, and enriching channels even when there are those who seek to derail it.

          "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

          by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 07:30:32 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  You surruptiiously left out "The racism ..." (5+ / 0-)

        ... part of that quote, which makes your comment an incidious attempt to cover up the truth. Some people might call that lying, others might call that unethical, you however might believe you were being artful in executing a nice propaganda spin to fool the readers. Calling someone's critique of valid policy issues "racism" or "treason" is a "bomb", yes, and doing so reveals an underlying spirit that is hateful and abusive, wherein true pre-judgments are obviously what spawns such abusive hateful false labels, and those who do so are the real "poutrage crew" if there are any such ilk here. You will not win this debate by surruptiously misquotng people, leaving out the offensive words, like the false claims "racism" and "treason" .... so please, I am asking you politely, just stop.

        Please. Just. Stop.

        ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

        by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:39:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Settle down (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          princss6, ThisIsMyTime

          I'm sorry that I left the word "racism" out of my quote.  Since the quote itself was directly above my own comment I didn't think it was necessary to include the entire.  The point I was making had mostly to do with the portion that I did quote.  It's loaded with modifiers and mitigaters.  It's not a broad accusation but an expression of what someone believes might be the case.  That's hardly a "bomb".  As for the "treason" remark, as I mentioned earlier, BWD apologized for it and acknowledged that it was wrong.  Everyone screws up sometimes.  If they're willing to admit their mistake I think we can let it go.  Certainly many other popular diarists have erred in similar ways.  On balance, BWD's overall presence here wasn't combative, insulting or troublesome.  In light of that I think we can accept the apology as sincere.  If you don't then that's certainly up to you.

          I'll add that accusations like the one you're attempting to slime me with in your comment here only add (unnecessarily) to hostility at this site.  I'm not a propagandist or a liar.  I simply see the situation differently than you do.  You're not my enemy and I hope you don't regard me as yours.

          "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

          by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:11:31 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Settle down .... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Uberbah, priceman

            I was a fan of BWD's diaries way way back before her first GBCW, and since then, lost interest in her photo propaganda, but still, never expressed anything negative to her, so it's really not about me forgiving her, it is about how her words caused the ire. And you may claim your misquoting was "innocent" but since you chose to selectively blatantly quote HALF A SENTENCE focus on those innoffensive words that were mild and leave out the ONLY offensive word in the sentence, mehtinks you are / I believe you are / you appear to me to be / a liar, yet again. In other words, your attempt to spin, yet again, is a fail. As they say, when you're in a hole, quit digging. You are fooling no one but your apparent fans who probably engage in the same underhanded tactics, which I have seen far too much of here. And so, no, for the record, I am not "sliming" you, so "settle down", really, you are sliming yourself without any help from me by misquotng and spinning, so again, I am asking you politiely, just stop. Again, I assure you, you are fooling no one.

            PLEASE. JUST. STOP.

            ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

            by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:45:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Maybe (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ThisIsMyTime

              ...instead of searching for ill intent in my remarks you should simply take your own advice:

              PLEASE. JUST. STOP.

              I chose the portion of the quote to make my point.  Her comment was qualified in many ways, all suggesting that it was her opinion (not necessarily fact) and that it was only a maybe, AND that it was only directed at some of the critics.  I'm sorry that your strong feelings on this matter have led you to think so poorly of my character.  I just don't agree with you.  It's that simple.

              "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

              by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:53:40 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, exactly! You chose that portion of the (0+ / 0-)

                sentence to quote to make your point, because if you HAD included the word "racism" or the word "treason" your point would have NOT been valid. Which means, you used selective quoting to lie. Which means you are a liar. You obviously did it with conscious intent to decieve. 

                TO WIT:

                Consider how your comment would have been recieved if you stated the following:
                Suggestng someone's criticism is "racism" or "treason" is not a "bomb."     

                ~ lol ~ 

                Sounds pretty absurd, huh? 

                Please! 

                And then you tried to tell me that your intentions were innocent, that it didn't matter, when any intelligent reader knows that you HAD TO intentionaly exclude the word "racism" to make your falacious point, which means you did it kniwingly pointedly and with conscious decieving intent, which means you were not innocent, and this  means that you are,  yes, as you yourself put it, "slime."  

                So please;, just stop. I am asking you politely for a third time. 

                You attempted to spin a lie, to make uberbah appear incorrect. I called you on your lie. I called you out as a liar. And in response, you tell me to "settle down" and that you are "not my enemy." 

                For the record, I am calm and settled and I do not consider you my enemy and I readily forgive BWD for her slanderrous divisive offensive remarks, but that does not mean that BWD didn'tt cause the very ire she received, which was uberbah's main point, which he provided ACCURATE quotes with lnks to proove, unlike you.

                And you? 

                No, you are not MY enemy, you are just the enemy of TRUTH and HONESTY and HONOR and RESPECT. And you want to protest what I exposed? 

                lol ...

                Methinks the lady doth protest too much!

                Good luck with that! You are as bad as BWD, or maybe worse, cause your abuse employs insidious underhanded tactics.

                I repeat: PLEASE. STOP.
                   

                ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

                by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:43:08 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Nevermind (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ThisIsMyTime

                  You're missing my point repeatedly, either unintentionally or otherwise.  It doesn't matter either way.  I think only someone determined to find nefarious intent in every disagreement would characterize my remarks as deception.  If that's your bag then you'll have to find someone else to "expose".  I'm all done.

                  "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

                  by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:22:20 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Just because your point sucks... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    ArthurPoet

                    ...doesn't mean that he didn't understand it just fine.  BWD was complaining about racism, but you cut that part of the quote out.

                    "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

                    by Uberbah on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:25:37 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Yep (0+ / 0-)

                      ...because I was focusing on all the ways in which she modified the remark.  She was stating that every critic of the president is a racist, which has been the accusation flying around in this diary's comments.  That was my point.  Of course, you already knew that.

                      "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

                      by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:28:44 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Uh, no. (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        ArthurPoet

                        That's a bomb? (9+ / 0-)

                        "..some hidden and maybe subconscious and disturbing underline[sic] tone behind some of the things that I read here and throughout the left blogosphere..." is a bomb?

                        That wasn't pointing out any "modifications" (actually a lame non-apology apology the next day), it was leaving out the context for the quote.

                        Of course, you already knew that.

                        "Pragmatists don't DO things! They explain to you how things CANNOT be done." - AndyS In Colorado

                        by Uberbah on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:50:14 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Eh. Not really. (0+ / 0-)

                          My point was that stating that one thinks that there is some racism on the left and that it might be behind some of the more intense criticism coming from some folks on the left is not a bomb.  It's just an opinion.  Disagree?  Great!  Make a rebuttal and move on.  Expressions of opinion that are modified to avoid generalization are not "bombs".  That was my point.  I'm sorry if I did a poor job in making it, but there it is.

                          "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

                          by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:59:49 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  You misquoted to promote a falacious point, (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Uberbah

                            to make your statement more convincing, and that makes your point a lie. The topic is what statements are "bomb" like, and "racism" and "treason" are  such, yet you tried to make it appear that something else was being called "bomb" like. So, you lied.

                            Is there a hint of racism on the left? Yes, of course,  since there is a hint of racism everywhere, but is racism what is behind and drivng the criticsms on the left? No. Absolutely not, and to suggest that it is, is pure propaganda bullshit.

                            1. Did the progressive liberal left rise up with passion to get an AA man elected president in 2008? Yes!
                            1. Can you can point to ONE SINGLE DIARY that was a critique diary driven by specific explicit racism and not policy? No.

                            Will you provde the link? If not, you are, yet again, furthering a false propaganda meme whose intent is to stifle and to surpress criticism.

                            ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

                            by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 02:31:02 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  One more time (0+ / 0-)

                            I don't consider a statement that maybe some unconscious racism among some folks on the left is behind some of the criticism to be a "bomb".  It's just a viewpoint.  I've addressed the "treason" remark numerous times so I won't repeat it.  It was a bad move for which BWD apologized.  

                            but is racism what is behind and drivng the criticsms on the left? No. Absolutely not, and to suggest that it is, is pure propaganda bullshit.

                            No.  It's an opinion.  Just as your insistence that I am a liar and an "enemy of the truth" (yeah, that's not bomb-throwing, right?) is your opinion.  I've never defended BWD's opinion about racism driving some critics on the left so I have no need to defend it now.  It's clearly her viewpoint that it is.  You're free to disagree with that and to make a coherent (or otherwise) argument to support your disagreement.  That's the way this whole discussion/debate thing works.  I'm sorry that you're so angry about this.  I feel bad for you that your frustration has prompted you to attack me personally.  I hope that any future interactions between us at this site are more friendly.  Take care.

                            "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

                            by Triscula on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 07:46:36 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Again, I said you were a liar (0+ / 0-)

                            and an "enemy of truth" because you misquoted someone intentionally leaving out the ONLY salient word in the sentence, changing the very nature of what was said to make your point, which, otherwise, would not have been valid. Own up to your actions.

                            And, for the record, you have now quoted me here without providing the complete quote of my sentence, nor of my paragraph, substantiating my assertion.
                            (For those who want to read the truth, here it is, again:

                            Is there a hint of racism on the left? Yes, of course,  since there is a hint of racism everywhere, but is racism what is behind and drivng the criticsms on the left? No. Absolutely not, and to suggest that it is, is pure propaganda bullshit.

                            1. Did the progressive liberal left rise up with passion to get an AA man elected president in 2008? Yes!
                            1. Can you can point to ONE SINGLE DIARY that was a critique diary driven by specific explicit racism and not policy? No.

                            Will you provde the link? If not, you are, yet again, furthering a false propaganda meme whose intent is to stifle and to surpress criticism.

                            You really are a piece of work, Triscula, with your pathological "selective quoting" lying behavior.

                            And, regarding your "opinion" ... Did you provide a link? No. So, you are expressing your opinion, fine, but since you cannot back it up with a single example proving it, your opinion is, as they say ... questionable ... in its lack of objectivity. Clearly you have a PREJUDICED bias, which colors your opinion. And, since it is coupled with your blatant misquoting lies, you will forgive me, if I do not hold your "opinion" in very high regard, right about now. But again, I would be more than happy to absolve you of your lies, if you would just be so kind as to admit them and cease such insidiously deceptive "selective quoting" behavior. Deal?

                            And lastly, the point about BWD's "treason" comment has nothing to do with whether or not she apologized, because the damage was already done, since her comments incited, (ie: CAUSED) the very ire she receivued, and THAT is the point uberbah was making:

                            uberbah wrote:

                            Make inflammatory statements in diaries, get pushback.  Don't make inflammatory statements in diaries, and they're a lot more harmonious.

                            So, why don't you just admit that uberbah is right, instead of playing these games of deceit? And then, I will no longer consider you an "enemy of truth" ... Deal?

                            ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

                            by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:03:55 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

                            To put it simply:  I don't consider the statement to be inflammatory.  That doesn't mean that I agree with it.  Not once in this discussion have I stated whether I agree with it or not.  I don't need to agree with something in order to believe it's not inflammatory.  BWD's statement was addressing criticism from the left, not specifically rec listed Dkos diaries.  Furthermore, it's pretty difficult to prove the feelings that drive someone's opinion.  That's probably why she used terms like "maybe".  Personally, I have no idea if unconscious racism has driven some of the more intense personal attacks on Obama.  I don't think it's wrong or inflammatory to wonder if some of it has been.

                            Your efforts to paint me as a liar are pretty funny considering that we all know that every part of this discussion, including the quote that has you so incensed, is right there for everyone to see.  There's no deception.  I was just trying to point you to particular parts of the quote that are just as salient as the word racism.  

                            And no, you are not calm.  Calm, rational people don't need to resort to repeated personal attacks in discussions.  They can discuss their differences without demonizing their opponents.  You have never met me and as far as I know we have never even exchanged words at this site yet this simple disagreement over a single quote from a diary has you so wound up that you can't discuss it civilly.  That's not calm.  Let's end this discussion now.  Hopefully any contact with you will be less unpleasant.  Peace.

                            "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

                            by Triscula on Mon Jan 17, 2011 at 03:05:42 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

                            You're pretty funny:

                            I was just trying to point you to particular parts of the quote that are just as salient as the word racism.  

                            Do you seriously believe ANYONE readying this will accept the notion that the word "racism" does not constitute the defining CONTEXT of the sentence, and as such, to not include it in your quote, miscolors the very meaning being conveyed. The sentence is inflammatory SOLELY because of the use of the word "racism" and the sentence would not be inflammatory if the word was absent. So, WTF are you talking about? asdf ...

                            Please.
                              
                            You can try to insist till you are blue in the face that not using the word "racism" was not salient, but no intelligent reader will believe you. But hey, good luck with that!

                            And, again, "hints of racism" are everywhere: asdf .... so unless one is making suggestion about a specific instance that one can provide of a rec listed diary which is a critque of Obama's race and not a policy issue, and it better be an irrefutable one, (and sorry, no amount of pretty pictures will suffice, lol) then Uberbah's point is accurate: BWD's comments were inflammatory, causing the very ire she recieved.

                            These repeated attempts to try to make her appear as some innocent victim are a fail.   

                            ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

                            by ArthurPoet on Mon Jan 17, 2011 at 07:44:11 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Your argument ... (0+ / 0-)

                            Your argument:

                            1. Your argument was that BWD did not deserve the ire that she received.
                            1. Your argument was that her words were not inflammatory.
                            1. Your quote surruptiiously left out the ONLY inflammatory word, "racism," which makes your argument a complete lie. Her words were inflammatory.
                            1. You are attempting to downplay the importance of her use of the word "racism" yet, it is the main reason for the ire.
                            1. You argued that since she apologized for calling: "criticism" = "treason", she didn't deserve the flames her offense caused in the first place. But, she was wrong to say that in the first place, and her saying that is what caused the ire. She was not an innocent victim. She was an offensive lady.

                            I am not demonizing you, nor am attacling you, I am merely exposing you to be a liar who uses "selective quoting" with a clear intention to deceive and misrepresent people's words. You brought up the word "enemy" , suggesting that you are not my enemy, which I do not feel you are, so you can "calm down" ... I only used the term "enemy of truth" because you proved yourself to be a liar, and your use of the word "enemy" brought such notion of "enemy" into the discussion. Now, if you want to own up to your deceitful actions and intent, and apologize, and promise not to engage in such underhanded tactics in the future, I would be happy to forgive you for this and we can be friends ... Fair?    

                            ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

                            by ArthurPoet on Mon Jan 17, 2011 at 10:41:01 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  These people are not even worth your (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            rubyr

                            time. It is the same ole crap. The projection is quite amusing. Oh BTW, your point will always be missed intentionally by some idiots. Make a note of it going forward and ignore them.

                            ...We have many more issues that bind us together than separate us!

                            by ThisIsMyTime on Mon Jan 17, 2011 at 05:21:13 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  she was NOT stating that (0+ / 0-)

                        every critic of the president is a racist...

                        is that what you meant?

                        "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
                        I support Bob Massie for US Senate

                        by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Jan 17, 2011 at 08:32:32 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  I'm "missing your" point ... (0+ / 0-)

                    ... to lie? Ahh, no, I got your point loud and clear.

                    And no, you are not alone, I hear BWD's got an entire censored website of people who will welcome such propaganda lies.

                    ~we study the old to understand the new~from one thing know ten thousand~to see things truly one must see what is in the light and what lies hidden in shadow~

                    by ArthurPoet on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:28:29 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

    •  And the cult of personality (12+ / 0-)

      Take this, as an example, posted January 13 on BWD's new blog:

      When god is looking for one man to be his messenger of love and hope and empathy and forgiveness and clear eyes and full heart, when god is painting a beautiful man – he’s looking at a picture of Barack Obama.

      To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

      by sneakers563 on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:45:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I must agree... (11+ / 0-)

    with what cosmic debris just pointed out about Al Rodgers being here so long, and so well-respected.

    I'm not sure I've ever seen a pie fight or HR in one of Al's diaries, and I have seen all of Al's diaries.  My memory could be failing me, but I don't think so.

    Al is so very, very respected here that if anyone tried to start something similar to what happened in BWD's diaries, they would be blasted off the site.  BWD was a newbie in comparison to Al.  And it wasn't just his photo diaries that earned that respect.  Al was the initial host of the Saturday night diary that ended up being permanently promoted to the front page.  It sure didn't start out there, that was Al's doing.

    I agree with you, Seneca, that the lack of commentary in Al's diaries probably help keep the tone positive in the comments, but I think he does have the built-in advantage, earned and deserved though it is, of the overwhelming degree of respect he has from the other members of this site.

    Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore. John Prine -8.00,-5.79

    by Miss Blue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:54:54 PM PST

    •  I agree in part (8+ / 0-)

      and you know that means I disagree in part, lol.

      I do believe Al is respected. But I also believe there's a reason he's respected, and that respect is earned. And it doesn't require a low UID to earn respect.

      I agree with you and Senaca that it's the lack of commentary that makes it better. Also agree with Senaca that it's the lack of a barb. The lack of a title that makes some feel defensive before they even click.

      Same shit, different year.

      by BentLiberal on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:59:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  In another comment here.... (8+ / 0-)

        I mention the Saturday diary that really got Al well-known on this site.

        In that weekly diary, Al most certainly made his opinions known.  There were plenty of barbs, much snark and even more sarcasm.  And we all loved him for it.  Still.

        I am hard-pressed to think of anything Al Rodgers could do that would turn me against him.  And I think there are many, many more on this site who would agree with me.  

        OPOL, BWD, TIMT, and any others who use mainly photos to convey their thoughts would be equally hard-pressed to amass that amount of respect.  No offense to them at all, it just is what it is.  

        And yes, if you are thinking I am a 100# Al Rodgers toady, you are correct.  Love him madly and have for years.

        Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore. John Prine -8.00,-5.79

        by Miss Blue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:06:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  the phenomenon is this: (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lying eyes, foufou

        al was here since way back when...i.e., he earned his respect in a completely different dkos environment.

        Judging from picturebooks, apparently Heaven is a partly cloudy place. - Rilo Kiley

        by Cedwyn on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 07:02:05 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  My reaction? He's aged. (6+ / 0-)

    I know it always happens.  But this week I noticed it for the first time.

    His hair has much more grey in it, the strong furrowing of his face is deeper, the gaze sees farther.

    Some Presidents hide, and are aged by their fear.

    Some give their energy to us, doling it out over their terms and keeping little left for themselves.

    But they all age quickly...

    It ain't called paranoia - when they're really out to get you. 6 points.

    by Jaime Frontero on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 09:56:27 PM PST

  •  The only photodiaries I usually venture into (11+ / 0-)

    are haole's nature photography, jekyllnhyde's cartoons, OPOL's graphic wizardry, and troubador's (too) occasional astronomy themed posts...

    The president and his family are inarguably photogenic, but I find little to contemplate in these diaries beyond that.  However, if people want to take the time to post them, and others get something out of viewing them, more power to all!

    Whom do you blame more? The rattlesnake, or the bipartisan guy who put it in your sleeping bag?

    by chuckvw on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:04:54 PM PST

  •  I can agree with your recommendation (13+ / 0-)

    Although I can't say I ever had much interest in photo diaries. More on a special occasion than a daily or weekly thing.

    But what interest I did have was muted by the flame wars. And a framing that often included snide swipes at admin critics. Although I suppose some felt/feel that's righteous or appropriate to include, it really doesn't create an neutral ground. And I'd point out the passive aggressive asides can be counter productive. If the goal is to draw attention to the good the admin does, critics might be more inclined to see and internalize it, if they weren't challenged to defend themselves themselves in the same space.

    My deepest gratitude to all the Kossacks that supported my fundraiser for marriage equality in Delaware.

    by Scott Wooledge on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:08:35 PM PST

    •  The Key (6+ / 0-)

      And a framing that often included snide swipes at admin critics.

      I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it. B.H. Obama

      by Klick2con10ue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:23:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Took a moment (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Seneca Doane

        Comment for BWD to search for a suggestion up a I made to avoid the flames.
        B

        elow
        All this infighting is going on because people (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
           TiaRachel

        who participate in it want to do it. Both sides are wrong in this respect. Baited comments that threaten to hi-jack a dairy should be ignored and diarist should also avoid incendiary comments as this fabricated one

           Our President is so wonderful it is just terrible how cruel people on the left are to him

        or this fabricated one

           Their are people here on Kos that think Obama can do no wrong

        ...Either of these statements could have an element of truth but by and large they are simply hyperbole. And sincerity as to their truthfulness is no excuse to attack those who may disagree with you on any given topic.  

           Dealing with trolls

           Trolling is a sad reality of internet life. Most trolls tend to be blatant, posting comments or diaries that are clearly intended to provoke an angry response. Other trollish messages are posted simply to disrupt the conversation in a diary.

           Directly replying to trollish content is a waste of time; trolls tend not to be interested in actual debate. The community relies on a number of other methods to keep the community as troll-free as possible.

           Primary among these methods is hide-rating comments. Trusted Users (see above) can give comments a rating of Hide. If a comment has been hide-rated by two users and recommended by none, then that comment (and all replies to it) are automatically hidden. If a comment has been recommended at least once, then Hides must be applied to the ratio of 3x+1 (where x is the number of recommends) in order to hide that comment (again, all replies to the comment will also be hidden). Hidden comments and their responses can only be seen by Trusted Users.

           There is no mechanism for hiding trollish diaries. The most common alternative is to post a comment to the troll diary containing a recipe for a tasty dish. (This alternative can be used in replies to troll comments also.) Plenty of examples can be found in the Troll Diary tag (note: Most of those examples will probably be old, as the use of the "Troll Diary" tag is currently discouraged). An entire cookbook of recipes has been collected and is being sold as a fundraiser.

           Another alternative for trollish diaries is to post completely blank comments, or comments with a single letter or symbol, as a way of filling up the diary without actually rising to the bait of the troll.

        Comments made to be incendiary comments may not be HR worthy but they can be dealt with. It is very difficult for one person to hijack a diary. It takes willing accomplices.

        I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it. B.H. Obama

        by Klick2con10ue on Mon Jan 18, 2010 at 11:07:02 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it. B.H. Obama

        by Klick2con10ue on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 09:21:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I think that's Al's diaries this week show (4+ / 0-)

      how it's done.  I feel more positive after them than after the "OMG he's GREAT!" ones.

      I actually like them.  I hope there are more like Al's.  They do foster contemplation, etc.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:27:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I somewhat find (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      3goldens, Seneca Doane

      photodiaries of any sort inherently freaky and contrary to the essence of democracy.  I believe they promote brute and emotional identification rather than careful debate and analysis.  In my view, the whole point of democracy, and the reason that the first amendment pertains to free speech, is to carefully debate and analyze issues so as to arrive at the best solution.  If we'd live in an image driven society in the past as we do now we would have never gotten presidents such as Lincoln.  The problem with photo diaries is that they invite advocacy of positions based on what's photogenic.  I find this troubling.

      •  I wouldn't go that far (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        3goldens

        Again, I'd point to Land of Enchantment's photo diaries as ones that have packed a perfectly appropriate wallop.  And there's lots of non-political ones (Eddie C's, Haole in Hawaii's) that do as well.  I'm not scared of people inducing emotion; I just don't like it when they do so coupled with ways to make dissent untenable.  That's what kills good debate and leads to flame wars.

        Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
        It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

        by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:04:58 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I just believe very strongly (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          3goldens, Seneca Doane

          and deeply in discussion, that's all.  I find imagistic modes of rhetoric contrary to photo diaries contrary to that process.  Images are evaluated based on your emotional reaction and whether or not you find them appealing, not relationships between premises and conclusions.

        •  I really don't like hearing my photo diaries (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dsb, triv33

          being called "non-political ones." I don't feel that way about them at all.

          •  I'm thinking of the nature ones (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Hedwig

            I can see how you'd still conceive of them as political, but I also suspect that you'd acknowledge a difference between them and the "here's Obama visiting Albania!" ones.  I'd happily substitute in a different word that captures the distinction.

            I also realize that I may be thinking of your sunset photos and such in C&J, which (to me, anyway) often have the impact of full diaries, then ones you formally turn into a diary.

            No deprecation of your excellent work intended, in other words.

            Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
            It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

            by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:31:40 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  I tipped and recced and was truly appreciative of (16+ / 0-)

    the tone of your diary.
    But, I really do not see why anyone would get all hot and bothered about a photo diary.
    One is not forced to click on them.
    And is it not said that a picture is worth a thousand words?
    The uproar over these diaries (which I happen to love) is almost as silly as the raging debate over the President using teleprompters.

    Maya Angelou: "Without courage, we cannot practice any other virtue with consistency. We can't be kind, true, merciful, generous, or honest."

    by JoanMar on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:14:15 PM PST

  •  Thanks but no comment (4+ / 0-)

    ~a little change goes a long way~ (ps: sorry for all typing errors I has a splint on my left pinky today

    by missliberties on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:15:48 PM PST

  •  I believe you are correct. Good Idea. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1, Picot verde, Seneca Doane

    Everyone is adult here, mostly, and coercion is unwarranted.

    I want us to live up to her expectations. I want our democracy to be as good as she imagined it. B.H. Obama

    by Klick2con10ue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:20:53 PM PST

  •  A good, thoughtful diary, SD. (10+ / 0-)

    I will tell you that when I saw that Al had posted the Hope diary my eyes filled with tears before I even opened it.  I knew that whatever it contained he'd get it right, the tone would be as it should be.  That is what sets him apart from the other photo diarists.  There is no haranguing message to piss anyone off, no arrangement of pointed words hiding amongst the pictures to make you wish you hadn't opened the diary at all.  There are the beautiful pictures, carefully chosen, with facts laid bare in simple prose that is descriptive and touching without being antagonizing.

    Al's diaries are a form of journalistic art.  They rise about the petty arguments of the day to touch us in ways that only art can.  I thank him from the bottom of my heart for coming here and sharing his work with us.  I thank you, SD, for giving voice to the feelings I had that weren't expressed.

    "The world breaks everyone, and afterward, some are strong at the broken places." Ernest Hemingway

    by Got a Grip on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:30:08 PM PST

    •  Thanks, GaG (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Got a Grip, Situational Lefty

      I know that you're no slouch in the visual communications dept., so I'm glad this fit you.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:31:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, thanks SD. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Seneca Doane

        I think that we're all equipped with certain gifts, some more so than others, of course, but we all have gifts.  It's up to us to use them for the good of others and ourselves to the best of our abilities.  I try my best to make the best of mine.  This diary is an example of you using yours in just such a way, too.

        "The world breaks everyone, and afterward, some are strong at the broken places." Ernest Hemingway

        by Got a Grip on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:16:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Raged out. (5+ / 0-)

    I was gonna say that everyone finally reached maximum rage and we are now on the downward slope but looking at a few comments over this I see I was wrong.
    I'm with you SD in the past certain photo diaries felt like they were propaganda pieces intended to quell any dissent. In a democracy that is a threat.
    Al's diary was part of the cathartic aftermath we all needed. For all the disagreement we have on the policies I think we all want the best for our country, for our fellow citizens. That man shot at all of us. My rep received death threats this past week for voting against the tax cuts. I had made calls and written to him urging him to do so. He honored my voice by his stance. When the threats were made they were made against something I believed in, against a man who did his part for democracy. It makes the time wasted in those diaries sad.

    Remove BP's corporate charter for environmental terrorism.

    by Picot verde on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:33:54 PM PST

  •  You make some good points, as always. (11+ / 0-)

    In my opinion, photodiaries should be occasional, not daily. Except for photodiaries of Yosemite. Those can be posted three times a day for me :) I believe I rec'd at least one of Rodgers' diaries this week because it was very well done and what the community needed at the time. But after seeing way, way too many BWD photodiaries, I won't rec them - won't even open them - absent unusual circumstances.

  •  When I saw Al Rodgers name again (9+ / 0-)

    I nearly wept.

    Again, for the second time in just a few days, SD, you have written something that is so important. (Not that you don't all the time.  It's just that everything is - really - all about me. :-DDD)

    So, yeah.  What you said.  I hope Al sticks around.

    And, like you, I support Barack Obama even though he has let me down on some issues.  I'm pragmatic like that.  And that's hard to admit around here.  It always seems that you have to be either for or against.

    It isn't that simple.

  •  #1 (11+ / 0-)

    I always just look at the photos and am reminded of how I felt at the Convention in Denver and then on Inauguration night.

    When I'm reminded of the magic of those moments I forget about my disagreements with Obama. I forget about my disappointment at not owning the narrative except on very few occasions.

    I look at those photos and remember we have a black man as President and how that makes me get all misty when I see him and the family on the White House lawn. That is huge.

    Obama has done so much good even if I wish he'd be just as effective when it comes to the economy. Still, a Presidency is more than one issue and one area of policy. When I remember that I think he's done a damn fine job.

    Unapologetically pro-citizen. Not anti-corporation just very pro-citizen.

    by CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 10:50:11 PM PST

  •  I wish we had a photo diary (2+ / 0-)

    of the inner pathways of Obama's mind. I'm more interested in how he thinks than what he looks like with his shirt off.

    I didn't notice the diaries you've mentioned. I wouldn't read them. I'm ready to allow the site to be dominated by unquestioning OBama supporters.

    I used to care, but things have changed.

    •  On the other hand, I took a peak (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      3goldens, Seneca Doane, Eclectablog

      at the photo diaries S.D. recommended.  Not bad.

      Different context than the usual. Focus is on Tucson events.

      I once called Tucson home, having lived there for many years, and still have friends there, some of whom are active in the Democratic party in Tucson, and have been personally acquainted with Congresswoman Giffords, and who have been struck with sadness and grief over the events.

      My friends have shared with me their pictures of the images surrounding the tragedy, and I have read their words of horrified dismay and shock, and thus this hits me closer to home.

      I understand better now the point of the diarist.

  •  SD, you say (8+ / 0-)

    I am an occasional critic of President Obama, while continuing to believe that in some ways he is our greatest President since FDR.

    Now, here's the thing. I disagree with that assessment, but, having followed your posts for a number of years, I feel like I could explain to you why I think Obama's NOT that great a President and you would welcome that discussion. We both have skin in the game, in the sense that it's vitally important for Obama to succeed, and yet we (I presume) don't have an emotional, ego validating NEED to be right. You think he's great. I think he's not. We agree to disagree, and hopefully we learn something of each others' perspective in the exchange.

    Which brings me to my concurrence with your unsettled reaction to the PR diaries. In the BWD diaries and their offspring there is, in my view, a kind of in your face, "So there, we're right. How can you not see it?" (And, of course, this attitude is reinforced repeatedly in the comment threads.) Pictures or video clips of President Obama touting the PPACA or the Wall Street regulations or the stimulus package, along with the diarist's commentary accompanying each, seem to leave no room for an honest back and forth regarding what those policies actually do or don't accomplish.

    In one of the diaries immediately following Obama's speech at the memorial service I posted this:

    I have been as critical of the President as anyone here. I have lamented his pre-negotiation compromises and some of the policies which, in my view, have served to reinforce rather than fight the status quo. History will judge whether his governing style was adequate to the profound challenges our nation is facing.

    What I will NOT question in the future, however, is the man's essential decency and his genuine desire for a better America. Those truths shone brightly this evening.

    Al's simple, beautiful photos give us an opportunity to take comfort in what ALL of us admire about the President, without demanding that we buy into the sentiment expressed by many in the other photo diaries that Obama is THE BESTEST PRESIDENT EVER AND, GIVEN THE EVIDENCE IN THESE PICTURES, IF YOU CAN'T SEE IT YOU'RE JUST A HATER. (characterization only somewhat hyperbolic)

    "Republicans benefit from the fact that memories are short and statutes of limitations shorter." - Bob Herbert

    by WisePiper on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:00:03 PM PST

    •  Here's my brief for Obama: (5+ / 0-)

      On social issues, including DADT, he's as good as we've had.  Granted, the competition is not fierce, but he combines the feminism-friendliness of Clinton with the moral probity of Carter (who maxes out that scale).

      On economic issues, he's pretty much exactly like Clinton, so far as I can tell, but less unlucky than Carter (or Truman.)  LBJ was great on social programs, but there was that whole Vietnam thing.

      Or foreign policy, I think that the relations with the rest of the world -- and even the deft and difficult treatment of a finally surgent China -- have been very good.  He did get us as much out of Iraq as quickly as he reasonably could, and I still have hopes that he'll do the same for Afghanistan despite terrible institutional pressures that almost no President can withstand.

      And we could go on.  I don't think we've had a President as good as Lincoln except for FDR, but given the competition he may be the best since.  I could also make a case for any of the other Democrats, though.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:54:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  But doesn't this (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mightymouse, Seneca Doane, ohmyheck

        express precisely the problem?

        On social issues, including DADT, he's as good as we've had.  Granted, the competition is not fierce, but he combines the feminism-friendliness of Clinton with the moral probity of Carter (who maxes out that scale).

        Great, wonderful, excellent.  I want a president that's good on social issues.  But I also feel that both democrats and republicans have been handled by social issues for the last few decades.  We have republicans always playing up issues of religion, abortion, straight marriage, etc.  We have democrats always playing up issues of equality, freedom of choice, and so on.  Meanwhile, we're getting screwed on the economic policy that lies at the root of nearly all our problems.  I want a president that is good on all these social issues, but it's just not enough anymore.  We can't survive and prosper if we keep pursuing neo-liberal policy.  It's the failure to address these issues that prevents him from being a "great" president.

        •  I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with you (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Philoguy, foufou

          I think my positions are generally clear from above.  But this diary is about something else, so I don't want to go deeply into evaluating him.  I realize now that I've already said too much if I wanted to stay on point here.

          Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
          It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

          by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:09:16 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  And I just have to add (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Uberbah, ohmyheck

        that we had to pull him kicking and screaming on DADT.  He really deserves no great kudos for signing legislation that congress pursued, especially when he was so obstructionist along the way.

        •  I've weighed in on that often elsewhere (5+ / 0-)

          I think (assuming no last minute bumps) that we do have the more "permanent" solution he wanted, that he (and Gates) brokered it with the military behind the scenes, and that it was worth having, even though my heart was in my mouth when they appealed the federal judge's decision.  I think that his heart was in the right place, but that he was intent on giving the military its propers.

          There's a good argument that he shouldn't have felt the need to do it that way, but it sure doesn't strike me as "kicking and screaming."

          Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
          It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

          by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:08:00 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I apologize for pulling you into an OT. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Seneca Doane, gramofsam1

            And I thank you for briefly indulging Philoguy and me in a discussion of Obama's presidency, when that was not where you wanted this comment thread to go.

            "Republicans benefit from the fact that memories are short and statutes of limitations shorter." - Bob Herbert

            by WisePiper on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:59:45 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Not true! (5+ / 0-)

          By all accounts, the President informed the Military brass, in his first meeting, that he wanted DADT repealed. If your argument is correct and the congress wanted to repeal DADT, why didn't they do it before President Obama was elected? The strategy that the President persuade was better and more workable than letting repeal happen through the courts. This way, he robed the conservatives of a wedge issue they can milk and fundraise off for years to come. Also, the buy-in from the army made repeal possible. Do you think all of those so called "moderates" would have voted for it, if the army was against it or was not advocating for repeal? I don't think any objective person believes that's possible.

          You don't have to like President Obama, but you do not have to deny him credit, when he deserves one. That's how honest criticism works, otherwise it's just a blind hatred.

        •  I don't want to start a pie fight (4+ / 0-)

          But ending DADT was one of his campaign promises, so how you can say that we had to pull him (kicking and screaming) into supporting ending it does seem to ignore the facts.

          How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

          by skohayes on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 04:08:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  not sure about this one (0+ / 0-)

        On economic issues, he's pretty much exactly like Clinton, so far as I can tell, but less unlucky than Carter (or Truman.)

        Obama has been pretty "unlucky" to come to office after the credit bubble burst. And when global crude oil production has apparently maxxed out.

        Both these things mean he will have a tough time getting a good economy to run on in 2012.

        Te conozco bacalao, aunque vengas disfrazado - Hector LaVoe

        by mightymouse on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 08:29:42 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Timing is everything (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mightymouse

          If you start on a low and things get better -- as is still at least possible -- you're better off than if things collapse in the lead-up to your election, as happened with Carter.  Reagan was very lucky in this regard (as in most other regards.  Clinton, arguably, too, but he made a lot of his own luck.

          Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
          It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

          by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:38:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I guess I am not optimistic .... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Seneca Doane

            ... about things getting better.

            Until it happens, I'm skeptical about the possibility of bubble re-inflation on the scale of the 90's. Oil was ~$20/barrel then; it's $90 now. And that is just one thing.

            So the economy will still be lousy in 2012, meaning, to the average voter, that Obama and the Dems didn't do enough.

            Now whether it is even possible to do enough is very debatable. In other words, how much to blame Obama for this is an open question. Personally, I fault the administration for not understanding that we can't redo the nineties and acting from that understanding.

            Te conozco bacalao, aunque vengas disfrazado - Hector LaVoe

            by mightymouse on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:16:37 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  t&r'd for a launching an interesting (4+ / 0-)

    discussion and for a thoughtful diary. You handle the potential minefield of meta with aplomb, SD.

    "Space Available!" is the biggest retail chain in the nation.

    by Free Jazz at High Noon on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:10:45 PM PST

  •  I remember dropping everything to (6+ / 0-)

    catch Al Rodgers on Sunday evenings.  I would do the same tomorrow night.  Case closed as far as I am concerned.  

  •  I would like a weekly Sarah Palin photo diary. (7+ / 0-)

    If for no other reason than the cathartic release of pent-up frustrations at the total idiocy of a significant segment (extreme Christian, anti-science, generally ignorant) of the right.

    Follow Rex on Twitter as he follows Sarah Palin, conservatives and loony pundits!

    by Bob Johnson on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:22:13 PM PST

  •  So are to check with you (0+ / 0-)

    if we want to post a photo diary?

    Picking at a scab, yes. Offering salve, no.

    Why are you doing this? All that nonsense had died down.
    Why not leave it alone?

    God, it's infuriating. The arrogance!

    Salve, my Aunt Fanny.

    Proud Obama cheerleader since 2008.

    by kpardue on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:23:36 PM PST

    •  Huh. I think it hasn't died down for long (0+ / 0-)

      It's on hiatus, after a partially successful lame-duck session and this horrible shooting.  Your optimism about how fundamentally the site has changed is touching, though.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:58:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  What the Hell? (0+ / 0-)

        I said the endless sniping over BWD has died down.

        The BWD diaries had nothing to do with the Tucson shooting or the lame duck session. I don't know what the Hell you are talking about. Are you drunk?

        Proud Obama cheerleader since 2008.

        by kpardue on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:20:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh, I must have misunderstood (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sychotic1

          I thought that your comments dealt with photo diaries generally (which continue) rather than BWD in particular.  I apparently reached this erroneous conclusion that you were not saying that "the endless sniping over BWD has died down" by the fact that BWD is not mentioned in your comment.

          Do I seem drunk?  I noticed that subtle detail, after all.

          Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
          It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

          by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:24:05 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The diary criticized BWD, (0+ / 0-)

            not photo diaries in general.

            But keep bobbing and weaving.

            Proud Obama cheerleader since 2008.

            by kpardue on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:04:47 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Let's get down to basics (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              TheMomCat, Sychotic1

              You understand that when I replied to you, I was replying to your comment, not to my own diary.  Your comment could be taken to refer either specifically to BWD or to photo diaries in general.  I had presumed the latter, since this diary was about the latter, and was in any event more about Al R. than BWD.

              I'm flattered, in some odd way, that you think that you are boxing with me, but I'm not boxing with you.  Rather than bob and weave, I'm going to sleep.  Well, first there's a thoughtful comment above for me to address.  'Night!

              Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
              It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

              by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:21:33 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Okay. (0+ / 0-)

                One of us thinks you're special. I'm sure that's enough for you.

                And good night to you as well.

                Proud Obama cheerleader since 2008.

                by kpardue on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 01:33:35 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I think you're overreacting (5+ / 0-)

                  in that while I may not fully agree with SD, and probably appreciated BWD's diaries more than he would be comfortable with ;), Seneca's a good guy, and engages in a healthy, respectful way.  I feel comfortable that he intended no disrespect or hurt to anyone, and felt this was a useful discussion to have.  Engaging from that starting point never bothers me.  Unlike a couple of commenters in here who come in breathing a combo of fire and scorn.  If I never had to read a comment to another kossack like those, I'd be quite happy.  But that is never, never Seneca's style.

                  (Sadly, in Kathmandu no longer.)

                  by American in Kathmandu on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 02:16:25 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Perhaps you are right. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    dmh44, foufou, princss6

                    I rarely get into arguments. Mostly I comment where I can say something supportive.

                    But this diary struck me as being dishonest.

                    First, Al Rodgers diary is a memorial diary and is in no way comparable to BWD's diaries.

                    Second, Blackwaterdog is not here to defend her work. There was a great deal of really down and dirty criticism of her while she was here. Enough is enough.

                    She has chosen to disengage and start her own diary.

                    Seneca Doane was right about one thing. He was picking at a scab, as he said.

                    When a wound forms a scab, it is healing. That means it's time to leave it alone.

                    Proud Obama cheerleader since 2008.

                    by kpardue on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 03:03:25 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I liked it better when you said it this way (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      miss SPED

                      I believe, strongly, that these battles here are not over, and will return in full force soon, and that this would happen whether or not I published this.

                      My purpose in publishing this is to make it easier for people to say "you know, SD had a diary in mid-Jan. where he noted that if you do X rather than Y you're more likely to get Z reaction, and I notice that you did X here.  Would doing it differently have a different effect?"

                      To me, that's what good meta does.  I can see why you would want to sweep things under a rug, but I doubt that it will happen.  I'm sorry that this strikes you as "dishonest."

                      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
                      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

                      by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:43:35 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

  •  We'll see how it works out if Al posts picture... (4+ / 0-)

    ... diaries of the unemployed.

    Follow Rex on Twitter as he follows Sarah Palin, conservatives and loony pundits!

    by Bob Johnson on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:24:08 PM PST

  •  I also urge those (11+ / 0-)

    who are to be obsessed with trashing diarists for posting what they snottily refer to as "picture diaries" to go ahead and examine their diary recommend history.

    There appears to be some overlap between that group and those who have in the past eagerly recommended other diaries with little or no words, penned by people like OPOL, etc.

    Apparently some "picture diaries" are fine to recommend, just not the ones with too many pictures of Obama.

    Show me on the doll where Rahm touched you.

    by taylormattd on Sat Jan 15, 2011 at 11:29:00 PM PST

  •  I haven't voluntarily entered . . . (4+ / 0-)

    . . . a photodiary in years.  (Sometimes I wind up in one accidentally, while investigating some of the HRed posts in Clown Alley.)  So I know nothing about this week's photodiaries, or last week's, or the week before's.  My silence should not be taken to imply approval of them.  They just don't interest me, and so I no longer go there.  

    "Americans are a wonderful people: They will always do the right thing--after exhausting every other possible alternative."--Winston Churchill

    by keikekaze on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:35:00 AM PST

  •  Al doesn't launch strings of attacks, calling (7+ / 0-)

    people traitors and claiming that they're racists if they oppose forcing people to buy junk insurance whether or not they can afford it.

    There was no significant "push back" against others untill they decided that any attack was fine as long as they threw up some pictures and labled themselves "positive".

    "It is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence"

    by JesseCW on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:40:44 AM PST

  •  Honestly, I laugh at people who have a problem (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nio, foufou, princss6

    with "Obama picture diaries".

    It's the same people all the time.

    The same people who rec certain posters and topics.

    The same people who think their actions, comments and loyalties go unnoticed, and their motivation not transparent.

    I got news for you:  You might as well have a big "R" tattooed on your forehead.  

    •  A perfect example of what is poisoning this (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sychotic1, 3goldens, fiddlingnero

      community .. your obnoxious comment. I've been watching you for a while, and it's clear to me that your purpose here is to be a divisive jerk, and you're doing a hell of a job at it.

      Congratulations.  

      •  I call 'em as I see 'em. As far as "divisive", (0+ / 0-)

        tell me how many have left this site because of my comments and how many have left because of the anti-Obama rhetoric, of which the anti "Obama picture diaries" mob is a part.

        As far as the "R" tattoo, it can stand for one of many descriptors:  Republican, Racist, Religious, or Rahm's observation.  Take your pick.

        Likewise, I have been watching you for a while as well, shpilk.  It does not surprise me that you find my comment "obnoxious", nor does it particularly interest me.  The truth sometimes hurts.  Don't blame the messenger and don't cry.

    •  Excuse me? (4+ / 0-)

      What is that, the scarlet letter?

      This is to discuss the possible differences between the author's styles and why one may elicit a response that the other does not.

      I find your comment particularly unhelpful and quite possibly a great example of why people did not care for certain photodiaries.

      Repubs - the people in power are not secretly plotting against you. They don't need to. They already beat you in public. (Bill Maher)

      by Sychotic1 on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 08:25:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think comparing Al's two photo diaries (12+ / 0-)

    to BWD's does not work in this instance.  Al's pics convey images of a national tragedy - stuff you don't usually fight over. This event (the memorial) and images of grieving people overshadowed all other issues - including the nasty finger pointing bitchfest - for at least a short while.

    And most people were unified in their support of the President's address at the memorial service. Al could have chosen to include controversial remarks from Faux Noise, but instead selected only positive comments (TV screen shots). I wonder how the comment thread would look if he chose to insert the negative comments.

    Moreover, the Kos community was fairly united in blaming the RW for its malevolent provocations.  Contrast that unity to how split we were during the flame wars over HCR, etc.  I'd venture to say that folks already upset over policy and thus the Pres., were already disowning the Pres, Dems in general and supporters in particular.  When we have a common "enemy", we all play nicer.

    Of course, if Al continues posting future photo diaries, this theory could go down in flames!

    •  I recognize above that that one one factor (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sychotic1, Hedwig

      and personal affection for Al was another, but I think there was more to it.  You have my argument for the point above.  I'm not claiming it's gospel, but I think there's something to it.  Then again, I would, wouldn't I?

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:45:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  As others have stated, pictures are not (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        foufou

        solely objective.  Photos are meant to tell a story which makes them subject to interpretation and opinionated responses.  I get your point that you would like less PR and more reportage without prompting the viewer's response. "Just the facts..."  Even if you just go straight to Pete Souza's feed, you are still looking at someone's point of view, perhaps without the more overt cheerleading.  

        Asking for photo diaries without a point of view is like asking for text diaries without a conclusion.  If you don't like the author's perspective, agree or not, or don't engage. Isn't that what we do with other diaries?  So why take what you like and leave the rest?

        •  Because photos are different (0+ / 0-)

          They go straight to emotional response and they profess impartiality more so than does text.  That's why people are more likely to get their backs up about them.

          Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
          It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

          by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:47:56 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Unfortunately yes... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Patric Juillet

      if Al continues posting future photo diaries, this theory could go down in flames!

      Garrhgsfsafasd! or...where the heck is Lieber?

      by Hedwig on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:47:29 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I like photo diaries (10+ / 0-)

    as well as anyone does. We need to see more of Eddie C's sunsets and photo tours of NYC, as well as, Laurence Lewis's "In the footsteps of Cézanne"

    Thanks, Seneca, for the fine introspective

  •  Good one, SD (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane, Patric Juillet

    A valuable insight, as well as a point of contemplation for me.

    People don't listen to propaganda because they think it's true. They listen because they wish it was true.

    by thenekkidtruth on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 03:27:41 AM PST

  •  I think you're missing something here (7+ / 0-)

    As you mentioned in your diary, Al hasn't posted here in almost 18 months. When he did post a photo diary, it was during a period of sadness, outrage at the right wing and a lot of introspection.
    My theory (mentioned by some in other comments) is that if Al had kept posting his diaries during the Flame Wars, he would be as well received as BWD was.
    Some people here absolutely hated the fact that many people continue to support the president.
    Al wouldn't have been immune because he's been around a while, or because he didn't tout the presidents accomplishments in every diary (as I remember, people used the lack of comments in the diary as one reason to attack BWD, and then when she started adding commentary, it wasn't quite to their liking, so they complained about that too).

    How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

    by skohayes on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 04:19:13 AM PST

    •  As I said, I saw three explanations (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skohayes

      And I'm focusing on the one that one can change.

      Our recollections of the early BWD days differ -- and, unfortunately, she deleted all of those diaries, so it's hard to resolve.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:49:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you for your thoughtfulness. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bustacap, joanneleon

    As much as I appreciate the microcosm of these concerns, I come here more often to consider the bigger ideas that loom heavily and mightily on our lives as Americans.

    Your ideas are diddling around the edges of propaganda, asking what's better propaganda. It's just like resetting the deck chairs on a most crowded and mighty ship barreling through some of the roughest surf it has ever seen.

    My concern is that the stormy sea of our political environment is far rougher than the ship of state was ever engineered to face. Our Constitution is the lower moral standard, and for democracy to prevail, its citizens must adhere to a higher moral code. I hear pleas for that. But mere rhetoric will do nothing.

    Here: if you don't believe me, read this: It's an

    Insurrectionism Timeline

    On June 26, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court embraced the National Rifle Association's contention that the Second Amendment provides individuals with the right to take violent action against our government should it become "tyrannical." The following timeline catalogues incidents of insurrectionist violence (or the promotion of such violence) that have occurred since that decision was issued....

    Read the timeline of these events as a Peoples' History of the United States political lunatic asylum in the early 21st century.

    I guess I just entirely miss the point of your essay, as well-intended as it is. I'm still conflicted by the fight between compassion and aggression, but at least I'm not spewing hatreds.

    Also, there's this to consider as well:

    Madness.

    What we have here is an attempted assassination of a politician by an insane crank at a political event, in a state where the political discourse has been an unrelenting howl of eliminationist rhetoric and characterization of anyone to the left of Genghis Khan as a traitor and enemy of the state...and now, when six (including a nine year old girl) lie dead and another fourteen are wounded, now suddenly we're concerned that it is rude and politicizing a tragedy to point out that the right wing has produced a toxic atmosphere that pollutes our politics with hatred and the rhetoric of violence?

    Screw that. Now is the time to politicize the hell out of this situation. The people who are complaining are a mix of lefty marshmallows whose first reaction to the fulfillment of right-wing fantasies by a lunatic is to drop to their knees and beg forgiveness for thinking ill of people who paint bullseyes on their political opponents, and right wing cowards who are racing to their usual tactic of attacking their critics to shame them into silence. This is NOT the time to back down and suddenly find it embarrassing to point out that right-wing pundits make a living as professional goads to insanity.

  •  I never imagined looking at a photo took so much (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    otto, dmh44, foufou, princss6

    introspection.

    When I want to, I look.

    When I don't want to, I don't.

    "Don't fall or we both go." Derek Hersey 1957-1993

    by ban nock on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 04:40:23 AM PST

  •  Photo-diaries (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mightymouse

    are in most cases stupid.  Especially the BWD's ones, which were pure "admiration" and "how cool" Obama looks.  They ar intellectually flat, no matter how you take it and that can not change.  

    By the way, although people found the President's speech great (and it was), it FAILED to make the only REAL point out of the whole tragic incident in AZ.  That it would have never happened if gun laws were in place.  The psychotic killer who attacked the congresswoman purchased legally the gun that he used in the crime. As always, Obama did NOT have the political courage to call the obvious.  That we need completely new gun laws.

  •  In a diary about appearances.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1, 3goldens, Seneca Doane

    let me also try to elevate your discourse with an idea that is hiding in plain sight:

    What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence or lawlessness; but love and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or they be black. - Robert F. Kennedy, public announcement on the assassination of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    Often, we completely forget (as if we are in denial - and perhaps because it is so irrational) that the awful class war that has been drummed up and invented from whole cloth by manipulative elites is driven by the mindless and perpetual insanity of racial bigotry and prejudice.

    As much as we may strive for resolution and Democratic political victory, the rhetoric of gunsights on target maps, detestable race-baiting public speech - including outright lies - and hate-mongering to rally base and immoral resistance on any level - these envelop us in as thick a fog as we have seen since the nineteen-sixties.

  •  You know what's frustrating? (6+ / 0-)

    Your exercise (explained in the tip jar) of trying to gauge opinion by rec'ing one of two comments that you posted, was totally botched when people felt they had to first, jump the tip jar, then second, reply to the polling comments.

    Next time, you'll probably want to reply to your own tip jar with the first (option 1) polling comment and then reply to that comment with your second (option 2) polling comment.  Then at least those two comments would have stayed at the top, and stayed together.   As they are now, they're pretty useless.

    Why is it that people feel that they have to jump in at the top of the comments all the time with comments that are no more important than anyone else's?  What happened to clicking "Post a Comment" to have your say about the diary?  Yes, there are times when it makes sense to reply to whatever was said in the tip jar, but are people so desperate to get more "mojo" that they have to cut the line in front of everyone else?  It's obnoxious.

    P.S. For those who think they will get more attention by jumping in the line in front of everybody else, sometimes you don't.  When the comment thread at the top is an obvious mess, I'm sure I'm not the only one who skips over it completely and goes to the very end of the comments instead, where it's easier to read and where there are fewer attention mongers.

    •  I'll tell you way I didn't do that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Situational Lefty

      One of them had to come first, and that one would have had umpty-teen comments before even getting to the other one.  This was, they were on a more equal footing.

      The customs of replying to tip jars are ill-defined.  There's no rule against it, and it used to be more common, but it can clearly be obnoxious.  I used to do it often before someone pointed it out to me; now I do it sometimes, but usually after someone else has already done so.  An exception is when there's something important to say that frames or clarifies things.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:56:40 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I like photodiaries. (9+ / 0-)

    all of them.  I'm not gonna get into another fight about them, though.

    I'm proven effective by clinical tests.

    by mallyroyal on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 05:42:19 AM PST

    •  I like them too and they have (8+ / 0-)

      been one of the reasons I come here. Obama isn't perfect, big news. Showing photos is not fawning adulation as some seemed to think, they are just one way of seeing the person who happens to be President.

      I have to confess that the reaction to some of the earlier diaries almost caused me to abandon the site altogether, but I reminded myself that those diaries were always recced to the top very quickly by someone.

      I am still here and am happy to see the return of the photo diary featuring the President and others around him.

      We have only just begun and none too soon.

      by global citizen on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 06:08:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I've always enjoyed the photodiaries, (9+ / 0-)

    cheerleading or not, and regardless of whether I was happy with the President at a particular time or not.  To me, these diaries do what our media doesn't do.  They give us images of our President doing his job and they serve to remind of his humanity.  But I also rec diaries that I don't agree with if they are thoughtful and lead me to think about an issue in a new way.  Thanks for this diary!  Great perspective on a controversial subject.

  •  Clearer opposition (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane, AnnieR

    It's probably as simple as the fact that there is a clear opposition.  

    When the Dems are in power, we will always see the sort of divided left that we have seen over the past 2 years.  It will not change.

    I just figured that Al waited to come back when he knew that there would be a clear and shared opposition to the Republicans in congress.

    Now the bad guys are clearly defined, and we aren't forced into a situation of arguing about whether Dems are royal, turquoise, aqua, cyan, royal, navy...  

    "Obama is a failure." Rush Limbaugh

    by otto on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 06:18:47 AM PST

  •  There is always a POV with photo diaries (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    princss6, AnnieR

    To argue you can just include photos with no POV assumes that photos carry no meaning. I don't get into flame wars, but I respond purely as a media scholar here and choosing photos is the same as writing paragraphs. There is a point of view, and of course we are all able to engage with that POV, disagree, etc. But the images are not empty vessels of meaning.

    Either you are a feminist or a sexist/misogynist. There is no box marked `other'." -Ani DiFranco

    by ErinW43 on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 06:25:20 AM PST

    •  OK -- but can you see a difference? (0+ / 0-)

      No, it's not black and white.  But one is a much darker shade of gray than the other.

      (Note: "dark" is not intended as pejorative here.  I'm not sure how else to say this.)

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:58:35 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  This weeks photo diaries (4+ / 0-)

    were about something inherently emotional-- there were about President Obama rising to the occasion of addressing the nation's emotional reaction to the Tucson tragedy.

    As such, I think there is little to argue about. There is no reasonable objection to the President validating our collective national sorrow and encouraging us to be better people. Photo diaries seem completely appropriate in such a situation.

    Photo diaries used to provide support for policy decisions, without discussing the policy, are generally more problematic.

  •  You'll love this: (14+ / 0-)

    My mom forwarded a "Thank You For Your Leadership, Mr. President" photo diary email this week.  The most amazing part?

    It was from a right wing, teabagger friend who used to send her the birther and Fox crap!  The events of last week and the speech gave a group of them cause to pass it around, without criticism. My mom and I were amazed.  Her friend used to send things that were beyond nutz.

  •  I have to pick both, the weird one, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    which basically leaves it up to the diarist.  You see, when I go into a photo diary, as a shutter bug, it's simply to look at the pictures, and wonder about lighting and angles and maybe what I would have done differently.  Rarely do I read what the diarist has written or check out the comments section, unless it includes more pictures.  

    The GOP will destroy anything they can't purchase or own.

    by AnnieR on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 06:49:00 AM PST

  •  Thanks for this diary, SD, but I have a few (13+ / 0-)

    quibbles.

    First of all, I really enjoyed the Al's diary, and reposted it on fb.  Many people saw it, who don't read DKos, and thanked me for it.  I, too, was pleased to see the lack of controversy in the comments.

    When BWD first began posting diaries, they were made up almost entirely of photos, and videos of speeches, and a few bits of blockquoted information about laws passed.  Commentary was almost non-existent.  She received many negative comments along the lines of "pretty pictures, so what? Diaries here are supposed to have substance."  Then she added some commentary, and she was attacked for being either a fool or a propagandist.  She eventually got defensive and, seemingly, angry, and started to use the commentary in the diaries to take a pugnacious stand. And she got as good as she gave, and more so.  Certain posters, rather than ignoring her diaries, lay in wait for them, in order to be the first to throw a stink bomb in.   By the time she left to set up her own blog, the internecine war to be found in them had brought out the very worst in everybody. I stopped looking at them, although I had enjoyed them at first, and it was not the diaries but the war that almost drove me from this site.

    I am hopeful that we have more important work to do with the GOP in charge of the House and many state legislatures and state houses, with mind-bogglingly hateful or stupid plans, than to revert to that pointless struggle here so soon.  But I'm not entirely hopeful.

    Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it. --Mark Twain

    by SottoVoce on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 07:01:08 AM PST

  •  I picked up a book called "Obama Zombies" (8+ / 0-)

    which was given to me by an anonymous someone.  Now, I would be one of those people who would easily be called an "Obamabot" insofar as I want Obama to do well, support his overall leadership, understand what's at stake if he fails, and realize that Congressional Republicans and corporate lobbyists have a lot of responsibility for what's wrong.

    Well, this Obama Zombies book really illustrated to me what the playbook is for trolls .... basically, ridicule anyone who is involved in independent efforts to promote representative participatory democracy and engage in direct dialogue with the President.

    What's sad to me is how OFA has been misinterpreted, not as the most inclusive, most participatory method for people to engage in politics and talk to neighbors, but rather as a way to strongarm individuals and get them in line.

    I share your observation and feel some relief.  I tend to agree with BWD's general point that the President is under such attack, someone should defend him.

    Stop clapping. Stop screaming. Open your mind. Listen.

    by Benintn on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 07:17:07 AM PST

  •  It seems to me that the main objection (8+ / 0-)

    to BWD's diaries was initially that there were only pictures with no content. I think that, after some time, BWD developped the content and occasionally, wrote diaries with (almost) only text and no pictures. That did not reduce the number of attacks in her diaries. So I'm not at all sure that your conclusion and your advice is right.

    I think Al's diary drew no critics because everybody is awestruck by what has happened and there's a need of unity.

    I'm not sure that those who used to attack BWD's diaries have expressed their point of view in Al's diary. I think that they have simply exerted restraint, I don't recall reading from them recently - but I may be wrong; maybe I simply didn't notice them.

    In fact you have provided a fine analysis of the purpose and usefulness of those 'hagiographic' (my word for it) diaries. They have a function analogous to that of, say, the chansons de geste, songs of the heroic deeds of Obama and his administration.
    Let me add that I enjoy greatly those diaries.

    And tragic events of national import are typical occasion when the need for such medicine is needed.

  •  I Like the Photo Diaries Better (3+ / 0-)

    Than the "My Cat Died" diaries.

    "It's always been a class war, Frodo."

    by bink on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 07:24:33 AM PST

  •  Attacking photo diaries is just sad behavior. (8+ / 0-)

    What kind of person is driven to vitriol and invective by the sight of pictures of Barack Obama looking happy, and of people being happy to see him?

    Angry teabaggers, and their analogues, that's who.

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 07:42:40 AM PST

    •  People who see a disconnect (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      3goldens, Seneca Doane

      between some of his policies and the positive message communicated by these images and diaries, and by the PR "summary" of such policies that ignore or gloss over their details that often undermine such positivism. I.e. people who realize that images and feelings are important, but that policy is ultimately what government's all about.

      Kind of like the disconnect between stating a person's job title or where they work, and what they actually DO or DID there. Heh.

      That being said, I agree that people who vent without substance to back it up should have no place here. It's the people who DO provide substance that I'm referring to, whether or not one agrees with that substance. And, actually, this is what distinguishes critics on the right and left. Most critics on the right vent without substance. Most critics on the left do not, whether or not one agrees with them.

      "Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" --Alexander Hamilton

      by kovie on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 09:27:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Not all photo diaries are created equally. (4+ / 0-)

    Nice job distinguishing the 2 main types of photo diaries we see here. While I appreciate the pictorial prose diaries, and it's Great to see Al back, I don't care for the adulation diaries.

    I do think that some here have taken the wrong message from the unity on display this past week. I've seen too many comments suggesting that all is forgotten and forgiven for the past 2 years of policy inadequacies. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    Personally, I was just so proud of the President's handling of the crisis that I feel that much praise was warranted. If he goes back to governing as he has the past 2 years than vocal criticism will resume. I will add that the criticism may be tempered in that I took MB's wonderful diary on introspection to heart. That's also the diary where some seem confused in the comments about why this community has rallied around our President.

  •  I had a brother, now deceased, who every time I (0+ / 0-)

    said up, he said down. We even had a knock out fight one day about how to plant tulips? upside down or downside up!

    Frankly, I now and then just chuck a handful of tulip bulbs in the hole, cover them carefully and leave them to do their own thing in the womb of the Earth.

    So, frankly, I just love the photo diaries as an occasional treat, not as an all day, every day unceasing sole diet of food for my brain. They are like vitamin supplement to me, sometimes necessary to balance my appalling diet!

    I don't feel any compulsion to say BUT to everything and anything and would no more think of entering a gathering and arguing every point with every person and storming out if i couldn't get them to say i was totally and completely right and they were wrong, or threaten them with social ex-communication.  I have strong opinions on some things and have absolutely no fear of stating them, but not every single item in the social, moral and philosophical hymnbook. I can still maintain an open mind.

    Keep them coming folks, all of you.  And in my new spirit of adventure if i DON'T find them here, I shall go look for them elsewhere.

    HAVE A NICE DAY.

  •  That's funny: Most of the trolling attacks (5+ / 0-)

    were on the expressed basis that the diaries contained insufficient text and were only pictures. Now you say that despite what people actually said, as long as it is ONLY Pictures, everyones okay with it.

    Nobody ever bombed a pro-life office.

    by Inland on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 08:14:42 AM PST

    •  I enjoyed bwd's diaries. The present diarist (0+ / 0-)

      is referring to the tone of the text that was contained in some of those diaries, not the amount of text.  Apparently he/she does not agree with the "trolls" whom you paraphrase here.  

      I would argue that being either defensive or deliberately inflammatory is probably a bad idea in any diary.  

       

      Poverty is a weapon of mass destruction. Dennis Kucinich

      by keeplaughing on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:00:41 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Maybe at the beginning (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Situational Lefty

      (though good luck finding them); surely not at the end.

      Take it for what it's worth.  If you don't find value in it, don't take it.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:07:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I had (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1, Seneca Doane

    a similar reaction to the Al Rodgers diary.  Don't know if it can be done in general, though.  The circumstances of this memorial are rather different from the day-to-day fights over policy.

    With all this manure around, there must be a pony in here somewhere. - Count Piotr Vorkosigan

    by jrooth on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 08:18:32 AM PST

  •  Thanks. There may be several reasons, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    keeplaughing, Seneca Doane

    not the least of which is the need for compassion and reflection in the face of Tucson events.

    But I suspect something else will be in evidence. With Republicans controlling the House many critics will have a chance to see again what happens when Democrats lose. They will see that the alternative to Obama and Democrats is not their own personal take on progressive Nirvana, but rather very conservative Republicans who are opposed to everything Democrats stand for.

    •  what do Democrats stand for? (0+ / 0-)

      since you mentioned it.

      Te conozco bacalao, aunque vengas disfrazado - Hector LaVoe

      by mightymouse on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 08:57:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Democrats stand for (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        keeplaughing, Seneca Doane

        this as opposed to this. Political realities have constrained the Democrats from achieving all they aspire to but the comparisons in aspirations are remarkable.

        •  "Stand for" implies actual effort (0+ / 0-)

          it's a nice list of issues.

          But in reality they don't really "stand for" all these things. This is based on actual performance as a party.

          This is the problem. Based on what they actually achieve, elected Democrats too often stand for investment banks, the war machine, and the non-sustainable status quo.

          Obama brought back Larry Summers. It goes on and on.

          Te conozco bacalao, aunque vengas disfrazado - Hector LaVoe

          by mightymouse on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 09:56:42 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  OK. Compare your statement against (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Seneca Doane

            the list. You will see that many of those things have been done, at least in part. As importantly, compare what has not happened with what would have happened if the Republicans could have implemented their list.

            It's pretty simple. When Democrats control things more of what Democrats want gets done and less of what Republicans want gets done. The reverse id true when Republicans control things.

    •  I agree, you nailed it. The reason we are having (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Gary Norton

      less Obama-hate on this site is because reality is starting to set in.  

      Poverty is a weapon of mass destruction. Dennis Kucinich

      by keeplaughing on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:02:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  what a bunch of crap (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dmh44, FORUS50, princss6, abrauer

    so now as long as you do not add any "commentary" the progressives on DKos will welcome picture diaries?  HA HA HA.
    Here's the deal.  We who like pictures AND the commentary no longer click on DKOS for that.
    We go to BWD's site.  We use this site to hear the voices of "progressives" who don't like the president THEN go back to BWD's site to hear the voices of a whole bunch of people who like the president.  I bet Al only posted his diary just to stick it to you all to prove a point.

    "This country was founded on compromise. I couldn't go through the front door at this country's founding" - President Barack Obama

    by AAMOM on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 08:38:07 AM PST

  •  Interesting diary, but I will not tip or rec. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FORUS50, princss6, ThisIsMyTime
    1.  When you start a diary off with this:

    I truly don't mean this diary to be inflammatory

    you are asking for inflammation.

    1.  When you suggest something like this:

    "Don't tell other people how to write their diaries" is a good rule of thumb here, but the photodiaries have led to enough virtual bloodshed in the last year or two that I think it's valid to offer a suggestion simply so that people can register their agreement or disagreement.

    you are begging for a big push back.

    This is my opinion.  I think that most DKers here understood why Rodger's photo diary was so well received without it having to be mentioned or diaried:  it was a very good selection of pictures that reflected the mood of the country during a time of national crisis and Rodgers seldom, if ever, provides any commentary, news or script to them except to describe what's in the picture.  Second, people were still basking in the glow of 'disagreeing without being disagreeable' and third, the troublemaking uber conservatives who usually pose as 'progressives' on this board temporarily slinked back to their mudtrolls as they usually do when their tactics have consequences that they don't want to own up to.

    But we all know that they will be back.

    And in larger numbers.

    I'm sorry Seneca, but I have better idea.  Let people post the kind of 'picture diaries' that they want.  If those diaries don't suit you, then ignore it or move on.  Or post in it and say that you don't like it.

    No one on here has the magic bullet to what kind of diary will 'work'.  However it is clear that some individuals have the skills and talent to do a diary that is consistently good.

    I say leave it be.

    "I'm measuring everything the Democrats and President Obama do, not against what I WANT, but against the status quo." --RASalvatore 9/16/10

    by smoothnmellow on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 09:11:03 AM PST

    •  Wow. One of the more egregious (0+ / 0-)

      misreads in dailykos diary history.

      Poverty is a weapon of mass destruction. Dennis Kucinich

      by keeplaughing on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:08:21 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  "Asking for inflammation"? (0+ / 0-)

      Do you really think that, without that proviso, comments here would have been less inflammatory?

      The ones from last night were pretty measured, actually.  Today, there's more vitriol.  But the initial discussion here was pretty much what I would have wanted to see.

      As for the rest -- you stated your opinion clearly and well, so thanks for that.

      Soon on DK4: Chit Cheat and Undisputed Facts!
      It's a heartache, nothing but a heartache.

      by Seneca Doane on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 12:10:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  One thing many missed about BWD's (9+ / 0-)

    diaries, because they were too busy slinging mud, was that they very often, almost always, contained news mash-ups from all over and provided information that we may never have heard/seen elsewhere.

    But then, one would have to actually go through the diary rather than jump right down to comments section so one could hurry up and type "Pretty pictures... blah blah blah."

    Sarah Palin releases video decrying media for attributing violence to her as unfair and misplaced. Muslims all over the world Tweet: "LOL"

    by second gen on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 09:57:10 AM PST

  •  from my understanding, (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dmh44, gobears2000

    Al, in the past, received push back in regards to his Obama photo diaries.

    As far as bwd's diaries, I never understood what the big deal was.  I mean we can only take exception to something if we choose to take exception.  

    At the time, and more than likely again in the future, the atmosphere here was extraordinarily volatile.  I have to wonder - would it really have mattered if the diaries were photo only?

  •  what I notice, is (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    princss6
    the lack of most people to give you the argument that you want.  I read the first 385 comments then I left.  It appears to me that you wanted a argument about Blackwaterdog.  Now I am sure that some of BWD supporters read your diary but chose not to comment on it.  Then you have some that have left this site maybe to never come back.  

    I have never left the dailykos, but I glady read the only in adult in the room everyday.  I use to come the dailykos first, but now I go the only adult in the room first.  I like the fact that there are no ads there.  BWD's site  is not tainted by money.

    Some time I wonder about two of the front page  writers here.  I will not mention their names, let you guys figure that out.  But I wonder if Markos is not paying them then who is paying them?  They write like paid repugs trolls to me.  

    Let me close by saying that BWD has moved on, she does not refer to the dailykos by name.  And you can rest assured that there are no paid trolls on her site.  Pretty much of what I read here at the dailykos now, I wonder is it written by a paid troll.

    •  "The ONLY adult in the room" (5+ / 0-)
      is more than a little ridiculous, considering the participation of any number of temperate, rational, and insightful contributors.  For instance, our diarist Seneca Doane can invariably be relied upon for a thoughtful and reasoned perspective. And the imputation of "paid trolls" and undisclosed conflicts of interest at every turn, without any effort at substantiation, is on the offensive side.

      I didn't visit every BWD diary, but usually enjoyed them when I did.  I do miss them.  But elevating BWD's unmixed loyalism as the ONLY valid perspective seems to me like a willful narrowing of vision.

      "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

      by lgmcp on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:05:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    I agree with most of what you said, and I, too, felt a sense of relief that Al Rodgers came back.

    I missed BWD, so you gave me the link and I have now seen her photos.

    There are times I get exhausted by words--too many words--on the internet.  I want photos, so I can just sit and absorb them and try to feel the scene.

    This was a worthwhile diary.

  •  I find photo diaries (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mmontanaman, leema, Seneca Doane

    of pubic figures interesting but in the case of a sitting president, not so benign. Our democracy was founded on many concepts but the one I hold most hopeful is the 'We are a nation of laws not men'. Unfortunately the times we are living through politically are so fought with propaganda and hype, that photos and speech have replaced the reality of our politics.

    I reject these displays of 'leadership' because they ask me to suspend reality and believe in the images of nationalism and persona, they are to me like flag waving, they are an emotional distraction from the reality of what is happening. It's not personal any other president in this fictional light of pomp and symbolism is equally offensive to me, especially in a time so politically polarized and with so little truth.    

    Al's are not as offensive as BWD's he doesn't demand that I conflate respect for the image of a man or the office he holds, but they are not my cup of tea. Neither are huge 9/11 flags or speeches that call for unity with policy or politics that I find abhorrent. I realize that part of being a president is being a figurehead, but after what has happened to our country the last thing I want to look at are images of clothed emperors, or hero's, or first families. Leadership requires a direction that I can follow for me it's the cart before the horse to bask in the visuals of leadership or persona.

    I have never liked this aspect of American politics but then again not a big fan of nationalism, empire or the unitary president. This is just my reaction and I realize that others will take offense at my feelings as they will mistake my rejection of the images of a man as lack of respect for a hero and leader which is in a nut shell why I don't care for these diaries to begin with. I guess I'm a purist but to me they are just propaganda and a distraction from our democracy and the documents that state 'We the people...'                

    •  Interesting perspective (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      shaharazade, Seneca Doane
      Definitely your tastes in this matter are more inclines to the theoretical and the abstract, or as you term it, purist.  

      Certainly photos, flags, and symbols are only as good as the reality they represent. It's healthy to view them with an element of scepticism, and look past the pretty trappings.  

      But humans are still pack animals, deep down, and will always be responsive to dominant individuals.  I suspect the cult of personality is something that is more or less hard-wired.  And I think we understand ideas much better when they have a human face.  For instance I think Dan Choi's decision to offer himself as the "poster child" for ending DADT, made a significant difference to the course of that struggle.  Naturally HIS status as a servicemember is of trivial importance to the larger issue of justice for ALL glbt Americans ... but we seem to need the concreteness of a charismatic leader.  

      "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

      by lgmcp on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:55:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  agreed ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lgmcp, Seneca Doane

        In Dan Choy's case his cause and his struggle were for equality. MLK was another person that lead a cause for human progress. People do need leadership a person willing to be the poster child for a righteous cause. I also do not discount the need for 'propaganda' or advocacy. FDR was another master at creating a narrative, he needed to sell his New Deal. He used the media of his time to tell a story that humanized the face of the economic catastrophe, he hired artist writers photographer's and radio to get his message and agenda supported by the people. Some of our best leaders were not 'charismatic', but they moved us forward on democratic issues.

        Our national politics's at this point are not pragmatic in the sense that the narrative is just a sham there is no difference except style and tone between what either side is offering. Instead we have the same agenda as the Bush regime, based on the same false narrative. Were told this is the 'world as we find it' and that were moving forward. The need for change, real systemic bottom up change change, was recognized by a large majority. their was no peaceful change of power as DiFi said at the inaugural.

        The concreteness of a charismatic leader, needs the larger issue to drive it. Our politics have lost that all focus is on messaging and image. It is the cart before the horse. So while I may be a purist, I find as a citizen it does me nor the country, or even the world any pragmatic good, to place my loyalty in a charismatic man or even a political party.

        When the laws and rights  that have taken centuries to develop like habeaus corpus, property rights, human rights or international law are abandoned and destroyed for the same false narrative cloaked in national interests or security and wealth creation for the top, is touted as the way forward I just can't see how images of a heroic leader is pragmatic. It just enforces the false and makes it hard to get people to look beyond the image at what is being done.

        Leaders lead they are not facilitators of the entrenched powers that created the world as we find it. In a democracy they must lead for the common good not the giant vampire squid on humanities face or for geopolitical dominance that offers nothing to we the people not even security. Our security and our national interest lies with our tattered system, and our principles, and in us the people, the common good. The issue of what they are busy dismantling, and the calls for unity, make the pretty images become like the empty rhetoric just a distraction to keep our consent.      

  •  To Photo or not to Photo that is the question? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slinkerwink, Seneca Doane

    In the past I sometimes had the impression that some of the photo diaries of Obama were a sly way of getting me to overlook Obama's actions...maybe due to their timing. "Sly" because (and I bet others have this reponse too) I just LOVE to look at him and I automatically smile & feel good when looking at him  and despite corporate appointments and decisions that I think are hurting our nation, overall I think he is a man of good intentions with compassion.   But I don't want him to be the focus...I want his policies to be the focus.

    And maybe also due to timing (a non political timing) ...Al's diary did not evoke that feeling of sly manipulation and the topic was bigger than just Obama.

    "I think it is much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers that might be wrong." Richard Feynman

    by leema on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:32:55 AM PST

  •  You make an excellent point, one that (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slinkerwink, Seneca Doane

    I myself tried to make to BWD (whose diaries I mostly enjoyed) a number of times.  

    But let's be clear, there's no one like Al.

    Poverty is a weapon of mass destruction. Dennis Kucinich

    by keeplaughing on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 10:53:47 AM PST

  •  Interesting observation (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    When I got to the comments after Al's diary I sort of steeled myself for some of the old ugliness and threadjacking that became a norm in BWD diaries and was pleasantly surprised that it didn't occur. But I didn't spend a lot of time thinking about why that might be - just enjoyed the diary and the absence of divisive flaming.

    You have presented a thought provoking explanation. I went back to Al's diary, and some of BWD's; and see one other difference that stood out for me. The BWD diaries were almost exclusively focused on Obama and his family. Often, if others were shown in a photo, it was with the President, or there to see the President. In Al's diary Obama is not the sole participant. He is just one of many mourners. I think maybe that made a difference, too.

  •  You know Seneca, I think (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane, FORUS50, Amber6541, princss6

    you made some really excellent points here about needing reflective places that don't nudge us toward a POV.  

    BWD's diaries weren't meant to be that kind of place, and I took refuge there more and more often because I didn't fit into the small tent I found on too many other diaries.  Suggesting that President Obama might have a larger agenda or a longer time-frame than we might prefer was too often an invitation to be hammered on.  

    I have the good fortune to have been raised by a man with an eidetic memory for politics, religion, philosophy, and sociology.  He was also a preacher, and he preached extensively on those topics around the dinner table.  I can't help but know that the liberals of the day used almost identical language to criticize Social Security and Medicare that was being used during and after the HCR clusterfuck, and that gives me a perspective that I think is valuable.  I have a brain full of stuff that tells me that we're not in the worst of times, that this has all happened before, and that we're actually evolving as a culture and a species.  

    Like you, I found Al's diaries to be places of healing and reflection.  I  continue to find BWD's site and diaries to be a place to escape when this place gets too claustrophobic for me, a balance for my more optimistic side.  It's also the place I discover so much that's happening under the radar, stuff that matters deeply to me.  

    I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

    by I love OCD on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 11:46:01 AM PST

  •  It's not all that complicated really (0+ / 0-)

    words or pictures or pictures with words - they all tell a story. Facts are presented in various formats that communicate that story. It's a true story if it's fact, but it's nonetheless a story.

    After reading the 500 plus comments, I see that the hater's of photo diaries that contain any positive photos of Obama (with or without words) are the same crowd of commenters who recommended Rainbow Girl's diaries.  It's not all that complicated really.  We don't need to get lost in the weeds of parsing if the photo diaries have words or not.

  •  I love how Al Rodgers does it (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Situational Lefty

    It's not bombastic or seeking to divide when he does his picture posts. He also doesn't do them every day. They're good picture diaries and I treat them as such.

    I work with B2B PAC, and all views and opinions in this account are my own.

    by slinkerwink on Sun Jan 16, 2011 at 03:51:53 PM PST

Sharoney, JekyllnHyde, Ed in Montana, Mimikatz, jec, PLS, CJB, Ray Radlein, hannah, mwm341, slinkerwink, bob in ny, houndcat, GreenSooner, TrueBlueMajority, billlaurelMD, meg, KateG, dash888, marge, Jerome a Paris, expatjourno, Creosote, Bugsby, Gustogirl, TheMomCat, bronte17, indybend, jaysunb, gayntom, Larry Bailey, aitchdee, lulusbackintown, Quege, Mongo1967, pat bunny, grannyhelen, exiledfromTN, peterborocanuck, NYFM, Catte Nappe, Curt Matlock, Kitsap River, CanYouBeAngryAndStillDream, Sybil Liberty, Timroff, lam2b2g, Julie Gulden, Massman, bloomer 101, historys mysteries, Bluesee, radarlady, greycat, blueyedace2, JanetT in MD, Philoguy, bagman, DoGooderLawyer, Clem Yeobright, Gary Norton, Pam from Calif, GreyHawk, kyrol, Ice Blue, sunbro, Savvy813, WisePiper, The Raven, Shotput8, Pluto, Unduna, peacestpete, Ekaterin, littlewren, xanthippe2, kathny, Sister Havana, begone, lgmcp, martini, trashablanca, BachFan, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, cas2, myboo, rcbowman, Clytemnestra, edwardssl, ferallike, Im with Rosey, Son of a Cat, fou, Lefty Coaster, LokiMom, global citizen, philipmerrill, nonnie9999, tapestry, Derfel, bleeding heart, soccergrandmom, Roatti, Timothy J, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, va dare, Madam Deb, frankzappatista, RantNRaven, Picot verde, Hedwig, blueintheface, BentLiberal, GoldnI, Polacolor, Wanda517, threegoal, edsbrooklyn, ezdidit, Unbozo, davehouck, rainmanjr, Got a Grip, Terra Mystica, bkamr, GlowNZ, OleHippieChick, eustiscg, lineatus, rssrai, Jake Williams, Drewid, luckylizard, watercarrier4diogenes, LaFeminista, JGBfan, 1BQ, Rhysling, J M F, litoralis, ceebee7, greengemini, Scott Wooledge, LinSea, not a cent, CanyonWren, pvlb, Partisan Progressive, fToRrEeEsSt, langstonhughesfan, virginwoolf, NWTerriD, Alise, COwoman, allep10, kevinpdx, 57andFemale, DaNang65, KS Rose, clifmichael, French Imp, cassandraX, RhymesWithUrple, TFinSF, stegro, LaughingPlanet, brunoboy, gramofsam1, mamak, jethrock, catwho, UTvoter, your neighbor, Lost and Found, freeport beach PA, Eddie L, Klick2con10ue, JoanMar, gulfgal98, pixxer, Otteray Scribe, Actbriniel, TheHalfrican, renbear, gobears2000, angstall, I love OCD, westfriendship, escapegoat, ban nock, wildlife advocate, Eclectablog, Situational Lefty, beantown mom, misskitty64, California06, princesspat, molunkusmol, thomask, dle2GA, merrily1000, MRA NY, marshstars, Vtdblue, chira2, Marihilda, SoCalSal, zenox, RLMiller, Regina in a Sears Kit House, Rashaverak, jaebone, MichaelNY, Nena20409, Patric Juillet, Siri, Miep, AnnieR, AreDeutz, Ginger1, peachcreek, Forward is D not R, Free Jazz at High Noon, BusyinCA, MartyM

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site