General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy we must resist the bullying of Will Pitt and others here.
Let's take a look at the account in Christopher Hedges' new book on REBELLION of the persecution of exemplary patriot Thomas Paine for his honest criticisms of government and those who govern.
*
Paine ... understood that despotic regimes -- and here the corporate state serves as a contemporary example -- make war on reason and rational thought. They circumscribe free speech and free assembly. They marginalize and silence critics. They seek to subjugate all institutions to despotism-- or in our case, corporate power. They use propaganda to rob people of the language to describe their daily reality and discredit those who seek radical change. The goal is to render a population politically alienated. Those who live under despotic regimes, Paine noted, are denied the ability to communicate and discuss in a national forum [the Internet?] their most basic concerns and grievances. And this suppression, Paine understood, has consequences. Said Paine: "Let men communicate their thoughts with freedom, and their indignation fly off like a fire spread on the surface; like gunpowder scattered, they kindle, they communicate, but the explosion is neither loud nor dangerous -- keep them under restraint, it is subterranean fire, whose agitation is unseen until it bursts into earthquake or volcano. Finally, Paine understood that war is always the preferred activity of despotic states, for war is "the art of conquering at home."
Paine paid for his honesty. When he returned to England where he wrote The Rights of Man, he was relentlessly persecuted by the state, as he would later be persecuted in France and in America upon his final return. John Keane, in his biography Tom Paine: A Political Life, describes some of what Paine endured as a radical in late-eighteenth-century England:
Government spies tailed him constantly on London's streets, sending back a stream of reports to the Home Secretary's office. Those parts of the press that functioned as government mouthpieces pelted him with abuse. "It is earnestly recommended to Mad Tom" snarled the Times, "that he should embark for France, and there be naturalized into the regular confusion of democracy." Broadsheets containing "intercepted correspondence from Satan to Citizen Paine" pictured him as a three-hearted, fire-breathing monster, named "Tom Stich". Open letters, often identically worded but signed with different pen names, were circulated through taverns and alehouses. "Brother Weavers and Artificers," thundered "a gentleman" to the inhabitants of Manchester and Salford, "Do not let us be humbugged by Mr. Paine, who tells us a great many Truths in his book, in order to shove of his Lies." Dozens of sermons and satires directed at Paine were published, many of them written anonymously for commoners by upper-class foes masquerading as commoners."
THIS is why we must resist the bullying of any member of DU and especially of those who speak for liberty, democracy, and good governance.
If we would have defended Thomas Paine then, we must defend Will Pitt now.
Yes, I know that flying monkeys and hooting hyenas will arrive to mock a comparison between Pitt and Paine. I am not equating the importance of the two writers in American literature or their impact on our history.
I AM saying that the ACT OF DEFENDING THEIR SPEECH AND SAFETY IS EQUALLY IMPORTANT.
If we would have defended Thomas Paine then, we must defend Will Pitt now.
Paine: My poor are happy; neither ignorance nor distress is to be found among them; my jails are empty of prisoners, my streets of beggars, the aged are not in want, the taxes are not oppressive, the rational world is my friend because I am a friend of happiness--when these things can be said, then may that country boast of its constitution and its government.
*Inspired by WAGES OF REBELLION: THE MORAL IMPERATIVE OF REVOLT by Christopher Hedges, Pulitzer Prize winner. 2015 Nation Books
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)disclaimer- True Madonna fan here, but girl---
after 71+ million views-
likes-573,346 dislikes-253,565
WTF!
no mid life crises for you!
Aerows
(39,961 posts)ones that stirred this up, so I'm sure you are basking in it.
Eat your popcorn.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Me?
What'd I do?
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Cha
(298,077 posts)conversation if the OP of "the 24 business hour thread" wasn't trying to defend the guy who is supposedly being "bullied" now. But, it's all your fault.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7013022
Did those who were scorned because they didn't buy the big scoop that "dick cheney will be indicted" ever get an apology?
pipoman
(16,038 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)that's all we have -- and many, many DUers have done so. I merely say that resistance to bullying of truth tellers is as important now as it was in Paine's day.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Pitt can write whatever he wants. People have the right to disagree with him.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)the way the named former poster and a few of his acolytes bullied people who didn't agree with HIM! And I have seen that happen....!
Why we must resist the bullying of Will Pitt and others here.
Ah, the English language!!!
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Historic NY
(37,462 posts)but please proceed. I didn't see any statement about him being bullied, by himself.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)sheshe2
(84,072 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)sheshe2
(84,072 posts)That is the truth. I have it bookmarked.
obnoxiousdrunk
(2,911 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Real bullies (and their enablers) are known to claim victim status when confronted with their behavior.
This thread should serve as exhibit A.
Mob behavior is fascinating...
Then again, some people have the self-awareness of a doorknob.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)He has had a particularly odious troll spew death threats over and over throughout the years using hundreds of accounts.
That said, it wasn't that that drove him away, but somebody making fun of a disastrously wrong stance he doubled down on 9 years ago...
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)The "Will Pitt troll" didn't last long (about 20 accounts). The long-lived troll you're talking about is still at it, but isn't specific to WP.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Around for a very long time.......
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)people just want to smash to bits.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Precisely because he called a politician a mean name.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Healthcare information contained within that was never corrected. Nor did he ever update and admit that his wife got exactly what she needed. the former is inexcusable in a journalist. the latter is inexcusable in a person.
Spazito
(50,629 posts)I feel the same.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)A few years ago. Not denying coverage for pre-existing is huge- and a major reason why everyone's coverage is not much cheaper than it is now. We know single payer could not happen with this congress- Obamacare barely squeaked through. We should admit it is a win, and fight for better.
treestar
(82,383 posts)The way the OP is written, at first it appeared to be about we need to resist Will Pitt's bullying. If anyone did the bullying, it was him.
GoneOffShore
(17,346 posts)Andy823
(11,495 posts)Pitt is far from "being" bullied. To claim he was is just pure BS from his followers. I get so tired of those playing the "victim" card these days.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Yes, it would be bullying to keep harping on that endlessly, while
conveniently ignoring 99.99% of Pitt's good work.
sheshe2
(84,072 posts)Last one I read was pretty recent.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)sheshe2
(84,072 posts)malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I did not realize you were infallible, oh perfect one.
sheshe2
(84,072 posts)TIA.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)sheshe2
(84,072 posts)Care to point them out to me.
Links and comments if you please.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)you're too perfect for me.
All hail the glorious "sheshe2".
sheshe2
(84,072 posts)all that stuff got not one, yet several hides.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)whoosh.
Response to sheshe2 (Reply #105)
Long Drive This message was self-deleted by its author.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)elias49
(4,259 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)And why shouldn't he be called out on that? Too funny. You wouldn't give anyone else a break.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I recall several instances where his prognostications were, not just off; but, flat out wrong. I keep reading about the "mis-step" but must have missed, both, the "mis-step", and the thread calling out the "mis-step." It must have been a big'un, if it led to his exit.
I feel SOOOOO behind the curve!
treestar
(82,383 posts)that Rove was going to be indicted? It was Truthout's big scoop. Will Pitt was on DU claiming that and that's we'd soon see Rove frogmarched. That turned out to be wrong. Randomly 9 years later, someone made a thread recalling that. This apparently was bullying Pitt which caused him to leave DU (again). At least the OP so claims. And that's it's what happened to Thomas Paine. You know those bullies that caused Paine to quit writing (or in real comparison, caused Paine to quit making his opinions known at the local tavern).
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)"Bullying" means something completely different in my neighborhood.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And surely as a journalist/author/pundit he can handle that at DU - it could come from another pundit and be far worse!
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)And that Rove had been give 24 hours to get his affairs in order.
Then, when Rove wasn't frog-marched, 24 hours became "24 business hours".
Pitt responded to skepticism with the self-deleted but preserved at Kos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/05/15/210390/-Breakin-Will-Pitt-Home-From-Pub-Wilson-Leopold-Source
The martyr status being ascribed to Mr. Pitt is pretty unbelievable.
Sid
treestar
(82,383 posts)That was quite a weekend at DU.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)bobbolink in the face...
...or that other time he got drunk and threated to gut a DUer and leave them to bleed out in a roadside ditch.
for most people here, just one threat of violence like that would be cause for a permanent banning...
vhat? vas you shaying shumthing, about being a martyr.. to meeee?
Rex
(65,616 posts)LOL! You shouldn't lie like that, your nose will grow.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Someone didn't just happen to bring it up?
Maybe it was the BFEE.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Next.
Rex
(65,616 posts)The drama around all this is funny and amusing coming from the people that hate him the most (oddly enough the same group started all this drama).
It was just a slow day in GD and everyone was being polite, so the concern trolls thought they would shit stir in GD and they did. Same shit, different day, different target.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)in when multiple people start to post over and over with ridicule and mockery, based on self-righteousness.
Rex
(65,616 posts)The fact that they got caught bullying him and now they are crybabying about it in this thread - shows how small and shallow they are.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)sure give him a lot of attention. I'm willing to bet that if he returns, he will do so because of the haters and not for adulation.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)I was watching some toons and a commercial came on about bullying. What was the identified 'bullying' behaviour? Preferring to sit with your friends instead of a stranger.
That's a far stretch from getting the shit kicked out of you on a regular basis.
Cha
(298,077 posts)else who was scorned.. and owed an apology for not buying into the scoop that "dick cheney will be indicted".
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)the nastiness you spewed against Hillary Clinton in her last campaign for the Presidency.
Do you really want to bring up old threads? Yours are not all that pretty.
Cha
(298,077 posts)cheney indictment" were owed an apology?
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)Keep trying.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I guess we can lay to rest Will Pitt's past posts.
If Cha gets a clean slate, we all get a clean slate. Amirite?
Cha
(298,077 posts)bring up posts from then.. be my guest.
elias49
(4,259 posts)How arrogant.
Cha
(298,077 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Are you saying it is arrogant to change one's views? Then you expect no one to ever change their views? You would not if you found out more information about something?
randome
(34,845 posts)How are these two things remotely the same?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)will, in all probability, be for her a year from now. Either than or they will be facilitating the GOP's electoral chances.
I was against Clinton in 2008 too. Different time, different election, different candidates.
elias49
(4,259 posts)They're all coming together! Woohoo!
Cha
(298,077 posts)elias49
(4,259 posts)Part of the rafter showed up. Some decided to hide this one out.
Cha
(298,077 posts)Response to Cha (Reply #333)
Long Drive This message was self-deleted by its author.
elias49
(4,259 posts)and go throw some flowers around.
Cha
(298,077 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)it's childish. I can't imagine wasting time digging back years to find something to try to USE against another person.
What was the purpose, was there a goal, was there something important to accomplish? I didn't see the mess, whatever it was, I DID the attempt to bully and thankfully a majority of DUers responded and let the bullies know what they think of them.
If this is how DU is supposed to work, where small groups dig into people's years old comments then stalk them with them. HEY we can ALL do that, probably far better.
I'm game, let's make that a community standard. Everyone go digging for comments and statements of people they are jealous of or disagree with or dislike for one reason or another and let's turn DU into what these stalkers whoever they are, want it to be. Maybe they won't like it so much when the tables are turned.
What fun. Wait, I'm SURE there is nothing they have ever said or done that anyone could possibly dig up and throw at them.
I do think we all should do it for a week, let's see what DU looks like if we emulate the small group who spends their time on something so petty.
On second thought, let's not. What a waste of intelligence and time and effort.
840high
(17,196 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)could we all.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)As could we all.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)sheshe2
(84,072 posts)Yes it is bullying. And it's a tactic that is used by a certain small group here, it's stalking and it's childish.
Yet I don't believe we are talking about the same peeps! Oh, wait let me change that small to large.
Night night.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)whoosh.
Yet I think you understand perfectly.
This is starting to be fun. Yes? No?
sheshe2
(84,072 posts)Again.
Whoosh indeed.
Have a wonderful life.
Bye.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Because nothing shuts people up like it...and runs them off.
And when they have run people off and there is nothing left that is allowed to be discussed they will have won control of the message.
But don't think doing it to them will have any effect on their behavior at all...all can be rationalized and turned around to accuse you...the method is well tested and practiced.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)influence anything, when all you do is turn people off.
There is no self awareness, I agree, so no doubt they think they are accomplishing something, blind to the reality that most people either have them on ignore or just pass them by, or as you say, leave, since they make DU seem like a children's playground and would prefer to spend their time with adults.
Not sure what the goal is, and don't really care much to be honest. It's not my problem, thankfully
zeemike
(18,998 posts)No need to waste your time with them.
But I admit I have in the past, and it has been a learning experience for me.
It hurts when some of them leave, but we have not depleted the stock by a long shot...so yes they have failed.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)But I have played with them sometimes, if I want to use them to help kick a good thread eg. Mostly though, I find myself attracted to more intelligent conversation and barely notice them.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)It is to thoroughly hijack, pollute and therefore eliminate public spaces where real discussion and organization can occur. Occupy is disbanded with clubs and pepper spray. Dissent and organization online are disrupted with surveillance and propaganda.
It is no accident that propaganda brigades post new threads on discussion boards far out of proportion to their presence in the community, and that they nearly *always* demand the last word in any interchange.
The goal is to disrupt the important public space for liberal thought, discussion, and organization that these boards offer, and to keep the participants busy instead batting off the corporate lies and talking points.
woo me with science Sun Jul 28, 2013
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Whatever their goals are they are NOT to discuss issues. I realized a long time ago that even if you provided absolute proof of something to them, the responses will be the same.
They are best ignored. Don't know what really happened re Will Pitt, but I knew when I saw who posted the phony 'appreciation thread' pretty much what was going on.
I miss woo me with science!
treestar
(82,383 posts)After all that "bullying." Like people supporting Democrats and disagreeing that they are all disappointing corporate suck ups. I guess this very post is bullying you. I suppose you are going to leave now.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)I rather enjoy standing up to bullies...becaise basically they are cowards who prey on those among us that have the sense and good nature not to fight...and I respect those peaceful souls more than I do myself.
But no that post is not bullying...you asked questions I was happy to answer.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)nasty attack on people who have done more to get Democrats elected in this country since they were old enough to vote, than all those USING the false accusation put together.
THAT is another form of bullying. And that kind of passive aggressive bullying 'you don't belong to OUR club' must be challenged every time it appears on this site.
So either prove your claim, or those reading can determine that a false claim with no backup was made and that is exactly what it is.
Many Dems are 'corporate sucks' to use your phrase AND we can prove that. I will be more than happy to do so.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Find a post to where you ever said anything positive about a Democrat.
And don't call it bullying.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)game to some. One told me it was merely "house cleaning".
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)and I have no idea what prompted it. I certainly didn't join in any of it. However, I think someone who is so aggressive in his criticism of others should be prepared to take some himself. He publishes under his own name on a news site. That constitutes being in the public eye of sorts. That means he is going to get criticism. There are people here who have taken far worse, far more nasty personal attacks and haven't left or generated this degree of sympathy.
I certainly do not agree with the OP's comparison with Thomas Paine. That is over the top.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)years ago in order to do so, which has no significance to anything that is relevant today, which is what I understand was what happened, is just plain stupid to be honest.
How about using that energy to go after the MSM 'journalists' who LIED this country into a devastating war that is still ongoing? What someone said on a blog that is unknown to the rest of the world years ago? THAT will do WHAT to contribute to anything, other than satisfy some personal grudge.
When it gets personal, it has nothing to do with honest criticism, and when something that is insignificant is dragged up over and over and over again, something NO ONE cares about except for those who are holding on to some kind of personal grudge against another person, no matter whether or not that person is the nicest person in the world, it just reminds me of the far right attacks on Clinton. There was an agenda that was not going to do this country any good and in the end it was the attackers who thoroughly disgusted a majority of Americans. When there is an agenda other than offering constructive criticism, it is simply bullying and no decent person wants anything to do with it.
Good for you for not participating, most people apparently did not. Most people were simply disgusted.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)until someone explained it to me.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)anyone would be dragging up something from a decade ago other than to use it for some personal vendetta.
I do not know WP on a personal level, but I despise bullying and despise even more, passive aggressive dishonesty and deception from people whose own 'records' leave an awful lot to be desired, to say the least and in fact should cause them to mind their own business since someone might decide to raise their own past history.
The hypocrisy was so stunning it was THAT rather than to defend WP that got so many people involved at all
Criticize constructively all someone may want, no one will object to that. That is not what happened here.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)I think that unfair, to whomever you had in mind. I know that I didn't recognize the OP. You may, but I wasn't familiar with him. Seems to me it's not right to make such assumptions without looking at the thread.
Also, you're characterizing a thread you didn't even read. I don't know how you can be so sure it's bullying without having actually read it.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Things get boringly consistent after a while, I have no desire to read stuff repeatedly every time it is dragged up by the same people. If I'm wrong, which I doubt, no harm is done since I have not named them.
As for the OP, he is well known and is fortunate that most of us are not interested in doing what was done to WP unless he chooses to set himself up as a judge of other people.
I'm wondering if that is the only way to stop this as it appears some people are obsessed enough that they simply cannot stop. Same thing with the Cave, same old stuff re WP. They too are obsessed with it, but we are not them, and it should not be happening here. The place is becoming like that place and who wants to spend time obsessing over DUers personal blogging history as they do?
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)Perhaps there had been an ongoing discussion in the middle of a thread somewhere?
Cha
(298,077 posts)apology for being scorned for not buying into the scoop that "dick cheney will be indicted".
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7013022
We wouldn't be having this conversation if a defender of the old report hadn't brought it to everyone's attention.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)I just know the summary I got and how it related to an old thing about Rove.
Cha
(298,077 posts)wilderness.
"24 business hours" [View all]
I strongly suspect that Karl Rove to be indicted from TruthOut was due to an insider to deceive and give the impression it was about to happen to ridicule them for not turning to be accurate. I have a feeling anyway."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7013022
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)I think there is a small percentage here on DU that will forever hold on to their pretend offense.
They damned sure don't like being called out on their own offenses.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)or simply the fact that there are people in the world who just don't agree with them, on politics or whatever.
We all drag up old posts and years old events but when you have a real issue, that is not what you do, you address it, try to resolve it, if you do fine, if not you do NOT hang on to grudges for years and years.
Unless there is something else going on.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Seriously, they are the most pathetic and petty group of people I've ever seen on this website. They are ALL in here right now, crybabying all over the place about how Pitt is getting treated too well...as if they have an honest bone in their body. So YES, it is something else...GD was slow and everyone was getting along.
You know how the swarm hates it when GD is polite and people are having a good time. At least their drama show blew up in their faces and now everyone and their dog knows who they are and what their agenda is.
It is getting harder from them to shit stir and not get yelled at by most of the forum, something they are not use to.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)It reminds of a child who was just told "NO".
I have dealt with those tantrums (from both children and grand-children) more times than I care to remember.
Well put.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)...as I explained in the OP, except to say that they were both hounded by those who would shut them up and that those of us who stand for liberty and democracy and good governance should not tolerate attacks on Pitt now if we would not have tolerated attacks on Paine then.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)Such as those I discuss here? http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7025821
Having been the target of a number of those, I fail to see why he is so much more equal than the rest of us. That is, in fact, an ongoing struggle I have understanding the views of some on this site. How is it that some members, some public figures, some politicians, and some citizens are so much more valuable than, superior to, others?
grasswire
(50,130 posts)"and others here"
Not edited, that is the original subject line.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)You didn't post threads insisting people defend members in those situations, that I have seen anyway. You did so because Will got grief for an article he wrote 9 years ago. How about Bobolink? Did you post a thread for her? Because really, stuff like that, death and rape threats and continual, continual insults, strike me as worse than criticism for an old article. Not that I see much point of resurrecting something that old. I don't. I agree it was uncalled for and mean-spirited, but this portrait of a martyr being painted in this thread is extreme, particularly in comparison to much worse, more dangerous sorts of comments others have been subjected to.
Not only that, you don't even express concern about any of what I mentioned. An off handed comment that they are included in the term "others." No, I don't believe they are. I see running throughout the comments in this thread a hierarchy of intrinsic human worth equated to sameness of thought, life experiences, and adherence to political orthodoxy.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Un fucking believable! A high profile journalist is bullied if called out on a major mistake! What a double standard! Such hypocrisy! Then no more comments about Hillary and Goldwater or what Obama disappointed you on way back on 2009!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Obama disappointed you on the way back on 2009?'
Not to worry, I focus on issues. And if you're comparing an online journalist to the President of the US, and calling it a double standard to point out POLICIES, such as the TPP or the Pipeline on which these politicians have enormous power to influence, I can see why you are using all those little roly poly guys. It IS laughable.
Bullying is bullying and doing what the cavers do eg, obsessing over a DUer and dragging up decade old material to try use as a weapon, IS just that.
If I want to see obsession with DUer Will Pitt and read over and over again about a decade old, out of ALL the work he has done, irrelevant issue, I can just go that dark, dank, hatefilled place where most normal people do not go.
I don't expect to see that garbage here.
treestar
(82,383 posts)I think journalists would hold themselves to a high standard too. Everyone makes errors and mistakes. Have you not done your share of criticism of others? If it's bullying for one then it is for the people you criticized too.
randome
(34,845 posts)I'm sure you'd make the further assumption that I was part of the group but I'm here to tell you I am never invited to those meetings.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)IOW, it's something she doesn't like.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesnt always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one youre already in.[/center][/font][hr]
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)that old familiar, boring, redundent nonsense to take a wild guess as to who is dragging it all up, AGAIN, and again, and again.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)casting aspersions based on your preexisting views of members rather than evidence. It turns out that thread was actually--at least ostensibly--in defense of Will. I also commented on what is denounced as bullying around here and what isn't. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7025821
I would never accuse you of being a bully. While I nearly always disagree with you, I appreciate the fact you pretty much stick to the subject matter, at least when interacting directly with someone. The same can't be said for others who agree with you on a host of issues, however.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)holding house events last night. I honestly thought this area would have nothing, but when I put the zip code in, I was amazed at how many there were within an hour or two from where we are.
Go to Bernie's website and look at the menu, volunteers eg, I don't have it right next to me at the moment, but I think you can find who is in your area from there.
If not, look on google for groups who are supporting him in your state or city.
There are now literally thousands across the country so there should be some near you.
The map might still be available somewhere, that was a great way to contact people holding house parties etc.
I have to run, but I'll try to get more info for you later.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but until I read through some links here, I had no idea what was going on.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)you in that category. We have disagreed but you have never been mean spirited or nasty about it. I have no problem with people disagreeing with me especially when they do it civilly, as you have done.
Even though you are wrong and I am right most of the time
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I doubt that the membership of your group matches the group I have identified.
And I suspect, other DUers would identify different posters, as well.
PM me, if you wish.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)way to deal with those you don't agree with. Alert, lock, hide, ban.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)You know ... the:
part.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I believe she is referring to a small number of non-progressives that think they need to control the discussion via alerting, locking, hiding, and banning.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)they get the usual suspects together and bombard a thread with post after post of ridicule and mockery. The justification is that the victim "deserves it". And isn't that always the justification?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)They might get a shock to find out, if this becomes the norm here, how many people think the same thing about THEM.
I'm of the opinion that those handing it out would not be too good at taking it. As a matter of fact considering the pushback they are getting from the community, it's obvious they are not great at handling what the community thinks of THEM.
It's always the same with bullying.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)contribution for real issues. There might be a pet issue or two that they will comment but other than that they have a lot of free time. I believe the best response to a bully is to ignore them if you can. Sometimes it isn't possible. They love to drag you into their world of ridicule, harassment and mockery. And they are most likely better and for sure willing to spend more time on it. If one does feel it necessary to confront a bully, do so calmly and with intelligence. They hate that. And move on. They will try to drag you down. If one lashes back, one loses. I offer this advice for free and it's worth every cent. I don't always follow said advice but I try.
Also, there is the old saying that one should never wrestle a pig in mud, yatta, yatta, yatta....
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)There are probably reasons for that.
840high
(17,196 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)It is funny watching them crybaby so much about getting caught bullying someone.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)You are simply de clase.
Response to grasswire (Original post)
LuvLoogie This message was self-deleted by its author.
BeyondGeography
(39,395 posts)which he would use in response to posters he disagreed with? Never hidden either. Pitt rules. He was a spoiled bully.
longship
(40,416 posts)Irony!
Cha
(298,077 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)This thread will bring out the bullies and you will see them by their fruits.
as predicted
sheshe2
(84,072 posts)Just not the ones YOU were referring to, but ya the are here.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)Skittles
(153,310 posts)*THAT* is what bullies really are
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)before the FUCKING COWARDS part, otherwise amen, sister!
Skittles
(153,310 posts)YES INDEED
muriel_volestrangler
(101,414 posts)What brought it all on? Was there an OP with name calling in?
betsuni
(25,815 posts)jealous-stalker-swarming-corporatist-Rove-and-TPP-lover-conservative-blah-blah-blah-insults hurled about. Is it too much to ask that the name-callers think of new words to insult us now and again?
Rex
(65,616 posts)No dog in this hunt right? Concern trolls disrupt GD and you are defending them, my I am shocked.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,414 posts)In this thread, I'm criticising the name-calling that is disrupting GD.
I have also criticised someone telling a DUer they are 'too emotionally involved'; said that we don't know why Pitt has said he was leaving; and said that this is not something to worry about, and it will sort itself out.
I'm saying people are getting all concerned over nothing.
No, I don't have a dog in this hunt. I'm not a strong supporter of Hillary or Bernie. I don't have strong opinions for or against Will Pitt.
If you want to talk about it, you can PM me and tell me who you think are 'concern trolls' that I'm defending.
Response to Skittles (Reply #57)
Corruption Inc This message was self-deleted by its author.
Skittles
(153,310 posts)I am going far past the folk who trash Bernie
H2O Man
(73,709 posts)to "leave it."
Skittles
(153,310 posts)it's to see cowards being struck down
H2O Man
(73,709 posts)that you know how I voted. And not just because I think so highly of you, either.
Skittles
(153,310 posts)aw man wouldn't it fun to be a fly on the IM walls - so much SH** to land on
Rex
(65,616 posts)Cowards getting into a group to disrupt GD, sadly same shit - different day.
It's no surprise what cluster of people it is.
Skittles
(153,310 posts)yes INDEED
snooper2
(30,151 posts)RIP Tupac!
snooper2
(30,151 posts)FYI-
somebody has a GBCW post on a random message board doesn't = the greatness of Thomas Paine LOL
They used to express opinions to each other with the spoken word, not the intertubes
grasswire
(50,130 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)it is yummy!
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)does not mean that he should be immune to criticism, and I don't equate criticism with bullying. I for one am not prepared to put William Pitt on a pedestal.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)bullying and criticism are not the same. But "criticism" is generally not characterized by the tactics of repression or propaganda. Paine was bullied. And Pitt is bullied. The method of communication is different. The intent is the same, to shut him up.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Last edited Thu Jul 30, 2015, 04:57 AM - Edit history (1)
I don't like him or his style. Since I usually stay away from his OPs and almost always refrain from even replying to him, I probably haven't seen as many of his interactions as you have. I will say, though, that I've never seen any instances of him being bullied. In my experience, he's more bully than victim, and I don't feel the need to support someone like him.
murielm99
(30,785 posts)I did read his OPs from time to time. But I never replied to him. He reminded me of an entitled high school athlete.
We have other thoughtful, interesting writers who post great OPs. People like McCamy Taylor and H20 Man come to mind. NanceGreggs rants, but she doesn't rant at her fellow DUers. She gets us to think. I learn from Omaha Steve.
I would rather interact with any of those people.
Pitt will come back. He has done this before.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Historic NY
(37,462 posts)some people defending him haven't been here for the long haul or more that 10 yrs....we have seen & read.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)and that he thought we should all be grateful he chose to post here.
elias49
(4,259 posts)'Impressions' are just that: impressions.
Dig deeper.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)My impression hasn't changed.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)BainsBane
(53,137 posts)Seriously? That thread seemed to be an out of nowhere resurrection of a past mistake, but it does't rise to the level of repression or propaganda. Mocking, yes.
Your analogies and descriptions are way over the top.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)someone is being being attacked, even if I don't like that person, I will do what I can to support that person and stop the bullies.
After that I can go back to disagreeing with the person, or ignoring them or whatever.
The problem for those who decide to chose to be nasty to other people is that EVEN IF they originally have a point, that point gets lost when THEIR behavior is worse than whatever they were upset about in the beginning.
A perfect example is how the Far Right loonies went after Clinton using his weakness wrt to women to do so. They became so vicious and nasty that even those who didn't like Clinton, ended up despising THEM more.
If they really thought that a president engaging in sexual activity with an intern was unacceptable, there were civil ways to handle that. Instead they revealed more about themselves than about him and ended up being despised by a majority of the people.
HFRN
(1,469 posts)you're really comparing a guy on a messageboard to Thomas Paine?
really?
Historic NY
(37,462 posts)I'm really taken back by the drama. Pitt will find his way back from some Boston bar stool in the not to distant future.
Flying Squirrel
(3,041 posts)Have a nice day
grasswire
(50,130 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)important than Will and therefore the need to "defend" changes. That type of rational hasn't helped the race issue one bit.
And there is a big difference in defending someone and putting them on a pedestal. Pretending to not know that is absurd. Personally I can take Will or leave him. I disagree with some of what he says and does, but I will defend him, as others here, that get attacked by those thinking their self-righteousness gives them that right.
Self-righteousness is the devil's masterpiece to make us think well of ourselves." Thomas Adams
pnwmom
(109,025 posts)HFRN
(1,469 posts)'Mr. DeMille, I'm ready for my close up'
DRAMA!!!!!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)oddly focused on WP, do you know him personally? Because you do seem to have a deep connection to someone you don't know, assuming a month on a forum is your only knowledge of him. Where did you meet, how did you get to know each other? Not on DU obviously.
RandiFan1290
(6,261 posts)They've been here before...
HFRN
(1,469 posts)can't you just tug your ear, and get the answer yourself?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)somewhere. Your use of the word 'stalking' and the pics, yes, I think we have. Maybe on another forum??
HFRN
(1,469 posts)maybe you have me confused with a warlock you met at a caldron?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)A couple more and I'll probably be certain.
HFRN
(1,469 posts)I've given myself away!!!! lol
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Btw, thanks for kicking the thread!
HFRN
(1,469 posts)Enquiring mind wants to know
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Will Pitt is certainly NOT a VICTIM.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)You give as good as you get.
You certainly are not a victim, but like Will Pitt, you play the part well.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I say what I mean, I mean what I say, and artifice is not in my nature. I know I give as good as I get, I'm PROUD of that fact. I do not shrink, I find the humor in life, and I always look to the future and find solutions.
Many people have a problem with my bluntness. Too bad. Many had a problem with his. Too bad. He was NOT a VICTIM. He gave as good as he got and then some. I said that because it is the same way I feel about myself. Although unlike him, I have never threatened to beat another member to death, have not been banned for any reason, and do not call our Democratic president a piece of shit anything.
Oh, and I know when someone starts out with 'No offense' they intend to offend me in the worst way possible, on purpose, to try to hurt me.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)you know you are one of my favorite posters on DU.
You don't cry victim but people just jump to defend you as though you are.
Just like people jump to defend Will Pitt, even though he doesn't cry victim.
I love your bluntness. It is the very reason that this was my first reply to you since you said you were sick of hearing from Bernie Sanders supporters.
Pardon my bluntness.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Cha
(298,077 posts)they think you're a "victim". They are speaking out against the egregiousness of the racists attacks.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)It is the definition of integrity and abiding strength. The world needs much more of this.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Cha
(298,077 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)They usually don't do gbcw posts. He will come back when he feels like it. They should be happy he told them and they can find him easily at Truth-out. They act like he died.
Cha
(298,077 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Posting in 2004. Let him go. Nobody bullied him. He's a professional writer. If one can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. That's what he did. Nobody is indispensable.
DFW
(54,506 posts)Did anyone threaten Will Pitt's safety? If so, they deserve a visit from their local constabulary. And--Tom Paine's uncomfortable words caused him to be hounded from country to country. DU is just an internet board, and the man, perfectly capable of making his own decisions (and I am ALWAYS pro-choice) chose to bow out--a decision I went on his thread and disagreed with, by the way.
It is worth noting that Paine, by the way, wanted "jails [that] are empty of prisoners," and a country where "the taxes are not oppressive," two things that do not seem to jive with the presiding sentiment on DU these days. Of course we need jails--where should we be putting rogue killer cops, frackers who poison cities and CEOs who get rich off of pollution, "accidental" firearm deaths and shady offshore deals that allow them to pay zero taxes? And who decides what level of taxation is oppressive and what is not? That is a moving target no one has managed to hit yet--nowhere, ever. My man in Geneva (CH, not NY) yells and screams about his marginal bracket being being bumped up to 25% when he hit a six figure income. I tell him he's living in a tax paradise and he tells me, no, I'm the one that's living in a tax hell (Germany).
Like Paine, I am a friend of happiness--as in life, liberty and the pursuit thereof. I like to think I have attained a reasonable degree of it. I am also relatively confident this puts me in the minority.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)Most of us women. That isn't the situation here.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Nope.
Ironically, or hypocritically, whichever the case may be, the same cannot be said about Pitt threatening the safety of a homeless woman on DU.
DFW
(54,506 posts)I never saw anything like that.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)he was banned from DU and then allowed back for some reason. He is a poor writer and a mean drunk whose trust fund keeps him from having to work for a living.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)"Th newspaper does ivrything f'r us. It runs th' polis foorce an' th' banks, commands th' milishy, controls th' ligislachure, baptizes th' young, marries th' foolish, comforts th' afflicted, afflicts th' comfortable, buries th' dead an' roasts thim aftherward".
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finley_Peter_Dunne
Many times referenced by H.L. Menken.
It's our job.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)He was also a rather enormous racist and anti Semite. I understand that many of you hear a quote or two and think Mencken was like Will Rogers or something but he was not. Here is a passage from H.L. Mencken on African Americans:
"I admit freely enough that, by careful breeding, supervision of environment and education, extending over many generations, it might be possible to make an appreciable improvement in the stock of the American negro, for example, but I must maintain that this enterprise would be a ridiculous waste of energy, for there is a high-caste white stock ready at hand, and it is inconceivable that the negro stock, however carefully it might be nurtured, could ever even remotely approach it. The educated negro of today is a failure, not because he meets insuperable difficulties in life, but because he is a negro. He is, in brief, a low-caste man, to the manner born, and he will remain inert and inefficient until fifty generations of him have lived in civilization. And even then, the superior white race will be fifty generations ahead of him."
From his diary, 1943: "...it is impossible to talk anything resembling discretion or judgment to a colored woman. They are all essentially child-like, and even hard experience does not teach them anything."
He cut this portion from later editions, but here he is in 1930 on the Jews:
"The Jews could be put down very plausibly as the most unpleasant race ever heard of. As commonly encountered, they lack many of the qualities that mark the civilized man: courage, dignity, incorruptibility, ease, confidence. They have vanity without pride, voluptuousness without taste, and learning without wisdom. Their fortitude, such as it is, is wasted upon puerile objects, and their charity is mainly a form of display."
People need to read up on Mencken and actually read his works prior to claiming him as their own.
Mencken was opposed to populism, representative democracy and to the New Deal. You claim to be a big giant populist, when you are not saying civil rights are unimportant, you are all about the populism. You seem to like the New Deal. HL did not. On some days you affect language of racial equality and justice, HL had very different views.
He is often cited on DU by people who want to be seen as very progressive. This is a huge error.
Spazito
(50,629 posts)Educational as well. I didn't know about Mencken's racist and anti-semitic views, loathsome views.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)But an elitist opposed to representative democracy, populism and the New Deal being cited for political credibility is something that calls for mention on a website dedicated to democratic principles.
Mencken was clever and so many think he was being coy when he was being very direct.
Spazito
(50,629 posts)without looking further into the bigger picture and context related to the quote and the person they are quoting. I have done it myself in the past and found it is a lazy way to reinforce one's point.
I really had no idea of Mencken's loathsome views until your post so wouldn't have questioned the use of the quote, I appreciate the fuller picture you provided, makes a BIG difference.
Wash. state Desk Jet
(3,426 posts)betsuni
(25,815 posts)PatrickforO
(14,605 posts)There's no reason to, not at all. We need to stand strong against the oligarchs so they won't bully us.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)they don't have to interact with them. It's simple, for most mature adults.
PatrickforO
(14,605 posts)But some people are really sensitive and I feel bad for them.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)petty nonsense. It's such an interesting world, so many great things to do and so many real problems to focus on.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)First, President Obama caught wind of it and called a suicide hotline, then his DAUGHTERS read about it and ran away from home in total shame, and FLOTUS Michelle Obama threatened him with divorce! Then, to top it all off, nuclear weapons started raining down on the country!
What's that you say? None of that happened? Yeah but it coulda! Heck I myself called the Secret Service to let them know someone needed to be arrested for such a public display of disrespectful speech. Toward the President of all people.
What? A few hundred people at most are even aware it was posted? BS! The whole WORLD reads, lives and dies over what's posted here!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)But I was told today that Public figures should EXPECT that kind of thing. Well this was in reference to Will Pitt 'who is a journalist and therefore a public figure so he should expect to be criticized'.
So I guess the President is less of a 'public figure' than WP?
Or is about WHO the public figure is?
Unbelievable, I hope I never get that deeply, personally invested in a politician.
How long ago was that?
And I hope the First Family survived this terrible event by now!
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)A journalist, I guess. He writes on a website anyway. That was my point to you earlier.
He also repeated the POSUCS attack within the last 4-6 weeks.
What do you think would happen if someone called Bernie something like that? I can tell you the post would be hidden the the person would NEVER hear the end of it. You all laugh at support for Obama, but it doesn't approach the kind of politics of personality surrounding Sanders. You will recall that people here called Black Lives Matter a Koch brothers plot. That is now hostile they are to anything that they perceive as critical to Sanders. I say perceive because that demonstration at Netroots was not about Sanders. it was about black lives and ensuring all politicians know that they are expected to do something about the problem. That movement and those lives were all thrown under the bus because some decided that great Bernie Sanders was too important to have to be confronted by protesters.
So you complain about people objecting to pointless name calling of a president, when just recently some of the most egregious behavior has gone on--ostensibly in order to promote Sanders but in reality doing significant damage to his campaign and more importantly relations between white progressives and black activists.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Good observation and funny to boot! DU is important and world saving (threatening), unless it goes against some narrative. In that case, DU is a worthless place full of political hacks and shrills and has no impact on even a single atom.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)bullying others outside the group can be used as a team-building exercise to strengthen the group's bonds with one another.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)Corporatist, enemies of the people, not real liberals or progressives, essentially implying they aren't even real people but corporate plants, even when they have far less privilege and money than those hurling the insults? Would that be the sort of bullying you mean, as a kind of team building exercise?
Then there are racist attacks, calling someone a "race nagger," "Lee Atwater," addressing them as "Dear black person," misogynist insults, rape threats, insisting a rape victim deserved to be "raped for real," death threats, yet none of that constitutes bullying? As opposed to what exactly? A laughing emoticon? Criticism of a post or a story? It truly is interesting what causes outrage among certain "groups" engaged in "team building exercises."
Cha
(298,077 posts)Thank you for a huge sample of what constitutes "a certain group's team building exercises".
zappaman
(20,606 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)The nerve of them to claim to be victims!
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Spazito
(50,629 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)considering the real issues this country faces? To dig back into the posting history of other DUers just to try to 'score' some kind of point? I would worry about myself if I ever became that invested in something that for one thing, NEVER succeeds, this community continually rejects these tactics as it should, and for another, the work involved, and boring repetitiveness of it all, just comes across as a few people who have some personal issues, jealousies, or whatever, and it looks so bad for them.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)This makes them feel better about themselves.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)they still think that? Like I said, I would worry about myself or hope someone who cared about me would try to wake me up.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)of outright telling people they are better than others, including the 93 percent of the American population who doesn't vote as their told and dares to care about something other than restoring the the white upper-middle class back to what it sees as its birthright atop the capitalist world order. You know, all those "corporatists" and "Third Wayers" toiling away as janitors, sale clerks, waitresses, librarians or fire fighters, getting by on a fraction of what the people who actually work for corporations and pull in six figure incomes do, while insulting those same people who have never had and never will have their considerable privilege in life.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)I'll bet Thomas Paine never did that.
LostOne4Ever
(9,302 posts)JI7
(89,289 posts)joshcryer
(62,287 posts)alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Indeed.
shenmue
(38,506 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)And he's retired to his farm in the country, likely chopping wood and preparing for a long winter in his own forest, I guess.
I don't think he's doing poorly. Maybe he just decided to live the good life, it's not like he was homeless or anything near that.
Jon Stewart and some other guy people here were worried about decided to take their earnings and get close to nature. They were finally in a position to do so and not living from one month to the other like so many who are anxious about politics. It doesn't matter what goes on outside their own lives, anymore.
Posting online is optional and for most, costs more money than it could ever bring in. Unless one can make a living doing it.
Number23
(24,544 posts)sort of litmus test for the decency in a person's soul to see who can wail the loudest over Pitt's most recent GBCW and pretend that someone who regularly used the dumbest, nastiest invective he could think of was some sort of literary giant.
Pitt had his time. And he wore it out, like most of DU these days.
treestar
(82,383 posts)That's hardly being bullied.
Texasgal
(17,049 posts)here on DU. Why? I have no idea. If I used the type of launguage and outright threatening behavior like he did I'd be out of here in five seconds.
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)harassment is dangerously close to terrorism. Seen it with two DUers in particular, Will and Nadin, both relentlessly abused by a rightwing hatemonger anti-DU website and RIGHT HERE ON DU.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)As nasty as they are, bullies and cavers are not the same as terrorists. No one here is being blown up with bombs or physically harmed in any way. The hyperbole in this thread is off the charts.
RandiFan1290
(6,261 posts)Don't forget that!
treestar
(82,383 posts)Two of the biggest bullies on DU. Claiming they are the victims. Incredible.
mythology
(9,527 posts)You can't seriously compare people being tired of Pitt's overwrought posts with actual terrorism. And if one wants to talk about online words potentially leading to real world violence, I'm not sure you should use Pitt as the victim given his history.
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)This has been quite the banner week here at DU.
And completely disagree about Pitt being bullied; he tended to go after other posters with abandon.
proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)Scroll down for announcement on the homepage (bottom left):
NIEMAN NEWS
Robert Parry wins I.F. Stone Medal for Journalistic Independence
The founder of consortiumnews.com, who broke many of the stories related to the Iran-Contra Affair, questions both conventional wisdom and mainstream media.
July 21, 2015
Investigative Reporter Robert Parry to receive I.F. Stone Medal for Journalistic Independence
In recognition of a career distinguished by meticulously researched investigations, intrepid questioning and reporting that has challenged both conventional wisdom and mainstream media, the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard will present journalist Robert Parry with the 2015 I.F. Stone Medal for Journalistic Independence during a ceremony in Cambridge, Mass., on Oct. 22, 2015.
<>
Nieman tagline: To promote and elevate the standards of journalism
Cha
(298,077 posts)Yes, but that was his right. We have no rights to bring up his failures.
libodem
(19,288 posts)To trash one of our own. Those Republican's stick together right or wrong and rarely break ranks.
We throw each other under the bus. And capitulate like a reflex.
Scrutiny is fine. But we should stand up for each other.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Liberals have a flaw. and that is that we can be turned against one another by an appeal to emotionalism...and they milk that cow daily.
libodem
(19,288 posts)And now the madness over Planned Parenthood because of that jackass O'Keefe.
Yeah, the Republicans back Larry Craig and David Vitter and That Folley page texter. But we can't be nice to Will Pitt?
zeemike
(18,998 posts)But to borrow a famous quote from the Bard...
The fault dear libodem is not in the Republicans but in ourself.
libodem
(19,288 posts)Self examination is under rated.
ancianita
(36,238 posts)grasswire
(50,130 posts)Terrific book.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)are in fact those who bully the most.
Cha
(298,077 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Sanders supporters and those on the left (even the far left) are in no way the minority here, and the suggestions from certain posters that the Third Way or corporate agenda dominate DU are absolutely absurd.
Claiming underdog status and persecution allows for some truly vicious personal attacks, plenty of which I was guilty of during the Snowden episode. ProSense suffered some of the most vicious attacks outside of direct death or rape threats that I've ever seen, and my part in that was absolutely shameful.
That some people are pushing back against bullies is not bullying itself.
Cha
(298,077 posts)underdog/the persecuted. It's so obviously not the truth.
How dare anyone push back against bullies!
maxrandb
(15,401 posts)it's like they are a left version of Sean Hannity
treestar
(82,383 posts)Who do they think they are fooling? They just look more ridiculous.
GusBob
(7,286 posts)and his minions ganged up on me over a grammar error when I was a newbie here
or the number of times another beloved long time DUer called me a douchebag because he disagreed with me
as a low-count no star poster, you just sit there and take your lumps
tularetom
(23,664 posts)Just asking.
Response to tularetom (Reply #84)
Post removed
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)you would have better luck to just say it.
MattSh
(3,714 posts)The more things change, the more they stay the same.
joshcryer
(62,287 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)He worked hard for that lunch money! He did! He did! {Channeling my inner John Oliver there.}
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)I posted a series of rather pointed OP's, or poignant ones, which received a modicum of attention. I felt I was "on my way", so to speak. One or two "wrong moves", and suddenly crickets. I presume a number of folks hid me, for various reasons. Whatevs. This ain't my day job, and I'm not here for heaps of praise. I also have no idea about why he left, and I don't care. I am pretty sure he will be just fine. Maybe he will hook up with any of a number of other outlets for his writing. Maybe Nance needs some help. ? We all have our moments. What we rarely find is any allowance for others' opinions. This a good place to come only if you have, after deep reflection, come to exactly the "correct" views.
tritsofme
(17,444 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
NanceGreggs
(27,821 posts)
and the comparison is laughingly ridiculous.
What Will Pitt is is an extremely talented writer, with a keenly observant eye and an ability to communicate his opinions with insight, as well as style. And they are just that, his opinions. They are agreed with or not, argued with, debated and often criticized. But as a professional writer, he is no stranger to harsh criticism and the fact that he often evokes that harsh criticism is not an insult to his ability as a journalist; quite the opposite, it is a testament to its worth.
We all know that Will can dish it out and we also know (well, some of us anyway) that he can take it. Hes proven that time and again. He can be sarcastic, rude, downright nasty he can also be empathetic in the extreme, and as funny as hell. But he is not a victim of bullying, nor would he walk away from DU or anywhere else with his tail between his legs. And to even hint at putting him in that light is an insult to his character.
Will and I have had many vitriolic exchanges on this board. We have also exchanged PMs during the same period. Our last PM discussion was about how we absolutely hated what each other posted here but how our political views had nothing to do with how we viewed each other as people. Will had my back here at times when we vehemently disagreed with each other. We never lost sight of the fact that disagreement on political positions and mutual respect were feelings that could easily co-exist.
I dont know why Will chose to leave DU but I am certain that being bullied had nothing to do with that decision. I suspect it had more to do with the childishness being displayed here on a daily basis, and the attendant lack of serious political discussion. I would think it had more to do with the fact that some posters think it more productive to engage in meaningless personal barbs than to engage in honest debate about issues that matter to us all. I would venture a guess that he grew tired of the mindless game of DU gotcha, and prefers to spend his time doing something constructive about his political views rather than being destructive of those who disagree with those views.
Lets be really honest here, shall we? Will is being put on a pedestal and mourned like a dead hero because hes an outspoken Sanders supporter. Were he an HRC supporter, the same people on this thread who are praising him now would be posting about his departure along the lines of good riddance to bad rubbish. The same people now posting about how he was bullied would be calling him the biggest bully in the DU schoolyard. And thats the truth a truth more obvious and transparent than any of you would ever have the courage to own up to.
Will Pitt is NOT a martyr to your cause. He is NOT a victim. He is NOT and never will be a mewling kid who got bullied off a website. And to pretend he is any of those things in order to prop-up some ridiculous theory of your own making is nothing less than insulting to the man himself.
Violet_Crumble
(35,990 posts)I never saw him claim he was bullied, never saw him running round DU in one of the many swarms that frequent this place, and I got the strong impression he wasn't someone who was cowed by attacks and stuff.
I didn't realise he supports Bernie Sanders. Now I know and after reading through this thread, I think what you pointed out runs both ways. Some of those in this thread and the other threads I've seen are doing the 'good riddance to bad rubbish' and 'he wasn't bullied but me and my friends are bullied!' routine because of what tribe they're in.
This reminds me of pro-sense, another poster who, like Will Pitt, I don't have any strong feelings about one way or the other. I saw post after post from a few DUers who've appeared in this thread insisting she was driven off DU and bullied and stuff, even though I never saw pro-sense claim she was bullied. Sometimes people leave because DU just isn't doing it for them anymore for a wide variety of reasons. Sometimes they come back and sometimes they don't.
elias49
(4,259 posts)BeyondGeography
(39,395 posts)Mindless anti-Obama sentiment on DU never had a louder and more high-profile bullhorn than the POSUCS post. That was a descent into partisanship from which he never recovered, credibility-wise, with many people here who didn't always agree with him but enjoyed reading his posts anyway.
I think he left/took a timeout at least in part because he had limited freedom of movement after that. He apologized (but not really), said something kind about the President once or twice (Cuba, e.g.) but then came TPP (told ya so!). Followed by crickets on Iran. It got stupid, and I'm pretty sure he realized it at some level. With the 24 business hours post, the door was open and he walked out, leaving as a victim rather than someone who had overplayed his hand.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)and clamor for banning, are the ones that hinder "honest debate". If one says the wrong thing they must fear the self-righteous that are too quick to throw the racist, misogynist, sexist, cards. A small few can hold a lot of power by being persistent. It's easy to get away from a poster like Will if he offends you. Put him on ignore and probably there are a lot that do. But some seem to relish being "offended" and therefore justifying their reactions.
BeyondGeography
(39,395 posts)He was able to provoke at a level that would have led to many hides if not outright bans for the average poster, and he used that privilege irresponsibly. Did POSUCS make this a better board? Calling people fuckwits, because he could? None of this kept me awake at night, trust me, but when you have an OP saying Pitt was bullied, well, even he should be laughing at that one.
mnhtnbb
(31,418 posts)GusBob
(7,286 posts)thank you
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)and a stronger affirmation of his character and ability that those who insist he is a victim.
Response to NanceGreggs (Reply #157)
Corruption Inc This message was self-deleted by its author.
sybylla
(8,533 posts)have some if us not even bothering to look past late breaking or greatest threads on the front page. There used to be a time when that shit got relegated to the lounge. Now it's ubiquitious.
I won't wade through it any more. It's impossible to have a conversation about facts and issues anymore without getting jumped on or outright blocked from forums by power-mad mods.
This site used to be invaluable to me. Now I've made my last donation.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)mcar
(42,474 posts)Thank you Nance.
This has really gotten ridiculous.
Number23
(24,544 posts)weak as hell and seemed more as a genuflect to the masses here at DU than anything genuine. Compare his Sanders "support" to his support for other candidates and it is truly weak.
I think Will was yet another casualty of what I call the DU:GD Effect. Where people get so steeped in the wall to wall, endless ignorance and cluelessness in this forum that they actually start to BELIEVE the shit that gets posted here. His anti-Obama bile and idiocy was becoming second to none. And while these positions would have made little sense in any other liberal forum, on DU with its "liberals" here, he fit in brilliantly. And to be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if that's what did him in.
NanceGreggs
(27,821 posts)... was definitely where Will was at. As I said to Will himself many times, he knew which side of the bread was the buttered side.
Once his anti-Obama screeds started racking up the RECs, there was no way he would ever change that position. That's why it's so ironic to see posters here praising his courage in speaking the truth - when in fact, the "truth" was always a matter of "DU truth" and never a matter of "real world truth".
As for the "DU:GD Effect", I couldn't agree more. You'll see countless threads about some "fact" that has been debunked over and over. And two weeks later, you'll see that same "fact" being referred to as Gospel. I find it particularly laughable when someone asks for a link in support of some purported "fact", and what they're given is a link back to a DU thread - in other words, if someone on DU said it, that makes it a fact.
Will is a writer - and writers want/need readers. Will was always keenly aware of what the majority of posters on DU wanted to hear, and was more than happy to oblige.
But to hold him up as a martyr who was "bullied" - well, that just defies reality - but then most of what gets posted here nowadays defies reality, so it's to be expected.
As I've said, had Will been a staunch Obama supporter and/or HRC supporter, the very posters who are praising him now for speaking up for democracy, etc., would be calling for his head. And they seem totally oblivious to how obvious that fact is.
Number23
(24,544 posts)threads for the man to know that what you're saying is true. They have more to say about this than about Sandra Bland (when they're not trashing #BLM and the black posters here) but want so terribly desperately for everyone to know how "liberal" they are.
His greatest defenders now only rallied to his side after they'd polluted this site for years with how horrible and evil Obama was and he finally seemed to relent and agree. Though who knows if he honestly felt that way, was just trying to fit in with the loons or if was the DU:GD effect kicking in.
But one good thing I can say about Pitt is that at least he seemed to own his assholishness to a small degree which is certainly more than you can say about many of his recently converted fans here.
NanceGreggs
(27,821 posts)On the afternoon before Obama's 2014 SOTU address, Will posted an OP praising Obama and discussing what he anticipated to be another kick-ass speech by the prez.
I watched that thread all day - because it had so few replies and recs, which was highly unusual for a WillPitt post. It never garnered more than a handful of recs, and pretty much sank like a stone.
After the SOTU speech, Will posted a scathing rant about Obama having "used a wounded soldier as a prop to glorify war". Despite the fact that it made absolutely NO sense (if you're trying to "glorify" war, you trot out a handsome, unscathed, medal-festooned soldier, not one who is visibly wounded and disabled), Will's tirade about Obama being a war-promoting fraud rocketed to the top of the Greatest Page will hundreds of recs and replies.
Will never posted anything but anti-Obama screeds after that. (And the OP singing Obama's praises posted that afternoon? "Self-deleted by author"
As I said, Will always knows which side of the bread is the buttered side - and his "fans" will attest to his Thomas Paine-like courage in speaking the truth - as long as it's the "truth" they want to hear.
Rex
(65,616 posts)If a small group of people drummed up a 9 year old post by YOU where you are 'not at your best' I would be saying the same thing to them.
Pitt went away, maybe will come back. Already to move on and stop with the flamefest...GD was pretty nice now that GD-P is active.
IMO.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)That OP was hardly the first time it's come up since. It'd be so weird if one dumb OP about it ran him off.
I do agree that that GD has generally been much nicer since the other forum was put in place, though.
Rex
(65,616 posts)want to go duke it out over their candidate...at any given time. Keep GD free of that stuff. NG is right, nobody is changing their minds over this etc..
Enough of this, Pitt really lost me when he went off on Obama over the ACA.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)I guess we'll have to get our melodramatic screeds and "scoops" of BS that doesn't pan out elsewhere note that he's left us cretins for good.
But that "24 business hours" thing was hilarious in its absurdity which is why it was and is funny to bring up for a chuckle.
NanceGreggs
(27,821 posts)... is exactly what I meant by "the childishness being displayed here on a daily basis".
I myself have referred to Will's POSUCS rant at least a dozen times. Obama is still president, still being discussed here, so that term is still relevant to the current conversation. What WillPitt said nine years ago about a possible Rove indictment is, by no stretch of the imagination, relevant to anything that is going on right now.
Will could dish it - Will could take it. My guess is that it was the fact that someone thought it somehow important to dig up some totally irrelevant post from the past that caused him to "blow his cork" as he put it, rather than the content of that ancient post itself.
But this kind of thing is now par for the course on DU. Not a day goes by that someone isn't digging up what Bernie Sanders said thirty years ago, or what HRC did when she was in college - always looking for that "gotcha!" moment that has absolutely no relevance to anything of import, and is certainly NOT going to change anyone's mind about who they support as their candidate of choice.
Rex
(65,616 posts)True way too much of the 'gotcha' stuff going on. Guess I was getting use to GD being a little nicer now that GD-P is it's own forum. Pitt will be fine...matter of fact, enough with this. Your are right, nobody is changing their mind and there are much more important issues to discuss right now.
JI7
(89,289 posts)she came back just to post a thread on him when he announced he was going to run for president.
Pitt never showed much support for sanders .
NanceGreggs
(27,821 posts)What does prosense have to do with it?
JI7
(89,289 posts)it was in the reply to your post where prosense was mentioned .
NanceGreggs
(27,821 posts)akbacchus_BC
(5,704 posts)Mr. Pitt is no coward and he would never leave a site because he was being bullied. He is a very political person and maybe his reasons for leaving is silly season and will come back after the primaries.
Hope you and yours are keeping well!
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)pintobean
(18,101 posts)I would assume Bobolink would be surprised.
maxrandb
(15,401 posts)where Thomas Paine took his ball and went home because he was butthurt
quickesst
(6,283 posts)This is like Xerxes complaining that Leonidas had an unfair advantage in numbers, and was picking on the Persian Empire.😖
Response to grasswire (Original post)
Post removed
maxrandb
(15,401 posts)"Let it go people, it's just some random dude on the internet" - Probably the most intelligent, profound and appropriate thing I've seen posted on DU in weeks!
Feel free to "Drop the Mic" gifted
I propose that we close this thread with gifted's very poignant post
Lars39
(26,119 posts)War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know
The Greatest Sedition is Silence: Four Years in America
House of Ill Repute: Reflections on War, Lies, and America's Ravaged Reputation.
and co-written with Dahr Jamail,The Mass Destruction of Iraq: Why It Is Happening, and Who Is Responsible
Response to Lars39 (Reply #190)
Post removed
Lars39
(26,119 posts)Some of us care about a much bigger picture.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Myrina
(12,296 posts)I've met him personally, I've been around DU since pretty much the beginning. I've seen the tantrums (on and off DU), and
I've seen him plagiarize other people's posts/threads/research.
He's leaving (left)? Again?
BFD.
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
paleotn
(18,015 posts)...in fact, I can't think of one I disagree with. That said, I'm just not with it on this forum bullying thing. Maybe that's just me....old and thick skinned. If it spills into cyber stalking or libel / slander, that's a serious problem and we have legal remedies for that. People are going to hate and spew bullshit. People are going to be assholes. It's been that way since the early days of the inter-webs. I know. I've been around that long. If you agree with my point of view, great. If you don't, whatever. If you want to spew shit on a forum, well, Johnny has my back....
?w=700
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)I missed that part in history class.
The OP makes the bizarre implication that folks on DU are threatening Pitt's "speech and safety", when in reality a great many people find the way he gathered up his toys and left as childish, cliche, silly and amusing.
You've made a paper mache mountain out of a non-existent molehill in the middle of a playground sandbox.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Having been on the pointy end of actual bullying, in which Will was a minor participant, I'm not all that sympathetic.
But I'm quite certain that if anything will tempt him back, it's comparing him to Thomas Paine.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)is the grown man who threatened to beat a homeless woman to death and who is so coddled, swaddled, lionized and enabled that he was allowed to keep posting to the site after doing so.
A thin skin, POSUCS, "fuckwits", and death threats -- those will be his legacies to those of us not blinded by his popularity.
randome
(34,845 posts)I'm staying out of the WP threads from this point forward. You and others have said what needed to be said.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesnt always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one youre already in.[/center][/font][hr]
Making him look like some sort of victim is absolutely insane!
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)he is popular, while his detractors are few and definitely not. The Cave hates him too, uses these same 'memories' to try to go after him. But they're buried in a small dark corner of the internet still lashing out, still obsessed with DUers like Will, jealous, angry and obsessed.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Perhaps you should ask yourself why you defend a grown man who threatened to beat a mentally-fragile homeless woman to death.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)why they can't get any traction with the same old grudges, see your own comment, dragging up of years old incidents which could be done about anyone here, but most people don't do that.
But they could comfort themselves with the knowledge that there is a small dark place on the internet who DO agree with them I suppose, just not this forum.
People are not 'defending' Will Pitt, they are just disgusted with the garbage that goes on here, they nasty attacks on good people, and they are letting people know it.
Same thing that happened with Clinton, in the end people were just so disgusted with the personal attacks, even those who didn't like HIM, liked the attackers less and he ended up leaving office with extremely high popularity ratings.
I don't get the obsession with Pitt frankly.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Same people thumping the drum, too.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)And now it's beginning to make sense!
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Quit trying to use that as some kind of insult, it's bullshit.
The truth is, the man really enjoyed trying to piss people off. His sig line is very telling - "Anger is a gift". I guess we can say the man was gifted.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)It's a comparison of the kind of 'material' used by them and by this group.
Doesn't matter if they hate everyone, no one here is using THEIR material to go after anyone else.
The truth is the 'man' was under attack as is everyone, because he went against the grain and went public with it.
But the attacks came as expected back then, from those who had a vested interest in silencing the Left.
You don't like someone, then ignore them, but if you continue to drag up the old Cave material to go after another DUer, then do not expect people not to notice and to comment on it.
So quit trying to silence people, it is what it is.
It's interesting how 'sensitive' his detractors are while claiming HE should be 'able to accept' what they call 'criticism' but when they get a little pushback, seems the don't take their own advice.
Distorting decade old irrelevancies to conduct personal vendettas is going to get the kind of backlash it is getting.
Do it, but don't whine when a majority of the people call you on it. That is the 'generic you'.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)That's exactly what they want. I haven't seen anyone on DU play into their hands as much as you do.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I remember it. I am not the one obsessed with that cesspool, those enabling it as they have done in the past, by USING their anti-DU material, are the ones obsessed.
When the origin of something is clearly identifiable that is called 'RECOGNIZING the source', the word is not 'obsession', it's simply 'recognizing' where something comes from.
Same thing last time we had a big exposure here of this kind of bullying. When I first had the misfortune to learn about that dive. Same material from there being used on another DUer.
I'm willing to bet if someone is brave enough to dive into that cesspool right now they are cheering on the small group here who are attempting to bully WP.
Why don't you go take a look? Too dirty for me frankly. A couple of days of researching the place was enough to last a lifetime.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)Those who would labor and invest in those making life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness more difficult if not outright impossible for current and certainly future lifeforms aren't really Paine people.
That is the trouble with speaking your mind. For a guy so fond of bridges, he sure burned a lot.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I think Will Pitt was a CLASSIC bully.... willing to post all kinds of bile and vitriol, but unwilling to take any of it back.
Dude's more interested in click and DU Recs than civility.
He has a right to say what he wants, IMO. But he doesn't have the right to insist no one pushes back.
No fucks given here.
marble falls
(57,540 posts)UTUSN
(70,793 posts)My head is spinning with the twists here of definitions of: victim, bullying, and who is being "tailed" (him or us/everybody else).
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Yes, it's a front loaded attack before making a claim that will garner opposition. It's what O'Reilly and Beck did at the beginning of their rants.
IOW, only a low-down-no-good dog would have anything to say in opposition to the premise that will soon be put forth.
Tiresome, but it's used at DU. I don't see a victim here.
kpete
(72,056 posts)bullies be damned
Codeine
(25,586 posts)that leads one to threaten to beat a homeless woman to death?
I mean, as long as we're redefining shit here I want to be on the same page as the cool kids.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)if anything he's likely frustrated by the "rules" of engagement here that limit our "free speech".
Most of those you address as "bullies" are really just cousins of the rightwingers who deploy and employ the same tactics because that's pretty much what they are confined to. That they work in concert is unsurprising, given that I've long been convinced they need to to make up for what they lack in numbers. Pitt just makes a high profile target for the unaccomplished ____ with nothing in their quiver but DU and the positive reinforcements of their cohorts.
It's amazing how quickly pixelworld became just like the one we physically occupy, no? OH boo hoo, "he called BHO a POSUCS!!!!" says the faux defenders of civil discourse.
too funny
Codeine
(25,586 posts)His has been some of the ugliest discourse on DU over the years, but as a member of our Protected Class he's gotten away with it.
Now, when reminded of one episode, he runs away and lets his fan club defend him.
Bullying my ass.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)which is why I don't agree with his being bullied or there being a need to defend him.
All of his non-fans throughout this thread pretty much unmistakably imply that he's a crybaby dickhead choking on his own medicine, but think they have the highground because they didn't use those particular descriptive terms directly. That's what I was addressing as much or more than anything else. I'll take all the insults and coarse language of someone like him over the wouldbe highbrow that strives to hide the same BS behind a wall of more innocent looking words -- the same insults just in 25 words or less.
I don't know the man, just some of his work. Based on that alone I'd say if he did decide to permanently depart, that "episode" or reminding of it, may have been a catalyst, but hardly the cause/reason alone for his departure.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)CrispyQ
(36,567 posts)IIRC, Will Pitt once threatened someone on this site, was banned & then given a 2nd chance. But NY_skip? Hey, he's gone for good cuz he used a bad word.
lark
(23,199 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)free license to wage war and commit genocide with impunity.
Clinton trusted George W. Bush, and passionately and publicly encouraged other Senators and members of Congress to grant Bush his wish to have complete use of the US Armed Forces to attack, conquer, and occupy Iraq.
This, despite frantic widespread attempts by millions of sensible people telling her don't trust Bush, don't vote to give this neocon warmonger the ability to wage war like a vindictive toddler with ADHD, in the peak throes of the terrible twos. Criminy, a blind hamster could see through that deadly maniac.
So, why should we take any group that defends Bush's holocaust of Iraq in support of a Presidential candidate who can be duped by a total loser like George W. Bush seriously? We have more productive, very serious endeavors to engage in, rather than wasting our precious time dignifying contrived illusion by paying attention to it.
All we need to do is consider the statements below, and move on, and do our best to ensure that a candidate like Hillary Clinton, who can be so easily fooled by George W. Bush, is never given the chance to exercise her tragic, disastrous inability to make wise judgments as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States ~
"If we get the resolution that President Bush seeks, and if Saddam complies, disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. Regime change will, of course, take longer but we must still work for it, nurturing all reasonable forces of opposition...I will take the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible....
....This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction....
.....So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed.
Thank you, Mr. President." - The actual words of Hillary Clinton.
A vote that puts that awesome responsibility in the hands of George W. Bush. Just so very wrong. Tragically wrong. Disastrously wrong.
When you give a 19 minute floor speech about going to war, it can not be called a mistake.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=433771
Here are the videos of Clinton's call to support Bush, and give him free rein to begin the Bush neocon war.
&feature=youtu.be
Text of Clinton's plea to support Bush and his war.
Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (October 10, 2002)
October 10, 2002
Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
on S.J. Res. 45, A Resolution to Authorize the Use of
United States Armed Forces Against Iraq
As Delivered
Today we are asked whether to give the President of the United States authority to use force in Iraq should diplomatic efforts fail to dismantle Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological weapons and his nuclear program.
I am honored to represent nearly 19 million New Yorkers, a thoughtful democracy of voices and opinions who make themselves heard on the great issues of our day especially this one. Many have contacted my office about this resolution, both in support of and in opposition to it, and I am grateful to all who have expressed an opinion.
I also greatly respect the differing opinions within this body. The debate they engender will aid our search for a wise, effective policy. Therefore, on no account should dissent be discouraged or disparaged. It is central to our freedom and to our progress, for on more than one occasion, history has proven our great dissenters to be right.
Now, I believe the facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt. Saddam Hussein is a tyrant who has tortured and killed his own people, even his own family members, to maintain his iron grip on power. He used chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds and on Iranians, killing over 20 thousand people. Unfortunately, during the 1980's, while he engaged in such horrific activity, he enjoyed the support of the American government, because he had oil and was seen as a counterweight to the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran.
In 1991, Saddam Hussein invaded and occupied Kuwait, losing the support of the United States. The first President Bush assembled a global coalition, including many Arab states, and threw Saddam out after forty-three days of bombing and a hundred hours of ground operations. The U.S.-led coalition then withdrew, leaving the Kurds and the Shiites, who had risen against Saddam Hussein at our urging, to Saddam's revenge.
As a condition for ending the conflict, the United Nations imposed a number of requirements on Iraq, among them disarmament of all weapons of mass destruction, stocks used to make such weapons, and laboratories necessary to do the work. Saddam Hussein agreed, and an inspection system was set up to ensure compliance. And though he repeatedly lied, delayed, and obstructed the inspections work, the inspectors found and destroyed far more weapons of mass destruction capability than were destroyed in the Gulf War, including thousands of chemical weapons, large volumes of chemical and biological stocks, a number of missiles and warheads, a major lab equipped to produce anthrax and other bio-weapons, as well as substantial nuclear facilities.
In 1998, Saddam Hussein pressured the United Nations to lift the sanctions by threatening to stop all cooperation with the inspectors. In an attempt to resolve the situation, the UN, unwisely in my view, agreed to put limits on inspections of designated "sovereign sites" including the so-called presidential palaces, which in reality were huge compounds well suited to hold weapons labs, stocks, and records which Saddam Hussein was required by UN resolution to turn over. When Saddam blocked the inspection process, the inspectors left. As a result, President Clinton, with the British and others, ordered an intensive four-day air assault, Operation Desert Fox, on known and suspected weapons of mass destruction sites and other military targets.
In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad.
In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.
Now this much is undisputed. The open questions are: what should we do about it? How, when, and with whom?
Some people favor attacking Saddam Hussein now, with any allies we can muster, in the belief that one more round of weapons inspections would not produce the required disarmament, and that deposing Saddam would be a positive good for the Iraqi people and would create the possibility of a secular democratic state in the Middle East, one which could perhaps move the entire region toward democratic reform.
This view has appeal to some, because it would assure disarmament; because it would right old wrongs after our abandonment of the Shiites and Kurds in 1991, and our support for Saddam Hussein in the 1980's when he was using chemical weapons and terrorizing his people; and because it would give the Iraqi people a chance to build a future in freedom.
However, this course is fraught with danger. We and our NATO allies did not depose Mr. Milosevic, who was responsible for more than a quarter of a million people being killed in the 1990s. Instead, by stopping his aggression in Bosnia and Kosovo, and keeping on the tough sanctions, we created the conditions in which his own people threw him out and led to his being in the dock being tried for war crimes as we speak.
If we were to attack Iraq now, alone or with few allies, it would set a precedent that could come back to haunt us. In recent days, Russia has talked of an invasion of Georgia to attack Chechen rebels. India has mentioned the possibility of a pre-emptive strike on Pakistan. And what if China were to perceive a threat from Taiwan?
So Mr. President, for all its appeal, a unilateral attack, while it cannot be ruled out, on the present facts is not a good option.
Others argue that we should work through the United Nations and should only resort to force if and when the United Nations Security Council approves it. This too has great appeal for different reasons. The UN deserves our support. Whenever possible we should work through it and strengthen it, for it enables the world to share the risks and burdens of global security and when it acts, it confers a legitimacy that increases the likelihood of long-term success. The UN can help lead the world into a new era of global cooperation and the United States should support that goal.
But there are problems with this approach as well. The United Nations is an organization that is still growing and maturing. It often lacks the cohesion to enforce its own mandates. And when Security Council members use the veto, on occasion, for reasons of narrow-minded interests, it cannot act. In Kosovo, the Russians did not approve NATO military action because of political, ethnic, and religious ties to the Serbs. The United States therefore could not obtain a Security Council resolution in favor of the action necessary to stop the dislocation and ethnic cleansing of more than a million Kosovar Albanians. However, most of the world was with us because there was a genuine emergency with thousands dead and a million driven from their homes. As soon as the American-led conflict was over, Russia joined the peacekeeping effort that is still underway.
In the case of Iraq, recent comments indicate that one or two Security Council members might never approve force against Saddam Hussein until he has actually used chemical, biological, or God forbid, nuclear weapons.
So, Mr. President, the question is how do we do our best to both defuse the real threat that Saddam Hussein poses to his people, to the region, including Israel, to the United States, to the world, and at the same time, work to maximize our international support and strengthen the United Nations?
While there is no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma, and while people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposed conclusions, I believe the best course is to go to the UN for a strong resolution that scraps the 1998 restrictions on inspections and calls for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded from Iraq. I know that the Administration wants more, including an explicit authorization to use force, but we may not be able to secure that now, perhaps even later. But if we get a clear requirement for unfettered inspections, I believe the authority to use force to enforce that mandate is inherent in the original 1991 UN resolution, as President Clinton recognized when he launched Operation Desert Fox in 1998.
If we get the resolution that President Bush seeks, and if Saddam complies, disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. Regime change will, of course, take longer but we must still work for it, nurturing all reasonable forces of opposition.
If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, then we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.
If we try and fail to get a resolution that simply, but forcefully, calls for Saddam's compliance with unlimited inspections, those who oppose even that will be in an indefensible position. And, we will still have more support and legitimacy than if we insist now on a resolution that includes authorizing military action and other requirements giving some nations superficially legitimate reasons to oppose any Security Council action. They will say we never wanted a resolution at all and that we only support the United Nations when it does exactly what we want.
I believe international support and legitimacy are crucial. After shots are fired and bombs are dropped, not all consequences are predictable. While the military outcome is not in doubt, should we put troops on the ground, there is still the matter of Saddam Hussein's biological and chemical weapons. Today he has maximum incentive not to use them or give them away. If he did either, the world would demand his immediate removal. Once the battle is joined, however, with the outcome certain, he will have maximum incentive to use weapons of mass destruction and to give what he can't use to terrorists who can torment us with them long after he is gone. We cannot be paralyzed by this possibility, but we would be foolish to ignore it. And according to recent reports, the CIA agrees with this analysis. A world united in sharing the risk at least would make this occurrence less likely and more bearable and would be far more likely to share with us the considerable burden of rebuilding a secure and peaceful post-Saddam Iraq.
President Bush's speech in Cincinnati and the changes in policy that have come forth since the Administration began broaching this issue some weeks ago have made my vote easier. Even though the resolution before the Senate is not as strong as I would like in requiring the diplomatic route first and placing highest priority on a simple, clear requirement for unlimited inspections, I will take the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible.
Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely, and therefore, war less likely, and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause, I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation. If we were to defeat this resolution or pass it with only a few Democrats, I am concerned that those who want to pretend this problem will go way with delay will oppose any UN resolution calling for unrestricted inspections.
This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction.
And perhaps my decision is influenced by my eight years of experience on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue in the White House watching my husband deal with serious challenges to our nation. I want this President, or any future President, to be in the strongest possible position to lead our country in the United Nations or in war. Secondly, I want to insure that Saddam Hussein makes no mistake about our national unity and for our support for the President's efforts to wage America's war against terrorists and weapons of mass destruction. And thirdly, I want the men and women in our Armed Forces to know that if they should be called upon to act against Iraq, our country will stand resolutely behind them.
My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of pre-emption, or for uni-lateralism, or for the arrogance of American power or purpose -- all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law and for the peace and security of people throughout the world.
Over eleven years have passed since the UN called on Saddam Hussein to rid himself of weapons of mass destruction as a condition of returning to the world community. Time and time again he has frustrated and denied these conditions. This matter cannot be left hanging forever with consequences we would all live to regret. War can yet be avoided, but our responsibility to global security and to the integrity of United Nations resolutions protecting it cannot. I urge the President to spare no effort to secure a clear, unambiguous demand by the United Nations for unlimited inspections.
And finally, on another personal note, I come to this decision from the perspective of a Senator from New York who has seen all too closely the consequences of last year's terrible attacks on our nation. In balancing the risks of action versus inaction, I think New Yorkers who have gone through the fires of hell may be more attuned to the risk of not acting. I know that I am.
So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation. A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war; it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President and we say to him - use these powers wisely and as a last resort. And it is a vote that says clearly to Saddam Hussein - this is your last chance - disarm or be disarmed.
Thank you, Mr. President.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2667891
Yes, Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you Senator Clinton, for the horror of holocaust you brought upon the sovereign peoples of Iraq, the shame you brought upon the United States, and the eternal wars you have brought into being as a consequence of your actions.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)WP is a professional journalist, meaning he has sources--some of whom will be mistaken. If every professional journalist was held liable for the reliable of their sources, none of them would use sources---and then how would whistle blowers get info to the public?
It appears that the substance of the accusation is not the problem. Rather, some perceive that WP was the target of a vendetta because of his political stance during the primary. Is this accurate?
The Democratic Primary is and will always be a Food Fight. DU is command for the Food Fight. Everyone on every side will be verbally assaulted. You have to have a thick skin to post here right now. Maybe, for a professional journalist, the attacks seem dangerous. Who wants to have their career threatened because of something they do in their off hours.
FYI, I seldom go to Kos these days, because, when I criticized the way that Blue Cross Blue Shield was rolling out their ACA coverage in Tarrant Couty--signing up people with lots of chronic diseases in plans with $5000 deductibles and with no primary care providers in the area, essentially collecting their premiums without offering any care---I was attacked by folks who looked an awful lot like health insurance industry astro-turfers (if you checked their post histories) for being anti-Obama. I had my sanity called into question. I was told I was not a doctor---and then told that I should not be allowed to practice medicine. That last was an especially vicious attack given BCBS history of using its minions on the Texas State Medical Board to drive its enemies out of practice. (Here is a link to my post about the story if you missed it when it was happening http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/19/1315030/-How-BCBS-Became-Judge-Jury-and-Executioner-of-Doctors-It-Considered-Enemies-In-Texas)
My suggestion to WP---get a pseudonym that is not your professional name and come back to enjoy the Food Fight.
treestar
(82,383 posts)I don't see DU as having power that way. It's not going to make the news in some major way - what is on DU that is.
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)about an impending indictment of Karl Rove some nine or ten years ago. As far as I know, that's it. Hardly the end of the world. The hand ringing is a bit much, seems to me.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)And, speaking from first hand experience, he is superb at playing the bully you would protect him from.
Julie--remembering why I rarely come here anymore
KoKo
(84,711 posts)That should "NOT" be Silenced.
And, he has certainly been criticized enough here that people are aware that the "Voice of Truth" can often come with Personal Baggage in times in world history when No One wants to hear "Truth to Power." And, the "Truth Seekers" often are characterized as "Difficul to Deal With and "Leading Lives that are Deviant from the Norm" of whatever the "Norm Is" in a particular Time Frame in our Culture.
If Jon Stewart had said "Obama is a Used Car Salesmen" would his viewers have attacked him? No, they would have looked at the Context.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)Pitt will be back, his ego will demand it.
HFRN
(1,469 posts)Grasswire, Will Pitt is no Thomas Paine
Rex
(65,616 posts)Thanks for exposing them in your thread - you knew they would come in here and crybaby about getting caught bullying a member. Well played.
Cha
(298,077 posts)those who push back.
We're "disrupting" DU and being "crybabies" for discussing it, Rex?
Rex
(65,616 posts)Good to know.
Cha
(298,077 posts)by him are going to push back.
Not sorry we're not rolling over and leaving the OP stand as stated. How is a discussion on a discussion board "disrupting DU", anyway?
And yeah, I really didn't like having to speak out to you.. but, I disagree.
Rex
(65,616 posts)'at your best'...I would be saying the same thing to them and their little crew.
The disruption has nothing to do with Pitt and everything to do with disrupting what was a nice forum for all of a week or two.
IMO.
Cha
(298,077 posts)post anything I've ever written on DU.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7013022
Rex
(65,616 posts)And I said nothing about you defending your posts, you know what my point was and I stand by it.
Cha
(298,077 posts)you "defending" my posts.
Good for you standing by it.. I'm not trying to change your mind. I'm clarifying how I feel about it.
Edit to put "changing" to "change"..
Rex
(65,616 posts)Turned off by it. Not to get all GD-P in here.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Sleepy time.
Cha
(298,077 posts)It is not just about a 9 year old thread, I wasn't here for that. It has a lot to do with his newer ones. The 'crew' as you call us are Obama supporters for the most part, not all. Some just are appalled at a call out on this President. Yes I know silly of us to support our Democratic President. We are called a lot of names. The Crew is one, Obamabots, BOGScum, Zombies, Third way, and so many more delightful names.
It was the President being called a POSUCS that tipped people over. Pitt got some great info from people on that thread, sympathy and he kept doubling down. His thread, the apology was another double down. Oh then we had the TROGAN HORSE OP. Hey, you and all posters that rec those threads slamming this President have no clue who he is. You support Pitt before your President. I find that sad.
"....Or is he what many of us have feared he is for a while now: a Trojan Horse president, presented at the gates as a progressive gift? Once let in, however, an army of Third-Way "Democrats," multinational corporations, insurance companies, banks and Wall Street masters-of-the-universe were unleashed to wreak havoc, again...."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026687597
Obama's wish, why he ran and how he has governed...is to some people here that believe his only goal is to screw the middle class and America as a whole. Seriously?
This place, never pretty has become down right ugly. It is why I don't post here much any more. I know that will garner cheers from many here. I found a place to go. I am loving it. No trolls. No Crap. No Hate.
Thought we agreed on a few things, sadly we do not, Rex. I for one will never support William Pitt over my President. Never!
FYI...this place has not been a nice forum for a week or so, it is and will continue to be as ugly as it can get.
Night.
Rex
(65,616 posts)or agree on. I really like his reporting back in the day of the BFEE and long before you showed up. I am always perplexed when I see so many people think I am talking about them. Why do you self-indentify when I speak of a small group of concern trolls? Did I mention you by name? I would bet good money you have no idea whom I am even talking about. They are all old timers that should know better.
Seriously this isn't about Pitt, someone wanted to get together with their little group and stir shit in GD and they did. IMO.
You don't have to agree with me, nobody does. It is my opinion and shared by many as you can see and not deny.
AGAIN, why do you ALWAYS bring up Obama and someone else...is it you are so unaware of what I am talking about that you just assume bringing up Obama is the point of all this? Total nonsense imo.
Pitt can do whatever he wants to and so can you and I. I don't need anyone to tell me what they think Obama is doing or not doing...I know exactly what he is doing and if you go and LOOK you will see I do NOT agree with anything about him being a car salesman etc..
Yeah, posting here seems useless sometimes, beause people are always trying to get an angle on you and not listen to you. Ever. Boy do I hear that. We can't have a META forum because of a few people and now that GD is somewhat nice they came in here and ruined it.
And I will keep pointing it out no matter who it pisses off...they can just learn to deal with it or not.
EDIT - sorry for sounding so angry sheshe2 not directed at you. I am coming off as supporting Pitt (it must seem that way) and what I am talking about is the 9 year old thread being brought up to fuck up a good mood in GD. As far as I am concerned, two distinct issues. You don't have to bring up Obama all the time, we all know Pitts view on him and I do believe it is NOT shared by the majority of people here.
Have a great night/morning.
sheshe2
(84,072 posts)I am rushing to work. I will write you when I get home.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Just got here myself...TGIF!
grasswire
(50,130 posts)tedious at times, since most of one of those categories don't read closely before sounding off.
steve2470
(37,457 posts)Love her or hate her or otherwise, I think it's fair to say that ProSense was bullied. She got a large percentage of ad hominem responses to her posts and OP's. If you disagreed with her, that's fair. A lot of the "disagreement" was over the line, imho.
The second was nadinbrzezinski. Again, disagreement is one thing, but I saw a large percentage of ad hominems to her.
WilliamPitt has had some ad hominems thrown his way, but nothing like ProSense or nadinbrzezinski. He's had a lot of intense disagreement. FWIW, the latest OP about "24 business hours" was just dredging up the past, imho. Let sleeping dogs lie, is how I see things. YMMV.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Prosense probably got tired of this place and I think nadin just hangs in there, because she really does like this place and some of us.
IMO, this is all because GD-P is now up and running so GD is so much more civilized and polite and SOME here cannot stand it if we all get along and have objective discussions without meta-conflict that derails a thread.
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)Clearly, she was bullied here constantly. Same as a number of other outspoken DUers. Pitt was hounded as well. As long as he has been on DU, there were people he rubbed the wrong way. Some just clashed with him over issues, but many were not content with simply debating. And Will was capable of giving as good as he got. I doubt he would call himself bullied. More like challenged to fight people throwing mud. And he threw back. Ugly words get thrown about on DU all the time. The disgusting thing is that there are so many keeping score, willing to try and force others to eat their words over and over -- like cows chewing their cabbage twice. It devolves into a kabuki drama acted by pantomime honey badgers who just don't give a shit what they do or say as long as it scores points with the peanut gallery.
That said, I am going to try harder not to rise to the bait and be one of those types of people. When I get passionate and I start banging the keyboard with supersonic force, I will step away and go water the roses. I don't want to ignore people's voices. I also don't want to silence them. I don't want to run them off by being uncivil, especially the people who gave our community a voice, whose contributions too often have become fodder to burn them at the stake. Luckily for me, my words do not "fork such lightning" as Dylan Thomas would say. Even so, this will not stop me speaking my mind.
Rex
(65,616 posts)I find myself neck deep in this shit and thinking just why did I let myself get goaded into these meta flamefests? Going to step back and stop wasting so much time on it, far more important issues and far better people to be talking to on DU than circle jerking because someone has a sadz about us all playing nice together.
Great post, I love the way you wrote it and could not agree more. Thanks for the reply, some of that has been on my mind these last few days and your words have pretty much convinced me.
"We can catch buses and count our change and cross the roads and talk real sentences. But our innocence goes awfully deep, and our discreditable secret is that we don't know anything at all, and our horrid inner secret is that we don't care that we don't." - DT
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)I agree about the other. I won't say any more than that.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Will, not so much. I do agree, however, that the old stuff needs to die and we need to move on.
AllFieldsRequired
(489 posts)are busy doing
http://www.reproductiverights.org/press-room/us-house-attacks-womens-health-and-rights-passes-unconstitutional-federal-abortion-ban
as well as the sick and twisted attack on Planned Parenthood
and
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/11/3276281/lcv-scorecard-2013-house-republicans/
I could go on, and I will.
They are also very busy with
http://billmoyers.com/2015/03/06/50-years-bloody-sunday-voting-rights-attack/
Jesus people, FOCUS...your LIFE depends on it. Your wife's life, your sister's life, etc.
Rex
(65,616 posts)you will notice which people are in THOSE threads you are discussing and which ones are ONLY in meta-disruptive threads.
AllFieldsRequired
(489 posts)Excellent point and observation.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Notice the ones that only do disruptive meta in GD and the ones that discuss the issues you bring up. They are both two very different and noticeable groups of people.
Also, this is another reason we have such a hard time talking about topics such as White Privilege and Rape Culture...too many here want to turn those threads into meta-battles of words.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)He is no exception.
harris8
(179 posts)Did it a long time ago. He doesn't bully me.
Left coast liberal
(1,138 posts)Will is iconic. WTF?
KauaiK
(544 posts)Highly recommended.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)zabet
(6,793 posts)here for a long time. I guess you have to be one of DU's golden ones for the troops to come out and defend you.....instead of taking pitchfork in hand and joining the angry mob like I have seen so so many times
villager
(26,001 posts)The swarming, the bullying posts, the abuse of the alert system... all of hiding (or not) in plain sight...
Some "underground," when your behavior emulates the worst of what the "overground" has to offer, eh?
BainsBane
(53,137 posts)post in a protected group. That is what they are for.
Cha
(298,077 posts)to himself.
theboss
(10,491 posts)If you'd dare criticize his writing, he struck back personally and had his little band of defenders - including his mom, I might add - go after you with a vengeance.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Democrats don't care what anybody says, they're smart enough to know right from wrong.
That's why they are Democrats.
Pathwalker
(6,600 posts)the idea of Will Pitt being the VICTIM of bullies is a joke, plain and simple. A man who threatens to beat a woman's face OFF, then beat her to death with his bare hands is not the victim of bullying, but the bully. But, hey, at least he didn't do or say something like vote for a war, so he's still a hero, right? Threaten to kill someone - okay. Vote for war - kill em.
No, I'm not a member of any of those groups you all like to call manes, I'm just a DUer who's spent the last 2 months in an ACTUAL life vs. death struggle to really care all all that much about this latest drama with Will. I've actually been the receiving end of his nastiness, so I'm not one of his cheerleaders. But, do carry on, continue acting like this actually matters, until death starts knocking on the door. That's when priorities really change.
Sheesh!