I was new to the site and was interested for a time. I was interested in news that I could not get on television. Now that I know more about the founder and the environment he seeks to create, and know that I can get the same information at a host of other progressive sites, I'm no longer interested in the website.
Daily Kos is like a brand of deodorant, a brand of toothpaste, or a brand of spaghetti sauce. I took it home, tried it out, and wasn't satisfied with it. I won't buy it again.
So many posters there say its just the primary season, and things will be better later. No. Not true. Its not the primary season, its the founder of the site, and the views expressed therein. I don't like the Daily Kos product, and won't buy it after the primary season is over.
Its just too bad that I'll miss diarists like BiPM, Meteor Blades, etc. But its not their site. Its not their brand. Its Markos'. And I don't like that brand.
You and others chased people like me away from Daily Kos and over to MyDD. Unfortunately, when you ran out of Clinton supporters to trash over there at Daily Kos, you decided to follow them all the way over here to continue trolling them.
You aren't into discussion. You're not a progressive. You're not a Democrat. You get satisfaction by trolling Clinton supporters. That's it. You're a Clinton bashing troll who chases Hillary supporters all over the internet.
I don't believe in censorship, but I think it might not be a bad idea to ban anyone considered to be at MyDD simply to continue trolling former members of Daily Kos. You can start with Bob, work your way over to Zonk or whatever his/her name is, and go from there.
Simply check their post history. If all they do here is harass Hillary supporters who used to post at Daily Kos, ban them!!!
Frank Luntz on MSNBC in person the way he's attacked me and millions of other Democrats on his website, simply for being Hillary supporters.
With Frank Luntz on MSNBC, its basically:
<blockquote>Frank and I may disagree on this, but I think we can agree on that, and also my book, blah, blah, blah.</blockquote>
But when discussing Democratic voters on his website, he calls us whatever names he called us in the above-quotes. Whatever, tough guy. Way to play nice with Republicans and maul Democrats. Anything to sell the 50 state strategy and some books.
When I saw him on round table discussions on MSNBC and other news outlets, and noted how differently he acts in person than when posting on the website in which he is the well-respected founder.
In person, he's calm, respectful, and open to discussion and debate. On his website, he's a tough talking, my way or the highway, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out if you don't agree with me kinda prick.
Other than quotes, what's wrong? I'm not sure if I got Markos' last name in the tags right, but forgot to go back and double-check. Anything else? (Keeping in mind that I'm not looking to be a journalist?)
It seems that Daily Kos members go out of their way to faun all over, protect, defend, and basically kiss the ass of Markos. It further appears that he digs that a lot.
It reminds me of when I was one of the founders of a small local sports message board. We only had a couple hundred members, it certainly wasn't as big as Kos, but the trend was the same. People would kiss my ass the way they kiss Kos' ass. They would attack anyone who would dare challenge anything I said or did. They would blindly support the founder of the site, and call anyone who didn't agree with me on any issue a troll.
However, instead of being pleased by it, I lost respect for the asskissers, and gained respect for those who challenged me, as long as they did so with respect and armed with knowledge.
From being a member of Daily Kos, I get the sense that Kos treats it differently. I get the sense he likes having his army of minions to blindly support him and whatever he says/does. That he is cultivating the mob mentality that has taken over that place. What some people have called the Lord of the Flies syndrome or whatever.
You read his posts, including his response to the so-called writers' strike, and you get the sense that he REALLY enjoys the "us vs. them" of it all on the one hand, while claiming to espouse a 50 state strategy of inclusion on the other hand.
Which is it, Kos? Do you want all Democrats in all 50 states to join together, or do you want all Hillary supporters in all 50 states to STFU, go away, and don't let the door hit us on the way out? Much like Barack Obama, people will only let you get away with having it both ways for so long. Sooner or later, people are going to question your claims of inclusion while personally excluding nearly 50% of Democrats.
for some reason Obama supporters blindly see him as above it all.
Its like the battered spouse. Slick politicians like - - - oh lets say Bill Clinton for the sake of argument - - - tell them what they want to hear, they fall all over themselves to vote for him, they get beat up with the truth (NAFTA), and then when another slick politician in Barack Obama comes around, do they learn their lesson? No, they say "you don't understand. Bill was a jerk, but THIS guy is DIFFERENT. This guy really loves me for who I am, and not just for my vote. Our love is real. You're just jealous", etc.
And then they act surprised when they find out that Obama is no more or less an ambitious politician than Bill Clinton was.
People really think Hillary is in it for herself, while Obama is in it for America. What a fucking joke. Obama wants money, fame, and power every bit as much as George W. Bush. So does Hillary, but at least people understand that.
politician who used Rev. Wright to gain mojo in the black community in South Chicago, and move on...
or would that make him look less like the first politician ever to not be ambitious (yeah, right), and more like Hillary, who his supporters tell us, unlike Obama, "would do anything to win, destroy the party, stay with a cheating husband, lie, etc."
Does anyone truly believe that Barack Obama "saw the light" and accepted Christ as his savior at the EXACT SAME TIME the lifelong athiest, who was raised by athiests, was trying to break into local politics in South Chicago, and that it WASN'T just blind political ambition that made "the light" of Jesus look so bright to him at the time?
Does anyone TRULY believe that he aligned himself with Rev. Wright because the Rev inspired him, and not because the Rev would help him break into local politics? If so, I've got a bridge for sale.