GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

Earlier today I wrote what I thought was a thoughtful diary about whether, as an Obama supporter, I should continue to comment or post diaries here. It was up for about 15 minutes, and then the management here issued me a warning and deleted my diary. Deleted my diary, which didn't attack a soul, had no profanity, which didn't make inflammatory statements. This while they left up the dreck that's presently in the rec list.

Well I have my answer. Obama supporters aren't welcome here. Thank you management for pointing that out.

I do hope that in a few weeks we will all be able to come together to help Sen. Obama defeat Sen. McCain in the general election. Until that time, I've determined this site is for Clinton supporters only, and not interested in dissenting opinions. More's the pity.

I didn't expect to make this decision, or to have it made so clear to me. I had hoped that others here would help me understand why it was a good idea to stay. The last thing I expected was for the management here to answer my question with a resounding, "Yes. I'm a Clinton supporter and you should leave." Well, at the least I am grateful for the time this frees up. To Obama supporters here, you'll need to make your own call. To the Clinton supporters, good luck. I mean that. You have some major adjustments in your near future, and I hope you come out the other side healthy.

I expect this new diary may get me banned, and it will probably be up less time than the previous one, but I just wanted to say goodbye. Anyone looking for me can find me with a quick google search.

Peace.

Travis Stark

Tags: 2008, Democrat, Election, MyDD, Primary (all tags)

Comments

44 Comments

Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

Calling out individual users in diaries is against the guidelines.

by souvarine 2008-04-01 05:41AM | 0 recs
I should have specified

First, I called out two diaries.

Second, my warning was for writing a "silly diary about MyDD".

by Travis Stark 2008-04-01 05:45AM | 0 recs
Re: I should have specified

yeah I thought the comment I made would get me banned or what not.

it's definitely not even here.

unfortuntely I still haven't found where the rational Hillary supporters post.

MyDD
Hillaryis44
TaylorMarsh.com

if this is the standard of Hillary supporters....wow

by TruthMatters 2008-04-01 05:50AM | 0 recs
Re: I should have specified

And yet all those sites display much better intellectual quality and a more enjoyable discussion than does the DailyKos.

Thank God for MyDD!

by DemAC 2008-04-01 06:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Yes, Thanks!

Travis Stark's diary was deleted for comparing MyDD to a hazardous waste site filled with "tripe diaries", "freeper tripe" and "hate dreck."

by KnowVox 2008-04-01 07:52AM | 0 recs
I don't think you should go

I'm supporting HRC, but we're just political fanatics on all stripes here and sometimes the rhetoric gets hot and heavy.

WE NEED a place to joust so we can thoroughly vett both of these candidates before the convention.

BTW, Nancy Pelosi has reversed herself and says the process should go on, see  

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080401/ap_o n_el_pr/pelosi_democrats

by katmandu1 2008-04-01 05:43AM | 0 recs
Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

same thing happened to me btw

by wasder 2008-04-01 05:43AM | 0 recs
Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

I wrote my first diary last night, pushing diplomatically for the beginning of a reconciliation.  The Clinton support is pretty hard-line here, but I found that, when pressed, many people were willing to have honest dialogue.  I think that commenting here is, for some, a way to get out frustrations at what they see as the unbelievable fact that their candidate is slipping.  

But I have a great deal of faith in the eventual willingness of good people to come together around the Democratic nominee, whoever she or he might be.  

by Bargeron 2008-04-01 05:45AM | 0 recs
Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

yeah apparently you can't say anyone names specicailly you have to use derogatory terms like "obamabot" or "kool-aid drinkers" then its ok.

because you are talking about a subset of posters that don't actually matter.

by TruthMatters 2008-04-01 05:47AM | 0 recs
Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

From this Hillary supporter -- you're welcome to stay as long as you discuss issues, keep an open mind, and not disrespect fellow diarists.

by pan230oh 2008-04-01 05:56AM | 0 recs
That's ridiculous.

Universal called me out in an update to the body of one of his tripe diaries, and told people to trollrate me. That diary is still there, and it's by no means long ago - a week, maybe.

Obama supporters shouldn't turn their backs on this site despite what could very well be a double standard. This because the freeper tripe that makes it to the rec list here n a daily basis at least needs to be commented on. And as we've seen in many instances, diaries that say positive stuff about the Democratic frontrunner actually can make the list, and provide some healthy counter-balance to the hate dreck.

by MBNYC 2008-04-01 05:56AM | 0 recs
Re: That's ridiculous.

eh, I use to think it was just about getting information out there, but no.

their minds are sent, if you post something that paints Obama in a good like, you are biased and can't be trusted and your facts are flat out wrong.

if you post anything that paints Obama in a bad light, it will get rec's and huge amount of comments.

probably just best to ignore MyDD untill 2 of so weeks after Hillary officially drops out. let them get all their venom out.

by TruthMatters 2008-04-01 06:01AM | 0 recs
I just checked

and the priceless gem, For Obamabots, Why She Won't Quit is still up there, unmolested.

I would infer from that that "Obamabots" is considered acceptable discourse.

by MBNYC 2008-04-01 06:05AM | 0 recs
Re: That's ridiculous.

"tripe diaries", "freeper tripe" and "hate dreck"???

That's the MyDD community to you? And you wonder why you get troll rated?

by DemAC 2008-04-01 06:14AM | 0 recs
Exactly, this guy is a dkos import.

by mnicholson0220 2008-04-01 06:29AM | 0 recs
Re: That's ridiculous.

I like both Obama and HRC and am very pleased that the party has had a lot of great primary candidates running this year. I even came to like Kucinich.

I like detailed, reasonably even-handed but tough discussions about, say, what's wrong with Obama's work as a senator, or what's wrong with HRC's work as a senator.

I think it's very reasonable that people post calm analyses of why different things that the candidates or their supporters are doing that might seem to be racist, sexist, etc.

But what I find off-putting are diarists that, for example, go on Daily Kos to accuse HRC of being completely unprincipled, of whistling a dog whistle every three seconds, etc.

Maybe the HRC supporters are simply over-reacting to that kind of HRC bashing (I just started trying this site a few days ago; I don't know whether HRC bashing came first or Obama bashing came first), but, regardless, it seems as if I'm clicking on plenty of diaries about how Obama has never done anything whatsoever in his life and whistles a dog whistle every three seconds.

If you're an experienced user here, you might find it easy to find the diariest that focus on actual facts, or first-hand observations, or delightful gossip, but I find that I see a lot of acid.

by sclminc 2008-04-01 06:31AM | 0 recs
Re: That's ridiculous.

well I have been here for a few weeks now, and even then it was like that.

pretty sure this was always a pro-clinton site.

by TruthMatters 2008-04-01 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: That's ridiculous.

But was it an over-the-top anti-Obama site?

I'm not objecting to supporting HRC or criticizing Obama, just the level of hostility.

by sclminc 2008-04-01 07:32AM | 0 recs
Ironic.

Compare my sig line to yours, and it's pretty clear who's in a position to make those remarks. I'm not the one who tears down Democrats automatically every time I post a comment, my friend.

by MBNYC 2008-04-01 06:34AM | 0 recs
Facts

You might not like what you find at RezkoWatch as it is an extensive collection of facts and links to news stories from various media outlets about your candidate, mostly from the mainstream media.

But that you think these facts and news stories "tears down Democrats automatically" says a lot, and does not exactly inspire confidence in your candidate.

When facts are considered negative campaigning - then you know there is trouble ahead.

by DemAC 2008-04-01 08:03AM | 0 recs
*sigh*
And what could be more natural a response then a troll rate abuse from Obama supporter Shiloh.
Isn't that just swell...
by DemAC 2008-04-01 08:13AM | 0 recs
Oh, of course.

I'm sure there is, in your mind at least, nothing wrong with promoting the newest Whitewater story. After all, it's all for a good cause, right?

Eh. I wonder why I even bother anymore.

by MBNYC 2008-04-01 08:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, of course.

Feel free to promote whatever Whitewater facts you wish. It will not hurt any Democrat.

by DemAC 2008-04-01 09:09AM | 0 recs
Indeed.

Which is why it's so astounding that you're the one peddling it. Rezko has about as much substance as Whitewater did.

But you already know that.

by MBNYC 2008-04-01 10:12AM | 0 recs
Your logic is utterly flawed.

Either there is nothing to Rezko, like there is nothing to Whitewater, in which case neither of it can hurt anyone. In that case your statements that it "tears down Democrats" and that it is "astounding that you're the one peddling it" would be hypocritical and patently false.

In reality however, Rezko is nothing like Whitewater; with Rezko there is plenty of "there" there. This is absolutely not good for Barack Obama and, then again, this is one of the things that make him a decidedly inferior candidate to Hillary Clinton in the upcoming elections. And thus it is for obvious reasons necessary to examine it and discuss it publicly.

I fully understand that you and your candidate don't like the facts of Rezko to become widely known. That however does not make it any less legitimate or any less interesting to pursue the truth in these matters.

by DemAC 2008-04-01 10:50AM | 0 recs
My logic isn't the problem.

Either there is nothing to Rezko, like there is nothing to Whitewater, in which case neither of it can hurt anyone.

Because Whitewater had no impact on the Clinton Presidency, I suppose? On what planet?

If there were a there there, the Clinton campaign would have already published it. These are the same people that tried to hang him with a kindergarten essay. But since there is no there there, we get, as from you, a constant stream of insinuations that there might be a there. I'd say that speaks for itself, but then again, I'm a kool-aid drinker, or whatever the preferred term of dehumanizing derision is these days.

by MBNYC 2008-04-01 11:20AM | 0 recs
True. Your hypocrisy, rather, is the problem.

Oh, play the victim card all you like, it's only befitting of an Obama supporter anyway. Hillary's campaign have played incredibly nice this entire campaign. She has never pushed Rezko, save that one single remark in a debate when Obama tried to smear her with Wal-Mart. She has never pushed Rev. Wright. In fact she has never pushed anything. So don't you try to hide Obama's ugly Chicago history behind her great and very decently run campaign.

If exploring and debating Rezko has an impact on Obama's chances of being President - all the better.

by DemAC 2008-04-01 11:36AM | 0 recs
Haha!

She has never pushed Rev. Wright

TPM: Ickes: Wright Is Key Topic In Discussions With Super-Delegates

TPM: Hillary: Wright "Would Not Have Been My Pastor"

In fact she has never pushed anything.

TPM, again: Clinton's New Strategy: Telling Late-Voting States Obama Wants Race to End

Sorry to burst your bubble, friend. But I expect you'll master that bit of cognitive dissonance, too, right?

Come on, you know you can.

by MBNYC 2008-04-01 12:47PM | 0 recs
Pushing...

The idea to use links from Obama's Talking Points Memo to illustrate Hillary's campaign is... well... Hillaryous. But, then again, that's how the media situation in general looks like for the most part.

Anyway, Hillary answered a straight up question from a journalist on Rev. Wright. No pushing whatsoever. Nothing.

That Ickes now is using Rev. Wright as an argument on the SDs I honestly didn't know, but that's of course excellent news. And if you want to call that pushing - OK, fine with me. I was more thinking "pushing" as along the lines of making a big media splash out of it, but never mind. I'm not all Presidential and gentle like Hillary and I've implored them to use Obama's liabilities against him.

Point in case: see, it does pay off to dig up the truth. For the country, for the party and for the voters. And it doesn't hurt Democrats. It hurts only one very specific Democrat who brought it all on himself.

by DemAC 2008-04-01 02:10PM | 0 recs
Okay.

So now that we've established that you weren't telling the truth, we've further established that you go one step further and don't even care about the truth at all.

Which is entirely in line with your candidate demanding that all 50 states vote and then turning around and saying the results of that vote won't influence whether or not she tries to get the nomination via super-delegates.

See, that's what got you folks to this point, where you basically don't have a chance, in the first place. People understand that none of the statements made by your campaign ever need to be taken seriously, because you'll say what you feel is advantageous - cf. Tuzla.

Problem is, we've seen that from Bush, we already saw it from Bill and Hill, and people are tired of it. There's a hunger for honesty in America. As evidenced, say, by the fact that Hillary won't be the nominee and will never be President.

Cheers, mate.

by MBNYC 2008-04-01 03:25PM | 0 recs
Certainly not

We've of course established nothing of the sort. We've however established that if the truth hurts Obama, heck yeah, I'm all for using that truth to the advantage of country and party.

That the primary system includes delegates chosen in primaries and caucuses as well as SDs is extremely well know to everyone here and to both campaigns, and as neither candidate can win with one "type" of delegate alone, I actually don't understand why you bring this up at all. If it's about disenfranchising FL and MI, well, I'm against it. Obviously.

Not only does Hillary have a chance, she has in fact a very good chance. Regardless of the final outcome it will be a very exiting but also challenging journey to Denver where, finally, this will be decided.

I agree that there is a hunger for honesty in America. Which kind of puts you in the hot spot since this incredibly long discussion started with you wanting me not to link to a site containing extensive and credibly sourced news material regarding Barack Obama with a particular focus on his history in Chicago; a history not well known by a public thirsty for truth.

I challenge you to find one single lie at RezkoWatch. I maintain that there can only be found hundreds of links to news material and also some hard truths. And if that truth hurts an untruthful Democrat - then so be it.

In Denver we will all be better off for it.

by DemAC 2008-04-01 03:44PM | 0 recs
If you can't say something nice

about someone, don't say anything at all. I praise people I like and admire and ignore those I don't. How about everyone practicing old-fashioned good manners?

by ellend818 2008-04-01 06:08AM | 0 recs
Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

I'd like to know what constitutes "attacking or bashing" users.  The guidelines say nothing about referencing other people's diaries as "hateful" or "negative".  Simply saying someone's diary is wrong or inflammatory, I would not consider "attacking" or "bashing".  To the Administrators, is that bashing?

by minvis 2008-04-01 06:12AM | 0 recs
Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

Go over to http://www.dailykos.com

It is where all teh cool kids hang out.

by Andre X 2008-04-01 06:13AM | 0 recs
Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

by Andre X 2008-04-01 06:13AM | 0 recs
If yours was "Depressed" ...

well it's pretty clear in the rules that you're not supposed to attack other members by name, and your Tags were just a list of people you were attacking.  

As so many Obama people are fond of saying, but then ignoring if it doesn't fit their immediate purpose, "rules are rules".

This site carries plenty of pro-Obama and anti-Hillary diaries, and the membership are for the most part very civil in their treatment of dissenting views.   Not many troll and hide ratings.

by mnicholson0220 2008-04-01 06:25AM | 0 recs
Re: If yours was "Depressed" ...

I really am leaving, but I wanted to clear this up.

My diary was not "Depressed", and the only sense in which I called out others was to say that in the rec list now was "diaryA by diaristA, and diaryB by diaristB". It was not deleted for calling out others it was deleted for criticizing MyDD.

My diary was entitled (I think), "Is MyDD worth it?". BTW, if anyone has a copy please let me know. I really did work a long time on it and, of course, all of that is gone. Google didn't get a chance to cache it.

Anyway, I really am out of here, but I didn't want to sow or support this confusion that my diary was deleted for "calling people out". It wasn't. It was deleted for having the audacity to compare MyDD to a hazardous waste site as a metaphor, and to look at the various options one has in hazmat cleanup.

Later all.

by Travis Stark 2008-04-01 06:34AM | 0 recs
Ok, sounds pretty fetid. But, really,

take it to dkos and you will feel the love.  They dig that kind of metaphor over there.  

by mnicholson0220 2008-04-01 06:44AM | 0 recs
Re: If yours was "Depressed" ...

yeah i have it.

by TruthMatters 2008-04-01 06:52AM | 0 recs
Re: If yours was "Depressed" ...

the diary? If so please email to travisstark01@gmail.com.

Thanks. Hope to see you around.

by Travis Stark 2008-04-01 06:59AM | 0 recs
Re: If yours was "Depressed" ...

sent

by TruthMatters 2008-04-01 07:14AM | 0 recs
Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

What seems to be happening here is that if you write inflammatory stuff about either candidate (and you can find it easily about either) it stays and finds its way up the rec list. If you write and ask that people take a little responsibility for the site and ask that the mods guide it towards thoughtful dialogue you get called out.

by wasder 2008-04-01 07:25AM | 0 recs
Is this an April Fools joke?

I hope not.

As one of the most fervent Obama supporters you have done a pretty decent job of sanitizing DailyKos.  Clinton supporters have been chased away and you have the orange site to yourselves now.

As Markos said, it's a big Internet out there.  I'm sure you will find another site where you can enjoy some good old fashioned Clinton bashing.

by Radiowalla 2008-04-01 08:14AM | 0 recs
Re: GBCW from this Obama supporter - for now.

Radio---the point is not to retreat to echo chamber sites but to have a site where intelligent arguments can be made and enjoyed and even fought over without right wing talking points (Rezko watch etc) being brought into the mix. MyDD has been that kind of place and a lot of us here who support Obama are trying to foster that kind of vibe here. I don't want to go to DK.

by wasder 2008-04-01 09:10AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads