It's my opinion (and since you read my diary, you cared enough!) that the following statements do not mean, stand for, or constitute "STFU", 'Get In Line', or 'Hippie-Punching', and that referring to said statements as such are examples of fallacious logic known as 'straw man':
Description of Straw Man
The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:
Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.
Examples of Straw Man
Prof. Jones: "The university just cut our yearly budget by $10,000."
Prof. Smith: "What are we going to do?"
Prof. Brown: "I think we should eliminate one of the teaching assistant positions. That would take care of it."
Prof. Jones: "We could reduce our scheduled raises instead."
Prof. Brown: " I can't understand why you want to bleed us dry like that, Jones."
"Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can't understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that."
Bill and Jill are arguing about cleaning out their closets:
Jill: "We should clean out the closets. They are getting a bit messy."
Bill: "Why, we just went through those closets last year. Do we have to clean them out everyday?"
Jill: "I never said anything about cleaning them out every day. You just want too keep all your junk forever, which is just ridiculous."
source
These statements that are NOT the above '"STFU", 'Get In Line', or 'Hippie-Punching',' include:
'On ELECTION day, you have a black or white choice. Because our laws don't require a minimum vote count or % to win (as long as it's more than the other candidate), not voting helps the opponent of the Party you profess to be a member of.'
'
Constant, excessive negativity will not help get out the vote.'
'The best way forward is to nominate better Democrats and primary the worst ones, keeping in mind the current balances of power in Congress.'
'This is a reality-based site and what you're claiming is the case does not have ample evidence to support it.'
'Social and civil rights issues are very important and focusing on those is not wrong or less-progressive than focusing on others.'
'It's unlikely that in a national nomination election, Elizabeth Warren would defeat Hillary Clinton. There is statistically-significant polling and historical trends that support this.'
'Currently, I do not believe there is a grand, coordinated, secret-society conspiracy taking place.'
'Per voting trends, it's possible that the most progressive candidate possible in this district will not win the general election, even with a superior turnout from registered Democratic voters.'
'This is a site founded on and for electing Democrats.'
'No progress will be made if Republicans are in power.'
Can you think of more that are commonly twisted into something they don't mean or say? Leave it in the comments and I will add as I can.