DU for Liberals only?

[SouthernDem2004]

Just curious because someone just stated that when I said I was a Moderate Democrat. I did not start readin DU until about 6 months prior to the last election. Is this site solely for Liberals or Progressives?

[redqueen]

1. No, it's for Democrats... all varieties.

:hi:

[HEIL PRESIDENT GOD]

12. Shouldn't that be "Democratic Voters"?

I don't consider myself rich enough to be called a Democrat.

[redqueen]

17. Huh? I don't get what you mean.

Many Democrats are very poor... so... :shrug:

[HEIL PRESIDENT GOD]

22. What I mean is

Democrats are people like Howard Dean, John Kerry, and Al Gore, not people like me. I will never agree with their platforms or even quite understand how they come to say and believe what they do. They are as likely to sign a law that gets me shot by a cop as they are to sign one that actually improves my living conditions. I vote for them because I think they are not actually trying to hurt me, the way the other side is. But I do not feel I am one of them. I think you have to own a home or have a kid, or something, before you even start to comprehend the set of positions that any politician takes.

[redqueen]

26. We disagree...

IMO Democrats are people who vote for or support the Democratic party.

That's it.

[HEIL PRESIDENT GOD]

29. But I won't identify with the party.

I want to keep these Democrats in line! I am open to a third party, so long as it has a fighting chance and a strong leader and good strategy (which rules out Green for me on all counts). I think it's more likely to be a fourth party, after the Fascist and Libertarian coalition called "Republican" breaks in half.

I don't like seeing this country in two. Not because I want it to be one, but because I need it to be more than two.

[redqueen]

34. On that I completely agree... I'll still identify with the party

because at the current time, and with the system we have now, it's the best thing we've got going.

However at state and local levels, I'm all for voting Green.

Until we get electoral reform (audit trail for ballots, receipts for voters, proportional representation, public funding of campaigns, etc.), the Democrats are our best voice at the federal level. IMO, of course. :)

[wildeyed]

78. I'm a democrat, but I would love to see 3rd, 4th and on and on parties

active and in the system. I believe that the only way to get a viable alternative to this two party system is same-day voter registration and instant runoff voting (or something similar). 3rd parties can't win under the current system. To vote for them simply diverts your vote to the opposition. But with a better system, we can get 3rd parties elected, hold all politicians to a higher standard and improve cooperation between the parties.

I am working hard in NC to get same-day registration before 2008. I think it could really make a difference.

[Sapphire Blue]

71. Did you see the "Pew Research Center - what type are you?" thread

... from yesterday?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3635270

I completed the survey (http://typology.people-press.org/typology/) and came up not as a 'Liberal', but as 'Disadvantaged Democrat'. On typical political surveys, I usually register somewhere in the Liberal/Socialist area. This being PEW Research, the categories were not typical...

ENTERPRISERS

SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES

PRO-GOVERNMENT CONSERVATIVES

UPBEATS

DISAFFECTEDS

LIBERALS

CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS

DISADVANTAGED DEMOCRATS

BYSTANDERS

You can find the profiles of the Typology groups @ http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=949#disadvantageddems

Anyway, I can identify with your comment, "not people like me"... which may be why I ended up as a 'Disadvantaged Democrat' on the PEW survey.

[HEIL PRESIDENT GOD]

75. Hmmm....

I come out straight-up Liberal, something I never imagined I was. The problem with this survey is that all the questions are based on things politicians talk about. Most of my political opinions center on things they aren't talking about, and that's my problem with saying I belong to the party.

[Sapphire Blue]

84. I just did it again & came up with 'Disadvantaged Dem' again

I had a problem with the questions, such as...

Government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest < > Government regulation of business usually does more harm than good

A decent government's regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest, IMO. However the current government's regulation of business definitely does more harm to the public and benefits only the corporations.

Then there's the question...

Most people who want to get ahead can make it if they're willing to work hard < > Hard work and determination are no guarantee of success for most people

IMO, "Most people who want to get ahead can make it if they're willing to work hard" is nothing more than a fairy tale today.

There were also a couple of 'immigrant' questions that seem to want to place the country's economic woes on immigrants' backs, rather than addressing Corporate America's abuse of immigrants, which results in all the trickle-down problems (the trickle-down theory seems to work well in this regard). Well, it's PEW research, after all. Many of the questions were worded problematically.

Me, a 'Disadvantaged Democrat'? The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind.

[HEIL PRESIDENT GOD]

86. I thought perhaps "Liberal" stuck to me b/c

I'm highly educated, but I ran it again with the same answers and a h.s. diploma only. Same thing.

The funny thing is that the same questions were bothering me for the same reasons as you!

Here are the questions I would add:

I think the war on drugs is at root of many of America's current social problems and should be ended immediately. <> I think that the drug problem in this country will be out of control if the government condones it.

I would be comfortable and honored having the last three presidential candidates I voted for visit me at my house. <> I would be nervous and unwelcoming if the last three presidential candidates I voted for showed up at my house.

[Zodiak]

87. Ohhh...love the survey. Description of "liberal" very useful

Thanks for this link. I have taken many of these surveys before, using the results of http://www.politicalcompass.org/ as my basic description of ideology. That particlar survey says that I am somewhere between Ghandi and the Dhali Lama.....REALLY freaky liberal!

This survey says that I am a regular run-of-the-mill liberal, which coincides a lot with my self-image. As much as I love my fellow libs, there are a couple of important issues in which I fundamentally disagree (issues dealing with loss of personal freedom in the interest of public safety, militant secularism, and political correctness).

[Sapphire Blue]

88. If I remember, I was left of the Dalai Lama, Gandhi, and Mandela

... and a little south (?) of the Dalai Lama on that one... very leftist / Libertarian leaning.

In this particular survey, 'Disadvantaged Democrat' fits me in that the answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind... the answer is blowin' in the wind... and we shall overcome someday.

[spooky3]

90. another similar thread, from Tuesday (link inside):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1774945

[paineinthearse]

23. How do you feel about DINO's? Or the Zell Miller branch? nt

[redqueen]

27. hahahahaa... well they clue there is "INO"

There are lots of Southern Democrats I don't really think support my views, and starting this year I'll start voting green rather than vote for them.

[Richard Steele]

30. The name DINO says it all.

Anyone who is working to further the aims of the current Repub party is NOT a Democrat, and shouldn't be posting here.

As a metaphor:
Putting on a dress would NOT give Zell the right to hang out in the 'Ladies Room' all day.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. Not as far as I know.

Lotta moderates 'round these parts. Just blow that stuff off.

[Darkhawk32]

3. Of course not. For me personally... anyone is welcome except....

those nasty Freepers :P.

Also, have a take, come strong and don't suck. ;)

[PKG]

You're fine

Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office.

You're a Democrat, and progressive is pretty broad. As long as your ideals are closer to the Dems than to the Repubs, you're fine.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PKG]

13. When did I say that?

I don't know where you're getting that from.

[Bouncy Ball]

63. He's getting that from someone else's posts.

[Ripley]

73. She.

Minor error. Thanks for following up on my posts for me. :dunce:

[Bouncy Ball]

77. Sorry, she!

Mea culpa!

[dogday]

4. What is it with this Liberal Label?

What exactly is a liberal?

[SouthernDem2004]

9. Good question. /eom

[SlavesandBulldozers]

85. i think"liberal", as defined by the corporate media, means

"somebody who doesn't believe our spoonfed bullshit".

[mmonk]

5. May I check your credentials?

;)

[Lex]

6. From the DU Rules page:

"1. Who We Are: Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office. Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates."

[Walt Starr]

7. From the rules

"Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office.

We ban conservative disruptors who are opposed to the broad goals of this website. If you think overall that George W. Bush is doing a swell job, or if you wish to see Republicans win, or if you are generally supportive of conservative ideals, please do not register to post, as you will likely be banned.

People who repeatedly and willfully break the rules, or who generally engage in rude, anti-social behavior, will be banned. It doesn't matter if you are a fellow progressive, a long-term member of this community, or a donor.

If you have been banned from Democratic Underground, you are not permitted to log on again using a different username. Previously banned members will be immediately banned, regardless of behavior."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html

If you are moderate, you still generally support the progressive ideals, so this is the place for you.

I consider myself moderate because I am pro second amendment and support the death penalty, but am progressive on most other issues.

[DTinAZ]

36. "pro-gun," not "pro second amendment"

I can't let that one slide by unchallenged. It's a bit like the falsehood of equating "pro abortion" with "pro choice."

The second amendment, when viewed in proper historical context, was a "bone" thrown to the anti-federalists at the time of the ratification of the US Constitution, who were concerned about the power of a federalized military. It was to ensure that armed state militias would be allowed. It was NOT written to ensure that random individuals could have whatever weaponry they desired. The "well regulated Militia" described in the amendment is now the National Guard, not Joe Sixpack with an AK-47.

(Edit: typos fixed)

[Walt Starr]

37. I support ALL of the Bill of Rights

I'm not a Cafeteria American.

[DTinAZ]

38. huh?

"Cafeteria American"? -- non sequitur. I support the true meaning of the wording of the Second Amendment, which is not "pro gun," but which actually provides for an armed National Guard. My point is that perhaps you're actually a "pro-gun Democrat" as opposed to a "pro second amendment Democrat."

[Sawyer]

46. Well known linguists

disagree with your interpretation of the wording of the Second Amendment.

http://www.saf.org/journal/4_Schulman.html

[Walt Starr]

53. Thank you n/t

[Walt Starr]

54. Thank you n/t

[DTinAZ]

57. consider the source

Your link is to an obviously biased website. The wording of the amendment was apparently clear to its writers, but apparently not clear enough to keep latter-day gun nuts from misusing it. I don't have time for an extended "link exchange" but here's the Findlaw page on the issue:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment02/

[Sawyer]

59. The site may be biased,

but the expert whom they quote is genuine:

" Roy Copperud was a newspaper writer on major dailies for over three decades before embarking on a distinguished seventeen-year career teaching journalism at USC. Since 1952, Copperud has been writing a column dealing with the professional aspects of journalism for Editor and Publisher, a weekly magazine focusing on the journalism field.

He's on the usage panel of the American Heritage Dictionary, and Merriam Webster's Usage Dictionary frequently cites him as an expert. Copperud's fifth book on usage, American Usage and Style: The Consensus, has been in continuous print since 1981, and is the winner of the Association of American Publisher's Humanities Award. "

Do you think this guy would be a reasonable expert to ask on the meaning of an English sentence?

[DTinAZ]

60. a better expert...

...on *constitutional* language would be former Chief Justice Warren Burger, who said that the second amendement is...

"the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word 'fraud,' on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime...(the NRA) has misled the American people and they, I regret to say, they have had far too much influence on the Congress of the United States than as a citizen I would like to see - and I am a gun man."

Also from Burger:

"The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon...Surely the Second Amendment does not remotely guarantee every person the constitutional right to have a 'Saturday Night Special' or a machine gun without any regulation whatever. There is no support in the Constitution for the argument that federal and state governments are powerless to regulate the purchase of such firearms..."

[Sawyer]

66. That in no way contradicts

the opinion of the linguistics expert that I posted. I agree that the Second Amendment does not guarantee every person the constitutional right to have a 'Saturday Night Special' or a machine gun without any regulation whatever. But it does guarantee the right of every person to have those weapons.

[DTinAZ]

69. no way

"But it does guarantee the right of every person to have those weapons."

No, it simply doesn't do that. We can go back and forth on this all day, but we're on opposite sides of this issue.

The bottom line is that the unrestricted proliferation of *any* type of weapons is a bad thing.

You don't need the faulty interpretation of the second amendment in order to support *reasonable* gun ownership. You can get that through common sense and good government and law enforcement. But the NRA and many others mis-use the language of that amendment to combat almost any restriction of gun proliferation and that's just wrong.

Respond if you like, but I've gone on to other things that require my attention. I wish I had time to further discuss the issue, but I honestly don't.

[Taverner]

89. I support gun rights, 100%

In fact, many conservatives might blush at my pro-gun stance. I think ALL guns should be legal, machine guns included. (but on that note I also think they should be regulated and traceable.)

But yeah, sawed off shotguns, machine guns, assault weapons - why not?

I have to be able to shoot back when the Republicans come gunning for me

[SmokingJacket]

8. It's not Liberal Underground.

Though people who are really into this place tend to be more liberal.

We need all kinds.

:hi:

[Midlodemocrat]

10. DU is for democrats of all persuasions

who wish to pursue and advance the democratic cause. There are many here who are more liberal or progressive than you, and many who are more conservative than you.

This site is for all dems, regardless of where they fall on the spectrum.

[Richard Steele]

25. "This site is for all dems, regardless of where they fall on the spectrum"

And we should point out, that it's getting harder to KNOW where you fall on the spectrum these days.

The 'spectrum' has been yanked so far to the right, the current repubs have gone way past 'conservative' and are well into FASCIST territory.

That leaves a LOT more than just 'Liberals' on the DEMOCRATIC side of the issues.
Actually, it leaves just about everyone who is sane, informed, and NOT EVIL.

Now if only we had some way to TELL them....

[Midlodemocrat]

28. I agree with you about that.

The one comforting thought that I hold on to, is that half the country voted for the Senator from MA to be President, the one with the very liberal voting record.

Maybe if people see how far right the * and cohorts have dragged us, kicking and screaming, they will wise up and start to question the crap that they are doing. We can dream can't we?

[JHB]

14. The "D" in "DU" is for Dems...

...ALL of them (well, except for the Zellbots...) :dem:

We're not "only for" Liberals or Progressives. You might, though, be challenged about what you consider "moderate", depending on what your actual views are. (I mean, I think my views are moderate, but according to the likes of Grover Norquist I'm a foaming communist)

Welcome and participate :toast: , and look at the site as a whole, not just at a few who might be a bit hasty in challenging you.

If anyone gives you a hard time, alert the mods, and just think of this place as a crowded room with lots of people expelling hot air out of both ends: if you light a match it'll be an even bet whether it snuffs out or causes an explosion.

(just my "picture them in their underwear" advice for web boards in general)

[erichzann]

15. No, its not for liberals only - but we can dream.

I'm awfully tired of how far some people try to stretch the "big tent" analogy. I'm tired of being accommodating to others who take the name of democrat who I believe are destroying the party and stand in start contrast to the long and very distinguished history of traditional liberalism on which the party has been built for generations.

I do not walk hand in hand with such people, and I'm weary of others telling me that I should. I should not do that any more than I should say that George Bush and I are "really on the same team" since we're both American. We're not on the same team. I fundamentally disagree with Bush, and I fundamentally disagree with DLC "new" (read: faux) Democrats undermining everything good and just in the party.

Also, you can take what I say with a grain of salt if you want, because of my low post count, but I think its pretty safe to say that this community does indeed lean to the left.

Of course you are welcome to give your point of view - you won't be banned if that's what you're asking. But if you expect to find a lot of warm, welcoming attitudes toward the DLC, or if you think that Joe Lieberman is the greatest democrat alive today and the party should be more like him... well then just be prepared for the fact that this is not the most popular point or view here. Thank God.

[Coexist]

16. heck no - there are freepers here everyday!

they hate us for our freedoms.

[Hello_Kitty]

18. It's a matter of perspective anyway

I consider myself fairly leftwing liberal but I know people who'd think I'm Barry Goldwater compared to them. Some wingnuts I work with think I'm the tree-huggingist and most commie liberal socialist thing they've ever seen.

[demgurl]

19. You are fine. I see you have made it past a 1000 posts.....

so you must be doing something right! Keep postings and don't sweat the small stuff - it's all small stuff.

[sam sarrha]

20. I thought it was for believers in DEMOCRACRY..!! I am an Anti-Fascist.

[Sparkman]

21. If some truth offends, we best set aside labeling the messenger, to learn.

[beyurslf]

24. All are welcome. I think there are just more libs or progressives here.

[immoderate]

31. Is there a strict definition of liberal?

Just askin'.:shrug:

--IMM

[sam sarrha]

44. those who believe in the Democratic process to initiate change..

that is pretty much it.

[immoderate]

72. Maybe "Just askin'" was misleading. (And I love that smilie.)

I was attempting to be oxy-moronic, and I think I got too subtle. And if I accepted your definition in the spirit in which it was offered I'd say, "Thank you."

I was trying to be funny. That's a good definition, and if I had been looking for a good definition, I wouldn't have said so. :sarcasm: (I hate to use that. It kills the effect.)

--IMM

[Roxy66]

32. No....some posters on this site are a little over-the-top, don't let them

run you off. We are all very passionate about whats happening in this country right now, and some people just need to vent. So, dont allow those who disagree with you intimidate you into not voicing your opinion!!!!

[salin]

33. The discussions tend

to be more liberal, but that is a relative thing. What is considered "liberal" today - was the rhetoric of the "new dems" (Gary Hart, et al) back in the Reagan years.

Moderate, too, is a relative term. Here in Indiana - most dems call themselves moderate, even when most positions they have are pretty liberal/progressive views (eg supporting workers rights... lots of attempts to union bust in this state - so even moderates are concerned; or supporting public spending on schools, on basic services for the poor, etc. and not viewing every "tax" as an inherent evil - but viewing some as the cost/investment for a livable community.) In some communities the terms liberal have just come to be to "hot" - so folks consider their views - which for many years WERE mainstream views - as "moderate".

Many views are present at DU. That's cool.

However if moderate means accepting much of the administrations lines (or lies) on public policy... then folks get into a little trouble here. There isn't much tolerance for those voicing support for much of the administration's policies. So as long as you aren't voicing those views, you should be okay.

[GreenPartyVoter]

35. No, it's for anyone who wants to further progressive values in America

[applegrove]

39. Welcome to the big tent. n/t

[Zorra]

40. What issues do you support that lead you define yourself as moderate?

I'm just curious as to what the difference is between a "liberal" and a "moderate".

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Deep13]

48. I don't defend baby Bush.

I want him out. My wife and I donated most of our free time last year and about $7000 to get him out.

Conservative judges are fine, but that is not who is being blocked by the D fillabuster. They are holding up radical, reactionary judges who want to rewrite the Constitution in their own twisted image. Those are the folks I object to.

See, just saying you are a moderate immediately makes you a Bush sympathizer!

[Bouncy Ball]

64. No, Ripley is talking about someone else

who routinely defends bush on this site.

[Ripley]

74. I wasn't referring to you.

okay?

[SouthernDem2004]

81. Lets see...

1) I am pro-Death penality.
2) I am pro-choice but do not like the idea of abortion. I personally think it is wrong but would not force my view on others.
3) I do not vote straight ticket. On the state and local level I vote for the best candidate which is not always a Democrat.
4) I am not for legalizing all drugs.
5) I am not anti-religion. I do not care if people pray in school. I do not care if there is a Christmas display in a town center. As a matter of fact I against those that try to ban Christmas displays. I am agnostic but Christmas is just a holiday. Very little religion left in it.
6) PETA annoys me... I love meat....
7) All large companies are not evil.
8) All Repulicans are not liars, thieves or murderers.
9) Bush is a moron, not Hitler or a Nazi.

I could go on... I often get accused of being a "freeper" when I post my views on these subjects. Sure, the term "freeper" is a little silly. It is like being called a "noob" by nerds on online games.

[sendero]

41. Read the rules..

.... they are very clear. And you fall well within the membership guidelines for DU. No problems :)

[lala_rawraw]

43. Liberals are progressives and anyone against this

Regime is, in my humble opinion, more than welcome here even if they are not a liberal. So welcome and pull a font, make yourself at home:D

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

47. No, but when people say I'm moderate and post conservative

stuff over and over, I think they deserve the scrutiny they bring to themselves.

[Deep13]

49. What do you mean by "conservative stuff"?

If we cannot debate these matters among ourselves, how can we convince the country generally?

[Bouncy Ball]

65. Yep.

Especially when they defend Chimpy McCokespoon at every single turn.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

50. There's been claims of moderate, but what's usually evident

is conservatism. Moderate is a good label to hide behind if one wants to parrot RW talking points, and then defend themselves by saying they're DLC or moderates.

[Ripley]

58. Ding! Ding! Ding!

It's in their playbook.

[salin]

68. to be fair, please see my post above...

in some red states in this country - the term liberal or progressive has almost been wiped out of the language. Thus folks call themselves "moderate" - yet hold pretty consistently mainstream democratic party beliefs... things now seen as "progressive" but just a mere fifteen years ago were considered mainstream.

I have lived both in blue and red states, and have learned that the titles are really quite relative.

Here in Indiana - my hometown considers itself very progressive and liberal - and relatively speaking, it is. But when I first moved back from the SF Bay Area - I laughed heartily at what was considered important - and the idea that this was really a liberal area.

Then I did more work in Indy and found folks tied themselves to the "moderate" term - but were really pretty consistently liberal.

That is my main issue - we react more to the self-applied terms, some times than we do to the positions taken on issues.

Elsewhere someone differentiates "okay with cons judges"... but goes on to define the bunch of current nominees by bushco as being radical - and NOT what the poster terms "conservative". Heck, Souter was considered "conservative" when nominated (all things being relative) and has been quite moderate - and in todays terms left of center on some issues. Point being - the words written were consistent with what many folks here could abide by - but one had to read the intent of the words...and get to the definition of current judicial nominees to not jump to the conclusion that said poster was supporting bushco and his assualt on the judiciary.

The titles "moderate" and "liberal" - are sometimes... to steal a word from last years election cycle... a bit "nuanced" - esp in red state areas. That does NOT mean that all red state dems are DINOS. Heck a lot of self-proclaimed moderate dems here in Indiana... can't stand Evan Bayh - and certainly do not want to see him run for president - they liked him well enough as Gov - but haven't like the opportunistic shows he has put on from his senate position. Go figure.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CornField]

52. The most extreme on both sides is in the minority - so they scream louder

It's always been the case and probably always will be. Still the vast majority fall away from the two extremes. I think, especially here on DU and even on the net as a whole, we need to be more persistant and perhaps even a bit more loud when it comes to voicing our beliefs.

[Misunderestimator]

55. Oh how I wish it was...

If you're a moderate you should be quite at home here... it's gone from being quite progressive to being enormously centrist... though admittedly it's partly due to some very conservative people who have joined and called themselves moderates. :shrug:

[slackmaster]

56. If you're moderate or libertarian you need a thick skin

But it's still entertaining and enlightening.

[Zenlitened]

61. Define "moderate."

I don't think there's any agreement on what that term means, anymore.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Stephanie]

67. Do we each get to post a thread about ourselves?

Can I have a thread about me?

[SouthernDem2004]

83. Sure, if you have a question or point to make why wouldn't you?

[UdoKier]

70. Depends what you mean by "moderate".

If by moderate, you mean a middle-of-the-road dem like John Kerry or Dick Gephardt, you'd be okay, but if you mean a Repug-in-dem's clothing like Lieberman you might have a hard time here.


Remember the flame war that started from your standoffish "I'm a policeman, ask me anything" thread?

From the rules:

"Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office."

I think most of us would say that the DLCers and DINO's are antagonistic to progressive ideals, although there are certainly some DLCers here, but they generally avoid starting flame wars with threads like "I'm beginning to think Bush was right about Iraq, How about you?"

Anyway, I would never call the likes of Lieberman or H.R. Clinton "moderate". I would call them right-wing democrats.


But that's just me...

[Generator]

76. It's a place for

People who are OUTRAGED by any number of things that have happened under the Bush adminstration in the last four years. You don't have to be outraged about them all or agree with many of them-but if you aren't outraged I don't know why you would be here.

People who want to read and learn what's really going on. (That would be the links, the editorials..not necessarily the regular boards)

And for those (PLEASE!) with a sense of humour.

I don't give a crap what you call yourself, there are some that call themselves Republican here because they actually know it has a different meaning than whatever this anomaly of horror is that's happened since 2000.

[enigmatic]

79. You know, I just want to flush these labels down the toilet..

because it's gotten to the point where they really have no meaning anymore; nobody can agree on what "Liberal", "Moderate", or "Progressive" mean; it all depends on who you are talking to and what ax they have to grind.

I've been a Democrat all my life (but I'm more of an NDP up here); the sooner we stop the labelling of all the factions here on a board that's called "Democratic Underground" the better.

[Bridget Burke]

80. It doesn't matter what someone calls themselves.

The content of their posts over time tends to show where they're coming from.

Some obvious disrupters create user names like "SUPER_LIB"--they usually give themselves away immediately.

Edited to add: The Search function can be quite useful.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.