A Seventhson Proposal: GD Primary 2004 - Gloves Off on Kerry and Edwards!

[seventhson]

Okay - I will be the first to admit that I have been pretty hard on John Kerry at times.

I have had plenty of posts deleted and even had a handful of warnings for "inflammatory" posts or posts which were not "sourced" reliably (especially in this recent Alexandra Polier fiasco). But I have never been time-outed or temporarily banned.

One of the reasons I have NOT been time-outed or banned is that I love DU, I love political discourse and arguments, and I want to stay and enjoy this community. I find it challenging to be challenged and occasionally to ruffle the feathers of some of the "hoilier-than-thou" in our midsts.

HOWEVER, I am afraid that this self-censorship is damaging to us all. We are NOT able to freely discuss the issues and as a result we are not always able to get or give the information we need to make a fully informed decision.

I am going to make an incredibly damaging and pitiful admission here that I am probably going to regret later - but it is important enough to me that I get the information I need that I am going to 'fess up anyway:

Here it is:

I do NOT know enough about John Edwards to say whether I honestly BELIEVE that he would make a better President than JFK.

I simply have NOT been paying enough attention to him until now and know too little about his record, his legal cases, his background, his marriage, his kids, his reputation in the community, etc., to make a fully informed choice.

I KNOW that I KNOW plenty enough about Kerry to know that I do not trust him. But there are policy issues with Kerry that I fully agree with and wherein I have NO idea where Edwards stands.

BUT - The PROBLEM is that if people started posting all of the NEGATIVE things about either of these guys the THREADS or POSTS are going to get locked because they are too "inflammatory".

I read a perfectly good thread yesterday which slammed one or the other of the candidates and it was locked down within an hour. It was a thread that made me think. It made me question myself.

I hereby PROPOSE, then, that in order for us to honestly and thoroughly VET and scrutinize and evaluate Edwards and Kerry - we need to have the GLOVES COME OFF in GD Primary 2004! We need to have a free-for-all (with only modest limitations) and fully expose our remaining candidates to all the mud, smear, vitriole and minute ugly details that we can possibly muster. We NEED to know where the dirt is and debate it long and hard so we know whether or not these men can stand their grounds against the Repukes and whether there ARE issues which ultimately will mke either of these men totally unacceptable to us versus the other.

Two important points:

1. The Freepers lurking or attacking here should be relatively easy to identify. If posts are BLATANTLY untrue and/or REALLY poisonous - then the mods can identify those posters and shut them down.

2. The Repukes are going to throw all of their worst slime and garbage at whoever is the last man standing. We need to immunize ourselves to this by a sort of innoculation: let's put up the germy uglies in all their odiferous splendour on Edward and Kerry and see what defenses are mustered by this worthy crew to knock it down.

The IMPORTANT Questions which are usually the nastiest of assertions are the ones we will have to endure in the general election. The same old "memes" will be trotted out again and again.

I propose that the rules in GD Primary related to inflammatory or even right-wing sourced articles be tossed to the winds.

I ask the ADMINISTRATORS to weigh in on this (and I know they have been pondering the issue) and that this thread NOT get locked for my irrational exuberance until the Boss(es) have had an opportunity to weigh in on its merit.

If we take the gloves off in GDPrimary 2004 we will be able to SEE whether our guys can take the bareknuckled hits. No matter what they are going to GET such hits by the extremists running this country - so we need to train THEM as well as oursleves for battle in real conditions.

Peace Y'all

and

I plan to post a Poll on this in a while. I wanted folks to digest the idea first.

It is a new theater of political war and our troops need to be prepared for it!

My preference right now is Edwards - But even I might be persuaded that I need to reassess once all of his dirty laundry has been aired - and Kerry's too - in terms of his "qualities" which make him a better contender in the GE.

Is this idea nutty or is it too true? Do we need the gloves off?

[Racenut20]

1. If you want to elect him, do not call him JFK

That sounds as phony as a prance around an aircraft carrier.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

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

[seventhson]

4. I have no problem with your post and would prefer that it NOT be deleted

I happen to believe a lot of nasty things about Kerry.

But this post is sincere. I want to hear what dirt they have to throw at Edwards.

I did a lot of research on Dean before I supported him. I had concerns because I BELIEVED untrue assertions at first (the Dean Witter meme - same family - turned out to be completely false, for example) - I also found aspects of Dean troublesome and mentioned them only in passing.

It looks like Dean's Dad and his brother were BOTH intelligence operatives. It LOOKS that way, but I cannot prove it. His Yale ties bugged the hell out of me too - too close to skull. But I kept silent on that for the most part.

Now I am left with Edward and Kerry and I know too little about Edwards. And time is short. I want to know what I can and what will be tossed at him. And my time is tight. I need help.

I also want to discuss the uglies in Kerry's closet. Because I have to make up MY mind who is the better man and better candidate (and they are NOT necessarily the same thing).

I want to discuss their weaknesses as well as their strengths.

But I want to hear about it without fear of posters here being timed-out for skirting the rules in subjective decision-making.

I happened to have BELIEVED that Kerry was fooling around. I still think he might have been but I have practically nothing but circumstantial and unconvincing evidence. I WAS absolutely gleeful because I thought he would be finished.

But the alleged sources have dried up and are nowhere to be heard. If they exist they are hidden away for now (maybe to be trotted out by Rove et all in the GE).

In any case I have no problem if folks think I was an idiot for believing what I already believed: that Kerry was a prevaricating cheater.

But is he WORSE than Edwards?

I want to find out what You all think and make up my mind because I happen to trust DU and its posters more than I trust the media.

[vi5]

6. It's not even my position to particularly defend Kerry.....

He has a voting record that is there for all to see. Same with Edwards and same with Dean. I agree with some of it and disagree with other aspects of it. Same with Edwards, same with Dean.

As with all of them though, I just refuse to wallow in the muck on irrelevant issues, and no offense I just don't want to waste time and energy convincing people who should know better how important it is to get the current resident out this election.

[WillyBrandt]

5. Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap Clap!!!

[Rowdyboy]

3. The members of this board have voted over and over and over

on the issue and "flamefests" lose every time-by very large margins. The entire GD2004 is set to end within a month. Are you really so desperate for a slugfest that you can't stand one more month of of behaving with a small measure of civility?

[seventhson]

7. Should your post be locked and you warned?

I do not think so. But it is my point.

Flamefests are one thing. But debating facts and opinions is another.

You may feel that I am "desperate". Some might consider that a personal attack.

I took a lot of personal attacks for my Kerry fiasco and never alerted once.

Even Skinner says that it is time for a change in his opinion and that people were "using" the rules for partisan purposes (presumably to shut down people they disagreed with).

The problem is the subjectivity of these specific rules.

I think that in a free speech climate (with rules for civility but not for content of ideas and opinions and assertions of fact, provable or not) the BAD ideas will be overcome by the reason and intelligence of the GOOD ideas.

If there is dirt, let's clean it out and put a light on it - disinfect it maybe.

Both Kerry and Edwards NEED a thorough vetting before the final nominee votes are cast.

If we miss things BEFORE the GE, then Rove will bash our guys with it anyway.

[Hav]

8. hi

Could you tell me how many warnings you received (if it's allowed to ask).I have already 3 warnings and read that 5 notifications result in a 24-hour time out.Something like that did not happen to you (for the case you got more than 5)?
Not that a 24-time out would be so hard but it can happen really fast that your warnings add up to 5 especially during these Primaries.
I accept when moderator delete my messages,2 times it was because of the rule that a reply shouldn't be about the poster (though I think that it is sometimes not so easy to omit on such a forum) but I don't think these violations would be worthy of a time out.

[Moderator]

9. Locking.....

If you have any questions regarding how DU is run, or if you would like to make suggestions for changes, please post in the Ask The Administrators forum.


Thank you

DU Moderator