Get used to it

[info being]

I have a very simple message for all Kerry supporters.

You don't like our criticism of things? Get used to it.

Our convictions are deep, not cheap. We don't fight against an illegal war until it starts...and then support it. We don't fight against Corporate greed and then support it as soon as a Democratic Presidential Candidate is selected.

The Bush Administration has awakened a lot of people...not just to the evils of Bush Administration but in the system that enabled "a Bush Administration" to come to power. Clinton was able to get a way with a lot and, frankly, fool a lot of us. But now we see through it. When another Skull & Bones elite insider is our only choice...let's say the writing on the wall is very clear.

While most of us (myself included) will probably vote for Kerry on election day, that is where our support ends. We will remain committed to truth and justice over strength and power. We will remain as critical of Kerry as we are of Bush. Failing to do so is failing in our responsibility as citizens of a Democracy.

Taunting us with the power of your candidate and laughing at ours doesn't impress us. It just makes you look like a lot like Bush supporters -- otherwise good people with their eyes closed. Its easy to win when you are a billionaire with the powers-that-be behind you. Its a shallow victory. Furthermore, you don't understand...in the bigger picture...that you are not on the winning side. You are on the "compliance" side of a force that is slowly destroying the human race and the world itself.

Asking me to give up my passion for truth, peace, love, and justice is like asking a Christian to stop believing in God -- not all that effective. Politics are not as important as who we are at our core.

[Dookus]

1. we're already used to it

the whiners have been bitching for months.

SKULL AND BONES! SKULL AND BONES!! BOO!

It's laughable.

[ibegurpard]

4. You really ought to stop saying anything in your posts

your sigline is quite sufficient.

[Dookus]

10. Congratulations

You're the one-millionth person to make that joke. I'm sure it was very gratifying for you.

[ibegurpard]

12. Not at all

I'm sure I'm in very good company.

[Dookus]

16. BOO!

SKULL AND BONES!!!

BWAHAHAHAHA

[ibegurpard]

17. Was there a point to that non-sequitur?

:shrug:

[Dookus]

19. Just to scare you...

your original post was a non-sequitor, too.

SKULL AND BONES!! RUN!!!

[RetroLounge]

44. Hello, I am one million and one

eom

[mopinko]

47. one million and two

[HFishbine]

80. One million and three

[INTELBYTES]

129. Make me one million and four!!

[bitchkitty]

78. It's pure theatre -

Comedic and tragic all in one.

[Nederland]

2. Fair Enough

I wouldn't asked you to back off your principles.

However, the fact is that there aren't as many of "you" as you think there are. In a democracy, that means you lose elections.

Get used to it.

[info being]

9. Oh, we are used to losing. But losing isn't what bothers us.

Well, it bothers us only to extent that the present power structure is destroying the world.

[Blue_Roses]

11. It obviously bothers you alot

'cause that's all we hear.

[info being]

13. Well, if I saw you standing in front of a train...

I'd probably keep telling you to move until you did so.

[Blue_Roses]

15. I've been in front of train

for the past 3 years...oh, that doesn't count the other 6 years when I had him for a governor in Texas.

[HFishbine]

81. That doesn't bode well for Kerry

Those "you's" lose elections and he says he's voting for Kerry. Damn!

[sangh0]

3. I don't mind your criticisms

Bring 'em on!

Taunting the power of your candidate and laughing at ours doesn't impress us.

It's not meant to impress you. As The Magistrate says "Kill one, warn one hundred"

When another Skull & Bones elite insider is our only choice

Gasp! You mean he's not one of those who think everyone should be an insider?

[comsymp]

60. The Magistrate says that?

I thought that was Coulter :shrug:

[HFishbine]

82. The Magistrate's better piece of advice was

"Politics is the art of addition, not subtraction."

[saltpoint]

5. Well shucks. I thought we was all pals.

[Melodybe]

6. Any one not supporting Kerry is supporting Bush!

Hate to say it but it is true, can you honestly tell me that a Kerry presidency would be worse than another four years of bush*? Wake up! this election is too important to waste your votes. We need you, we need your friends. As the mother of two little boys please reconsider your views. I'm sorry that America is not ready for Kucinich, I'm sorry that they weren't ready for Dean, but a vote for anyone but the democratic nominee is a vote for nazi USA 2004. That is the reality of the situation, I ask you again to re-evaluate exactly what is at stake.

[info being]

8. Uh...not sure whether you read my post.

- I'm voting for Kerry. I'm not sure what exactly you're afraid of.

- My loyalty is only to truth. The truth is that Kerry is a little better than Bush. Guess what: I have a lot more credibility with Conservatives who have been burned by Bush than you guys with blind faith in Kerry.

- I'm worried about your two little boys as well. The present system is unsustainable and can only end one way. I don't know how to change things, but I know that on my time on earth I must remain true to what I know is true.

[Melodybe]

14. Look I am one of the last people to jump on the Kerry bandwagon

Go read my old posts, I started ABK, I dealt with it and moved on, things could be worse we might have to vote for Lieberman! Kerry will be the nominee and I will campaign for them. Dean will be kicking of Change for America and I am very excited.

As for Kerry being only a little better than Bush* well you're right, but I'll take a man that came down south protesting for civil rights over the one that just appointed one of the most racist judges since the 60's any day. Kerry might be corrupt as they come, but at least he is not totally evil.

[info being]

24. Point taken

Good for you. I'm glad you can find enough passion within to campaign for Kerry.

[MrPeepers]

67. Don't give me this "blind faith" thing, please.

Can we please avoid this "Kerry supporters have blind faith in Kerry," thing, please? I do not have blind faith in Kerry, actually, and do imply that I do is something I find rather offensive. I've been with Kerry since last spring. I stayed with him through the times when people were wondering when he was going to drop out. I stayed with him all the way through the taunting and the Dean surge. I stayed with him when he surged to the top. My faith in Kerry is not blind. My faith in Kerry is based on a great many things which I have talked about at great length here over the past months. Stop implying that everyone who supports this candidate who you less than love is only doing it because they don't understand things right.

Peepers

[bitchkitty]

79. You said,

"Wake up! this election is too important to waste your votes. We need you, we need your friends."

I agree - it's way too important. But it seems as though many Kerry supporters want nothing more than for Dean supporters to go away forever. They still dump on Dean, and ignore the fact that THEY NEED US. I've seen see thread after thread telling me what Dean or Dean supporters need to do. Poll after poll that questions our loyalty or our principles. All they while, they've made it so obvious that they hold me and my candidate in complete contempt - how do you think that makes me feel? Do you think that heightens my regard for Kerry?

I'm voting for Kerry if he's the nominee, but don't you think that the old adage about flies, honey and vinegar applies here?

[info being]

7. These first few posts demonstrate a lot about the American character

You honestly sound no different than Bush supporters 1 year ago. I guess what was bothering you these past few years is simply that your Party didn't win. Cheap.

[joshcryer]

66. In many aspects, that's the truest statement here.

It really is that black and white.

[Minstrel Boy]

18. info being: thank you.

An important post, with measured, powerful words.

This is the logical end of "Anybody but Bush," which drains away everything but personality. Its purpose seems to be doing away with a smirk, and letting all else stand. Rather than "Anybody but Bush," how about, "Anything but this"?

You are on the "compliance" side of a force that is slowly destroying the human race and the world itself.

During the Bush years, many have come to the radical knowledge that the hour is later than they thought. There is a convergence of global crises that pose a near-term threat to global civilization. And yet the choice Americans will be offered in November is between walking over a cliff, and throwing themselves off it running.

[TreasonousBastard]

20. Then don't use such a wide brush.

"All" Kerry supporters are not "taunting" you or anyone else.

What we are well used to, however, are "some" people who appear to be in the cult of <insert candidate here> and just can't cope with the idea it's possible their favorite candidate could actually lose.

The constant refrains of "well I guess I have to vote for him, but...." are getting old and boring.

This is a democracy, and in a democracy, we rarely get the best and brightest to finish the race. We rarely get the best and brightest to enter the race in the first place. We live in a country of almost 300,000,000 people,and that means we live in a constant state of compromise.

Whining will not improve the situation. We have a candidate, for better or worse, and definitely better than the other one.

Get with the program, or get out of the way.

(That's not a taunt, that's just the way it is.)

[info being]

26. I'd be glad to avoid the wide brush...but none of you prove me wrong

Here are some quotes that support my claim, from the very post that tells me I shouldn't generalize about Kerry supporters. Just listen to the tone of the language:

"cult of"
"the use of parenths around the word "some""
"just can't cope with the idea it's possible their favorite candidate could actually lose."
"Constant refrains"
"getting old and boring"

I'm only half way through the post and I realized that everything you say is in the style of a TV pundit.

And you conclude with this: "Get with the program, or get out of the way."

Once again: "the program" is not "my program" and you will continue to find it difficult to stiffle voices like mine. Get used to it.

[TreasonousBastard]

59. Where did you get the idea that...

I am a Kerry supporter"?

My guy lost too, but them's the breaks.

I have no intention of stifling you or anyone else. I am merely advising you that you can howl at the moon from now till doomsday and nobody cares.

Yes, there are "some" people around here, and in RL, who just can't get over the idea that the vast majority of the population just doesn't agree with them.

This country WILL be run by a consortium of Republicans and Democrats who generally represent the many rich and powerful forces that be. That is a given, and has been the case since its founding. It is not unlike any other civilization in human history.

There is nothing short of revolution that will change that, and revolution would be far worse than what we have now.

So, our choice in November is to continue the way we are presently going, or to put some brakes on the most egregious evils of the present administration. That is our only choice. There is nothing else that can possibly happen.

An election is not to give you or me a personal paradise-- it is to choose the best among the choices. There will be only two choices in November, and we are simply to choose the better of them

If that does not fit in with your personal philosphy of how the country should be run, so be it.

I voted for Clinton twice, but howled and screamed and fought a lot of what he did. With Clinton, as with Kerry, there was at least a small chance he would listen.

And that is pretty much the best we can hope for in a democracy.

[info being]

106. Simple response:

You said:
"This country WILL be run by a consortium of Republicans and Democrats who generally represent the many rich and powerful forces that be. That is a given, and has been the case since its founding. It is not unlike any other civilization in human history."

The extent to which we can fight this is the extent to which "the masses" benefit. We may never completely eradicate this, but it is in our interests to join together, call it what it is, and fight it.

You said:
"So, our choice in November is to continue the way we are presently going, or to put some brakes on the most egregious evils of the present administration. That is our only choice. There is nothing else that can possibly happen.

An election is not to give you or me a personal paradise-- it is to choose the best among the choices. There will be only two choices in November, and we are simply to choose the better of them."

I'm not sure how many times I have to say this. Most of us "idealists" will vote for Kerry. But we will not "fall in line" and stop talking about what's important to us.

[BruinAlum]

21. Then get used to having the sore loser mantra shoved back at you, because

that's all this is.

Get over that taunting with the candidates already. Go lick your wounds if you need to. There is something bigger at stake now and the enemy is the GOP and Bush. If you can't see that then get out of the game for a while.

[Desertrose]

23. actually there IS much more at stake here...and

if you can't see just what it is, don't blame us for trying to help you to see it.

This goes way beyond the GOP & bush...why can't people see it I don't know....

Peace
DR

[BruinAlum]

25. First things first. The immediate task at hand is to get Kerry into

the White House and Bush out on his ass. The other things are secondary to that.

We do see it, we just don't agree on what the priorities are. Nor do we agree on what the majority of Democratic voters will agree on.

The rank and file of the majority of Democratic voters will not accept a far left candidate or a far left agenda or a restructuting of the Party as the priority over other things as the priorites. That will have to wait.

[info being]

28. You know what. If you can look into your heart and find...

the energy to get out there and campaign for a more-of-the-same candidate like Kerry....good for you. Seriously. I can't do it. But I'm glad you are because Bush must go.

[BruinAlum]

33. No problem at all for me. Kerry has the most liberal record of the

candidates and I've been for him all along and before Iowa. And I don't make 3 votes in the last 3 difficult years out of hundreds and hundreds in the past 30 the litmus test for my choice like some others do. I'm with the majority of Democratic voters in that sense.

I think Kerry will make an excellent President.

[info being]

34. It might be effective if you shared 1 or 2 examples of his "liberal" votes

You people refuse to persuede. You are so confident in your right-ness that you won't reach out to others. How do you expect to gain support. I've begged and pleaded for somebody to explain why I should support Kerry and I get nothing but lazy generalities.

[BruinAlum]

38. OMG I've seen them spelled out here repeatedly for months.

His ratings as a liberal is the best in the entire Senate as are his votes on liberal issues before it was popular to do so. I watched posts in particular from blm. If I have time I'll see if I can find some links but I'm new at this search feature.

I'll see what I can do but I was going to sign off soon for dinner. I just think you haven't been paying attention, or have been reading the posts that mischaracterize his positions more than the ones that tell the truth. I only get on here every couple days and usually just read without signing on. But I'll see what I can do, and check my website links I have saved over the months.

[info being]

39. I don't care about the "ratings" of some washington insider publication

I watched every single debate and still have NO idea what the man stands for. All of the other candidates were completely clear.

[BruinAlum]

40. These aren't "washington insider publications"

You really haven't been paying attention at all.

He has the most liberal rating from most of the top progressive organizations, even higher than Dennis Kucinich, and is hands down the best environmentalist ever to run for president.

I've watched the same debates and his positon has been pretty clear and consistent in every single one of them. I suspect you have been viewing him with some filters in mind, and perhaps a bias, because so far what you have given me are mischaraterizations and clearly nonfactual.

Maybe you should just take some time to get over the loss of your own candidate for a while first. I really don't want to spend any time trying to convince anyone of facts that has already decided no answer is going to satisfy them anyway.

[info being]

48. Thank you. You may have some good points.

[BruinAlum]

55. Okay. I wish you the best, truly I do. Take your time.

:hi:

[HFishbine]

83. "His ratings as a liberal is the best in the entire Senate"

I suspected this would come up again. I also wonder if this ranking rates the quarter where he cast no votes in the senate, thus "earning" him this label because he didn't vote against anything liberal or for anything conservative.

Does anybody have a link to the "most liberal" ranking. A glimpse beyond the label might be more convincing.

[saltpoint]

56. Senator Kerry's liberal rating is --

-- the highest among sitting senators.

You could begin there and make up your mind.

[HFishbine]

87. Link?

Source?

[saltpoint]

92. Kerry's ADA rating is 93%.

The site is:

Americans for Democratic Action at:

www.adaction.org

====

A 93% rate from ADA is plenty liberal. Would you prefer 95%? Or maybe it has to be 100% to satisfy the purists' yearning.

Not going to happen. If a liberal Senator is not liberal enough for you, you can write-in for Eugene Debs.

Kerry's job is not to morph into your perfect candidate.

[HFishbine]

93. You

ascribe a lot of incorrect expectations to me, and although Kerry's rating is actually 92 (and only 88 on labor and trade issues specifically), I thank you for the link.

http://www.adaction.org/Campaign2004/2004PR_1/2004pr_1.HTM

[saltpoint]

95. 93 pieces of apple pie vs. ==

-- 93 pieces of apple pie.

Still plenty sweet.

[HFishbine]

97. Plenty sweet

but is the "2" broken on your keyboard?

[saltpoint]

98. I can't blame the keyboard for my bad typing.

[seaglass]

36. Don't worry, we're doing it for you too. If you can't find it in

your heart, we'll find it in ours.

[saltpoint]

54. If you can't or won't, then that big wide brush --

-- is just too heavy.

We could use you out helping get rid of a very bad administration.

[info being]

107. Then collectively change your tone.

Asking for help politely, as you have done, is a much better approach than mocking us.

[saltpoint]

111. Broad picture view might hold that the nominating --

-- process has been in place for decades. Is it flawed? Yes. Can people work to change it? Yes. Will it work? It could, yes.

In the meanwhile, John Kerry is the likely nominee of the party. You say you will vote for him. Great. We can use the help and support.

But your original post, Info Being, was clearly intended to pick a fight. It was deliberately confrontational and sought dispute on several points.

You make a mistake to claim that your objections to Kerry are "deep" while those who disagree with you are less so. That's untrue, and knowing it must be untrue, you posted with the intent to create controversy.

A number of posters have responded to you here and not all that favorably. There's a reason, equally deep.

[gate of the sun]

63. only a marginal second.

that's why so many people are upset. It concerns me that so many people take it here as trivial. I thought many of the people here on Du actually cared about the issues. My eyes have been opened.

[Liberal Christian]

108. Of course we care about the issues

There's not a chance in hell that the issues that I care about the most will see the light of day under a Bush administration.

There IS a chance, slight though it may be, that some or many of the issues I care about will get talked about, pushed into some kind of shape, and maybe even become codified into law if there is a Democratic administration.

I'll bank on "some chance" vs. "no chance" every time.

The truth is that getting a Democrat in the White House (and it appears that whatever anyone may want, that is going to be John Kerry), is only half the battle. If we're not out to get control of Congress again, too, we're still going to have trouble getting bills out of committee.

So, fine. If you don't like Kerry, don't work for him. All I ask is that you not work against him by complaining. Instead, focus your energies on getting Democrats elected to the House and Senate.

[saltpoint]

53. "Something bigger at stake..." is exactly --

-- right, BruinAlum.

Good, clear post.

[Guaranteed]

65. Try thinking even bigger. nt

[saltpoint]

86. We'll do our level best to think big big big.

Appreciate your encouragement.

[Desertrose]

22. for those who have a different perspective....excellent post

"You are on the "compliance" side of a force that is slowly destroying the human race and the world itself."

"Politics are not as important as who we are at our core."
YES!!

Thanks info being...keep posting ...maybe more will eventually get it...maybe...

Peace
DR

[info being]

29. I just think we have to raise the level of discourse here.

I'm not exactly the most elequent among you...but I think "we" (being DK or Dean or Nader supporters or whatever) need to keep speaking from the heart and even try to explain ourselves now and then.

Thank you for the kind words and right back at you.

[Snivi Yllom]

27. good for you

your last sentence should be gospel.

[DuctapeFatwa]

30. Is there a Stand Up and Cheer Emoticon?

I suddenly need one.

Thanks for your post. Damn good word writin' too :)

[northzax]

31. what's the obsession with Skull and Bones?

John Kerry joined a fraternity at the age of 20, and you just can't let it go. a social club. 35 years ago. and that's what's important to you. what an inane thing to focus on.

[info being]

35. If you really want to know, Google Skull & Bones

Take an hour, read through some of this stuff, and explain to us here exactly why it isn't a big deal.

When you join a club that guarantees you power and wealth as long as you support the goals and interests of that club, what do you think that means?

Is the mafia just a silly club you join at age 18 or is it a bit more significant than that?

[northzax]

37. ahh, the Protocols of the Elders of New Haven, I see

I am quite familiar with s&b, but can you please cite me any evidence that John Kerry has remained an active member of that organization since his time at Yale? Can you please demonstrate one time he used his S&B connections to do anything? does he pay his dues? vacation at the island? go back for reunions? exchange secret handshakes with George Bush and William Safire? get up and leave the room whenever the name is mentioned, as required?

Has he ever gone into business with a s&B member?
Has he ever accepted money from a bonesman?
Has he ever used his bonesman connections to get ahead in life? how?
does he employ any bonesmen in his senate of cmapaign staff?

it's a freaking club. for college students. Yes, there are wealthy and powerful members, we suspect, since of course, there's no membership list. but we are long past the time in theis country when 25 people can really control everything. This obsession with Skull and Bones is absurd, and remarkably similar to an obsession with religion. George Bush and John Kerry may well have belonged to the same social club several yers apart in college, but I hardly think their lives have run in parrallel since then, do you?

and if you don't think people can change, remember that Robert Byrd was in the Klan. or is it once a Klansman, always a Klansman. Think he goes out and becomes a sheet-wearing, cross-burning yahoo on weekends? or can people actually change? This obsession with people being the same all their lives is very disturbing.

[info being]

41. How can you say you're familiary, and fail to demonstrate any knowledge

of it?

Here's a must-read for anybody interested. It's an interview on Democracy Now! I was going to just quote the highlights...but every word is a highlight, so go read it: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0122-10.htm

"ALEXANDRA ROBBINS: If this turns out to be a Skull and Bones versus Skull and Bones election. I guarantee people across the country are going to clamor for more information on the secret society. I think this is the point of my book and probably the point of your program, too. I don't think that the elected officials who represent our country especially the president should be allowed to have an allegiance to any secret group. Secrecy overshadows democracy. We need a transparency so we can hold elected officials accountable. I don't think its coincidence that I what I would call the most secretive government in America today since the Nixon era is run by the world's most infamous secret society. That's something we want to avoid in the future. "

How can we be aware of the fact that, here's a secret organization with just 800 members worldwide...and our only two choices for President are both members? How can you deny the significance of this fact?

[northzax]

88. I can name a president with an affiliation to a secret society

George Washington was a Mason. Every four years, the Masonic Temple in New York lends the bible he was sworn in on to the Washington Branch which allows the President-elect to use it for his inaguration. Think about that for a moment, every president takes his oath of office on a bible that belongs to an ancient secret society. That seems to have worked out okay, no? Or are the Masons taking over the world again?

[Minstrel Boy]

76. "can you please cite me any evidence...

...that John Kerry has remained an active member of that organization since his time at Yale?"


In 1986, Kerry surprised Yale junior Jacob Weisberg, now editor of Slate, with a "tap" to join Skull and Bones.

Weisberg had been interning at the New Republic, and received a call from Kerry's secretary to come to his office. Weisberg asked what it was about, and she said Kerry wouldn't tell her. Just that he wanted to see Weisberg the next morning.

Weisberg was stunned to learn Kerry wanted to invite him to join Skull and Bones.

They argued for a while - Weisberg was surprised that someone supposedly liberal would associate with S&B - and after Weisberg made it clear he wasn't interested, Kerry wouldn't accept No. He asked that Weisberg promise to think about it further.

Weisberg called Kerry's office later and was put straight through, and told him flatly he was rejecting the offer. Kerry expressed his disappointment.

Info from Alexandra Robbins' unsensationalistic Secrets of the Tomb. Robbins also says Kerry still uses S&B's "322" as a code in his everyday life.

It's not a frat. It's a secret society with lifelong bonds Kerry still honours.

You needn't believe Skull and Bones is an order of the Illuminati disturbed by the untoward accumulation of power and influence it has in American life.

Is it harmless, is it okay that the S&B tomb holds Geronimo's skull? What does Kerry have to say about it?

In the 1980s Ned Anderson, former chairman of the San Carlos Apache tribe in Arizona, tried to get it back.

He and his attorney met with bonesman Jonathan Bush (yes, another Bush bonesman - Dubya's uncle). Bush told him "I know what you came for and I'm going to see to it that you will get what you want and be satisfied." After that, he couldn't be reached.

Later they met with S&B's counsel, and they came away with a skull said to be the one they were looking for. But it looked different than the photo from the tomb they had in their possession, displayed as Geronimo's. They had it analysed: it was that of a 10-year old boy.

Then the Bonesmen tried to persuade Anderson to sign a document stipulating the society didn't have the skull, and he refused.

Anderson later asked his Senator John McCain to intervene with George HW Bush, but McCain told Anderson Bush wouldn't return his call.

Today the skull Anderson wanted returned remains in the tomb, and it's still known as Geronimo by Bonesmen.

Ron Rosenbaum in The New York Observer:

Chilling as well in its implication of the presumptions of privilege: Hey you naïve Apaches, we don’t have the skull you wanted, but if you sign this document and keep your mouth shut, we’ll give you another skull we happen to have lying around. Treating the Apache like a child.

But meanwhile, I want to know: Who was that child? And how did his or her head end up in the Skull and Bones Tomb?

http://www.observer.com/pages/story.asp?ID=2947

[northzax]

90. so to summarize

the bonesmen turned over hte skull they said they had. They then said they didn't have another skull. Somehow the head of the Apache tribe determined they did. Sounds like a he said she said to me.

What evidence that there is another skull does Anderson have? nothing, according to this link. Just because I'm convinced you stole my watch, doesn't mean you really did, right?

As for the Weisburg thing, since you consider s&b to the the gateway to power and wealth, can you blame Kerry for trying to get other good liberals into to mix? Imagine, a Boston catholic trying to get a New York Jew to join a Connecticut Protestant Secret Society. someone call hollywood, I got me a conspiracy.

Look, I don't want to waste energy on this, but I think putting a stupid 'secret' society up as a reason to believe the world is controlled by 800 people is a little absurd and antedeluvian.

[goodhue]

32. very well put

thanks

[saltpoint]

42. Why, sure was a lot of folks went votin' for --

-- Mr. Kerry. They must see some virtue in the fella. Heck -- let's just give the man a fair chance. Why, it's good form. Yep, it is.

[saltpoint]

46. Now that Miss Coulter gal -- you know the one I mean --

-- the one that bears a powerful likeness to a showdog shot through with expresso -- now THERE'S a little hot-head for ya. She lets on that the other side plans to keep cheatin.'

I can't abide no such thing as that.

If that gal's against Mr. Kerry, I reckon I'm FOR Mr. Kerry.

It's a gauge, ya see. A way of cipherin' things out.

[info being]

49. I don't agree with your characterization

Such a character would not know who Ms. Coulter is, and if he did he'd progably agree with her.

[saltpoint]

50. Such a character would if he had --

-- a tv set.

And ethnic, genetic or cultural variance are not exclusive determinants of social or political awareness.

[blm]

43. I'm passionate for JUSTICE and AGAINST government corruption, info being

That is why I support John Kerry. There is no lawmaker alive who has investigated and exposed more government corruption than John Kerry.

It is because of Kerry that we know as much as we do about the BFEE today.

You want to further rebuke the man who has been vilified for over 30 years from the Nixon White House (it's on the Nixon tapes) through Reagan and Bush? Go ahead. You're in company with Richard Scaife and Ollie North who tried to tear Kerry down throughout the 80s and early 90s. Ollie started on Kerry again just last week.

YOU don't see that Kerry is a true hero to those of us looking for the end of the BFEE...too bad. There are many of us who have been anxious to vote for Kerry as president for decades.

Try learning about BCCI, IranContra, CIA drugrunning and the illegal wars in Central America. Then you'll understand the import of John Kerry. The man has helped END more wars than anyone alive today.

I don't care if someone criticizes Kerry but the CHEAPNESS comes when you refuse to acknowledge his FULL length of service and his astounding accomplishments up against incredible obstacles.

MY devotion to justice and good governance doesn't come "cheap" at all and YOU denigrate that every time you ASSUME that we have just fallen in line like sheep and have no true convictions of our own. I'd say YOU are being the cheap one with cheap shots at those of us who to took the years to STUDY the history of the BFEE and KNOW Kerry's record and respect it.....MIGHTILY.

[info being]

45. ding ding ding

Right answer. Thank you. I will research some of that.

[blm]

52. Well, good. That is one smart answer.

Although I must warn you that once you start looking into BCCI and IranContra, you'll never be the same.

[curse10]

51. thank you blm!

you must post this stuff daily, yet it still hasn't gotten through. Keep posting, my friend. :-)

[saltpoint]

57. Jesus, blm. You hit that one out of the --

-- park and into the next time zone.

Real strong and real clear.

Thanks.

[BruinAlum]

58. Thank you blm

:thumbsup:


:yourock:

[JNelson6563]

77. Your BFEE expert claims crack me up

Kerry's such an expert on the BFEE he didn't know the boy king would fuck up Iraq.

Ugh!

Julie

[blm]

113. I believe he said he didn't know Bush would fuck it up as BAD as he did.

That's different than not knowing he'd fuck it up it all.

Heh.

Isn't that horse getting a little too high by now? Cripe, my nose would be bleeding at that altitude.

[JNelson6563]

131. Oh well that's a horse of a different color!!

Not.

Hell, I knew Jr would fuck it up as bad as he did, how come Kerry the BFEE expert didn't? :shrug:

Julie

[slinkerwink]

61. bravo!

[Feanorcurufinwe]

62. As if someone "asked you to give up your passion for truth, peace, love"

That has to be the most ridiculous strawman I've ever seen on DU.

[Guaranteed]

64. Absolutely fucking

BEAUTIFUL post.

"We will remain committed to truth and justice over strength and power. We will remain as critical of Kerry as we are of Bush. Failing to do so is failing in our responsibility as citizens of a Democracy."

That's exactly it. Nothing is going to change that.

I have a DUTY, as a United States citizen, to HOLD MY REPRESENTATIVES ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.

And I'm with you- Kerry will get my vote, but I'm going to call him on every single fuck-up along the way, in the harshest possible terms. I will NOT give up on what's right. NO ONE is going to squelch my voice.

[GreenPartyVoter]

105. Hear, hear!

[Rose Siding]

68. "The Bush Administration has awakened a lot of people..."

That's it, exactly. Finally we've been compelled to pay close attention and have developed a variety of informed opinions.

I hear "it's politics" and "that's how it's always been". Hooey! For one thing, that ISN'T how it's always been and for another, if that were a valid argument we'd still be on a quest for fire.

I'm firmly AB (against bush) and sadly HCIKTBWCD (holy crap is Kerry the best we could do)

[Castilleja]

69. This REALLY needed to be said....

Probably repeated over and over as well. Thanks InfoBeing, great post.

[Forkboy]

70. one thread says,"get over it!"...another says,"Get used to it!"

I'm sooooooooooo confused!!!!!!!!!! :silly:

[Desertrose]

71. well we have to either get used to getting over it or....

or get over getting used to it...
:evilgrin:

some choice,eh?? :crazy:

:shrug:
DR

[Forkboy]

72. you're not helping!

:spank: :D

[Desertrose]

73. dang...its way past my bedtime...gettin' punchy

sorry....just couldn't pass up the opportunity

:evilgrin:

ZZZzzzzzzzz
DR

[Forkboy]

74. 'Night DR

Sleep tight and dont let the bed bugs bite! :hug:

[HFishbine]

84. The consolidated meme: "Get used to getting over it."

I, on the other hand, have gotten over getting used to it.

[RummyTheDummy]

75. Yada yada yada

I didn't get what I wanted either. But be a good little boy/girl and go and do you duty in November. That is all.

[info being]

109. Have a little grace.

I wonder how many would-be Kerry voters leave the movement becuase of hard-core Republican attitudes like yours. You're not helping your own cause. In that sense, you are irrational.

[HFishbine]

85. Great Post

Well put, Info Being!

[PATRICK]

89. OK then

since Kerry is no LBJ or Dukakis or Kucinich or Kennedy or Lieberman or Gore or Clinton, but John Kerry, just maybe we can start to rally around our goals rather our dislikes and worries? How flawless and on liberal target do you have to get before we stop wasting valuable time here? To the point of bungling the political possibilities fatally?

The campaign will be sorely tempted to making bad choices and disreputable compromises, to get the focus off of Bush the monster and political realities- as horrid as they are for now.

I just see the old familiar steam building up for making Kerry the new Nader of DU postings. One jibe and it's 300 replies. As for his gleeful or undiplomatic supporters a lot of candidates had such if memory serves me correctly and they certainly had little to do with any candidate winning over the real voters.

The issues, which seems added incongruously to the personal dislikes, can still be a positive source of debate, such as where the Dems must get their future leadership elites instead of the Ivy league crowd of multi millionaires. But taking a legitimate issue and poisoning it with the personal smacks of the worst of Free Republic. Whoever is responsible for such should be rewarded with silence or brief dismissal.

My post too is a waste of time if no one agrees with it. So we descend to irrelevant absurdity.

[saltpoint]

91. Despair not, Patrick. A lot of us agree with you.

The bile spat on Senator Kerry here is sour grapes at best. In the nomination process, not everyone's favorite candidate can possibly win. Eight, nine, or ten candidates' supporters will not see their man or woman nominated.

The anti-Kerry response is pouty and selfish. It's a shame. Politics is rife with disappointments, even within one's own party. It would be better for all if people whose candidates lost would rally & focus. There's a particularly bad administration in the White House we need to be rid of.

That really ought to be a reasonable enough goal.

[Jolene]

94. He's a flippin' 'Blair democrat!'

Why should we support a 'Blair democrat?'

[saltpoint]

96. Jolene, unless you live somewhere where they --

-- don't have voting precincts, you can vote for anybody you want.

You can write in for the most wildly socialist person you can find in the history books or on the current horizon.

You can skip voting altogether and go bowling.

That's up to you.

This is the Democratic Underground and a good number of Democrats will be supporting our ticket so that Bush is out of power.

In context and on the whole, I don't think that's a bad goal.

[Jolene]

99. No. I can't write in.

This is also the DU which was abuzz with sentiments opposing the Iraq War. So what you're saying is that unless you're unprincipled and you don't care that the party doesn't stand for anything important...that unless you're a skirt-flipper, chasing anyone foist upon you, you're not welcome here.

You didn't answer the question. I'm not surprised. It's a hard one to answer, without self-reflection. It's a shame such a large segment of the democratic grassroots has adopted the Bush policy of killing people without valid reason and without remorse.

'Blair democrat,' indeed. Just like saying 'Bush.'

An unprincipled vote is an unprincipled vote, whether it's cast by a republican or a democrat. I hear many republicans will be doing the same. I guess this is 'unity?'

[saltpoint]

100. Nope, Jolene. No sale.

Kerry has explained his vote on Iraq authorization; you missed it. I wrote to Kerry last year this time and received a thoughtful, non-canned response.

More to the point, hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters in several states from coast to coast have voted for John Kerry. He is our party's presumptive nominee. If you feel it's necessary to go door-to-door to those voters' homes and call them violent and unprincipled because of one Senator's vote on one issue, go ahead.

I believe most of them will slam the door in your face. I reject the idea that you are principled and that they are not.

I'm sorry your state won't allow write-ins, but that's no grounds for smearing our nominee.

[Jolene]

101. I'm waiting for Kerry to speak out

The DLC referred to him as being a 'Blair democrat' just recently. When he speaks out against the rhetoric, I'll be more welcoming.

Right now, what I see, is another flip flop. Kerry says one thing, and his organization says another. I can get that with Bush.

Oh, and this isn't smearing. This is a legitimate discussion. A 'smear' would be to say that Kerry has big ears and he porks dogs. Sorry.

DLC | New Dem Daily | March 3, 2004
The Democrats Decide

snip

As a charter member of the Senate New Democrat Coalition, Kerry has often rejected the stale left-right options that disguise the real choices facing the country -- choices that are rarely reflected in mechanical interest-group Congressional vote ratings, but that are in line with the real sentiments of the American people.

As a Blair Democrat and a proponent of a tough-minded progressive internationalism, Kerry understands that America's security and our influence in a dangerous world depend on both a willingness to use America's military might and a willingness to advance our values in concert with countries that share them.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=192&contentid=252427

It's time for Kerry to step up to the plate and show he can lead. When he speaks out to the inconsistencies between what he tells voters and what his organization portrays him as being - let me know.

[saltpoint]

102. We promise to alert you when Kerry begins to lead --

-- although the Democrats and many Independents in Massachusetts feel that Senator Kerry has been doing that already -- that is, he's already leading! They have even returned him to the U.S. Senate to CONTINUE leading more than once. You might want to contact some of them for their reasons in doing so.

It's clear the man doesn't meet your standards. Ok. Why all the bile? Even the GOP has told some in the media (NPR as early as this morning) that they had hoped to run against Dean, not Kerry, because Kerry would be a tougher opponent.

There must be some REASON why he'd be considered that way by the GOP. Kerry's where is he in our nominating process largerly because he appeals to a cross-section of Democratic voters in several states in decided majority numbers.

What is it that so many hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters have seen in him that you will not grant him?

[Jolene]

103. Is this what you normally do

when you're confronted with an inconsistency you can't justify?

This is just the beginning and the larger onslaught will not come from democratic ranks.

If Kerry wants to win (that is, unless his campaign believes that votes are dispensible and have completely forgotten 2000) he will speak out against this.

He can reach out by simply stating that 'I'm not a Blair Democrat!'

It's not that hard.

That is, IF he's as capable of leading as his supporters seem to think he is - he will do it.

[saltpoint]

104. I don't enjoy your unchecked confidence --

-- in living in a world without unjustified conflict. I'm afraid for me, hapless and rudderless, the world is an existential circus. It's just too tough to get a focus on what's happening, let alone have a reasoned political viewpoint.

I lack the clarity of vision, the unabashed certainty.

And what's more, I am impure and flawed in my support of a violent and unprincipled U.S. Senator.

I stand judged and corrected and condemned.

I consent to being flayed and scourged in Mel Gibson's next movie.
--------
Jolene: chill out. If you don't want to vote for John Kerry, don't vote for John Kerry. But the chip on your shoulder is huge and it is impossible to miss. Go out and do what you want.

=====
edit: typo

[Jolene]

110. So if I want the nominee

to represent me, should I speak out about my concerns only after I vote?

I'm not here to only speak out against Kerry. I'm here to find something in him which I can support. If you're saying I'm wasting my time, just say so.

Can I challenge the nominee, or does it scare too many supporters for me to do that? If I can't challenge the nominee here, where shall I challenge him? If I'm to vote for someone who is unapproachable, what makes Kerry unique?

[saltpoint]

112. "Why should I support a flippin' Blair Democrat" --

-- was how you put it.

I'd say because Senator Kerry would very likely be a more humane and thoughtful world leader than the incumbent. And for a number of reasons.

If after you evaluate John Kerry as a potential president and you find you don't wish to vote for him, then don't.

[Jolene]

114. Thanks.

That's all I need to know. The silence speaks volumes.

[saltpoint]

117. If you'd like, Jolene, you can contact Senator --

-- Kerry's office for any issue clarification. Many of the rest of us have followed him since before he was a U.S. Senator, and frankly, it is at least possible that we may know more about him than you do. Hence, the defense of John Kerry against those who attack him on DU.

Sorry your guy didn't win. Mine didn't either.

[Jolene]

118. What is your problem?

I didn't 'have a guy.' I have been a staunch supporter of no one. Got that? Good.

I have been waiting to see who the nominee would be, because that's the only real vote which matters to me, as it's final.

I thought I had ended the conversation gracefully, by telling you that you had told me all I need to know.

Just for the record: Kerry doesn't need people like you.

[saltpoint]

121. You got challenged, Jolene. And you couldn't respond --

-- to the points raised. Any candidate needs all the votes he or she can get in any election. You know that.

I have Senator Kerry's address and email if you'd like it.

My "problem" is I don't like people smearing Democratic candidates who will be our vehicle to unseating George W. Bush. it's bad form.

[Jolene]

123. Actually, I had called...

I was given the handoff. That's why I asked here.

Don't you have some other democratic candidate to destroy? I think you've done enough here.

I think you have me confused with someone who gives a shit. I asked a question in an effort for clarity. It wasn't answered. Whether or not Kerry is elected only means something to those who support him.

Hint: Consider me to the the precious, gold-tipped 'swing voter.' You just flunked.

[saltpoint]

124. It's rare to see an emotional defense of a --

-- straw man argument, but by god you pulled it off.

You charged through the door assailing the presumtive nominee of the Democratic Party.

Tough luck for you if you don't like him, he's in the lead in delegates. If you want a recount, call Terry.

The personal attacks on me suggest that you don't honor the process of nomination in our party. I'm a Democrat and I play by the rules of the nomination process.

It's still America. You can go do what you want. But if you smear Democrats to other Democrats, you're likely to be challenged.

[Jolene]

125. LOL! Bless your little heart

You think that was 'smearing?' You'd better get your asbestos suit on, because that was just a question - nothing more, and it was about an issue which burned very deeply in the hearts of many here.

FYI: I just tried to call the Georgia and Massachusetts offices. I got an answering machine on one, and no answer with the other. Kerry might consider working to fix that.

I have emailed his Georgia office, and the response I receive will affect what I do.

As for personal attack, it is not personal attack to inform you that your approach is alienating democrats who are trying to decide what to do. While you may take it personally, that's just a shame. Alienating voters in the upcoming election is an issue for the campaign, and it should be an issue for this site to address. I do find it quite humorous, however, that you would be lobbing the 'personal attack' whine at someone whom you had assumed so much about in pursuing your very 'friendly' method of debate and persuasion.

I hardly think the moderators of this site, in attempting to advance a safe place to discuss the nominee, would want us to protect the nominee to the point that we refused to address inconsistencies in the campaign which relate to issues that have been so important to this site's membership.

In short, there's a difference between coming here to bash Kerry, and attempting to discuss a possible weakness in his campaign, before the republicans exploit it.

Your taking things so personally does not affect the validity of the question which was asked, nor will your upset that the question was asked in the first place, deter me from posting the response (or lack of one) which I get from the Kerry campaign.

[saltpoint]

127. Your personal attacks on Senator Kerry --

-- were untoward and uninvited.

And by the way, I do not run the Kerry campaign. Please address your logistical concerns about its operation to the appropriate party.

[Name removed]

128. Deleted message

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

[saltpoint]

130. Just to review a few highlights:

It's a hard one to answer, without self-reflection. It's a shame such a large segment of the democratic grassroots has adopted the Bush policy of killing people without valid reason and without remorse.
'Blair democrat,' indeed. Just like saying 'Bush.'
An unprincipled vote is an unprincipled vote, whether it's cast by a republican or a democrat.


It's time for Kerry to step up to the plate and show he can lead. When he speaks out to the inconsistencies between what he tells voters and what his organization portrays him as being - let me know.


If Kerry wants to win (that is, unless his campaign believes that votes are dispensible and have completely forgotten 2000) he will speak out against this.
He can reach out by simply stating that 'I'm not a Blair Democrat!'
It's not that hard.

That is, IF he's as capable of leading as his supporters seem to think he is - he will do it.

I'm not here to only speak out against Kerry. I'm here to find something in him which I can support. If you're saying I'm wasting my time, just say so.

Just for the record: Kerry doesn't need people like you.


Don't you have some other democratic candidate to destroy? I think you've done enough here.

I think you have me confused with someone who gives a shit. I asked a question in an effort for clarity. It wasn't answered.

Whether or not Kerry is elected only means something to those who support him.

Hint: Consider me to the the precious, gold-tipped 'swing voter.' You just flunked.

====

Nice touch. You defended an attack by the original poster on our nominee. You were challenged. You didn't like it.

[nator311]

115. you're giving bush what he wants

I actually think that Iraq was started so that the democratic party could be split. His administration knew that there would be some people in the democratic party who would bolt to Nader because of the war (Kerry was the believed frontrunner in early 2003). So you're basically just selling out to the republican party.

[info being]

116. Or is it the war supporters who are selling out?

Let's see...one part of the Democratic Party is for the war...the other is against it. Which one is giving the Republicans what they want?

Please don't insult my intelligence.

[saltpoint]

119. nator311 raised an interesting point, whether --

-- one agrees or not. It was interesting because it was intelligent.

I enjoyed the post.

[info being]

120. I don't think it was an interesting point.

Our "opposition party" failed to act as an opposition party and that is what the ruling party wanted? And to counter this we are supposed to ALL support the ruling party?

Do you see how convoluted this thinking is?

[saltpoint]

122. You aren't required to find the point interesting --

-- but I'm not required to dismiss it. It was thoughtful, well-expressed, and intelligent.

Part of the dialogue.

[JVS]

126. Either way you play it, Bush gets what he wants.

Either you affirm Democratic leaders who are more willing to work with Bush than against him, or you don't vote for the candidate most likely to beat Bush.

It is lose-lose.