Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

When is enough, Enough?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 04:59 PM
Original message
When is enough, Enough?
I have a sister who never, and I mean NEVER fails to mention just how much she loathes sports of any kind, whenever she is in my presence.

For a great many years now, I have been able to sense when she is going to go off on the subject of sports, and so I interrupt and finish her very predictable thought, followed up by a "yes, Mary Jane. I think we know how you feel."

I relate this story to former and current supporters of other candidates. First of all, I don't want to make the mistake of painting all with one broad brush stroke. Many have been gracious, when getting behind John Kerry. But there are many who can't or won't let go, without saying things like, "John Kerry stinks, but I'll vote for him", or "I can't stand him, but I will vote for him", or "I guess we're stuck with him", or "He's the lesser of two evils", or "I was a (fill in the blank with your former candidate).

You get the picture. The list of derrogatory remarks, followed by the phrase, "but I will vote for him", are endless.

I understand many of you are unhappy. I also know that we have the freedom to speak our mind. And I also know that this is a risky post, because some people will tell me, "How dare you try to tell me what to say or what not to say!" Which is true. I'm walking a fine line here, folks.

I don't have the right, nor does anyone else have the right to tell you what you can or cannot say, with the occasional exception of Skinner. But when is enough, enough? What useful purpose does it serve to constantly remind people every time you post, that you hate Kerry, but will vote for him?

Honestly, if I had a nickle for every remark like these, I could take my wife out for a wonderful steak dinner and a movie.

Could we please tone down the anti-Kerry rhetoric? I don't see where it does any good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dying Eagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thank You
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniorPlankton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Agreed! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. As one who finds the back and forth flaming
Edited on Fri Mar-05-04 05:06 PM by salin
not only pointless, but very counterproductive... I would suggest that on both side of this current divide, the first step would be to stop initiating these kinds of threads from either direction. Inevitably it is part of a DU inspired perpetual motion machine. Tit for tat threads.

There have been several threads in the past couple of days about how to work together and find common ground - how those who are not content with Kerry - can be involved on so many other levels (lets face it - give Kerry a democratic congress - and he will do better... also getting more anti bush info/news/etc. out there - will get more people who might not be voting willing to come out to the polls.)

Sadly - these threads from either direction - from each side taking a high road and intended or not rather steps on the other - just leads to more of the same.

Want to stop reading the threads that bug you? Hide them for now - participate on the other types of threads to which I refer until THOSE threads become dominant - stop starting threads that will inevitably result in one or more response threads (the ones that bug you.)

Far too few folks on either side of this are willing to take responsibility for their own actions that feed into this dynamic.

I find both types of threads to be... Boring, old, repetitive, and counter productive.

on edit - wrote far too many... meant (and now edited) far too few...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
34. They Serve One Purpose...
to increase the number of people on my ignore list. Over 50 now.

I did a quick review and peeked at the profile of everyone on my ignore list. One in ten has been tombstoned. Hmmm. Isn't that interesting.

-- Allen

P.S. When is Arbor Day?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nothingshocksmeanymore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #34
57. as long as you can still read this
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #57
60. Yes I Can.
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DuctapeFatwa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. Ohh have I got the thread for YOU!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DenverDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. Doesn't do any good, now.
Significant that such a pile of nickels would result from so many people's feelings of misgiving, however.

Enough will be enough when The People truly control this country again. There's a long way to go to get to that point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #5
41. I'm sorry, was the DLC the only one that voted?
I thought Kerry actually WON all those primaries by getting votes from real live people -- real live Democrats. Silly me.

Bake
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
6. maybe we all need
to look at our part in it, littlejoe? It would be my observation that you've done plenty to fan the flames. At some point it would be nice if we ALL stopped - but as long as these threads get started over and over, the fire isn't going to die down.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I'm not offering any more culpability, and I'm not asking for any
from anyone, Maxanne. All I'm asking for is for the democrats to bury the hatchet. (preferably not in each other's skulls anymore) What's wrong with a little civility now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. my advice
is be a power of example. Start by cleaing up your side of the street. In the end, that's what we all have to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangh0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. You might want to take the broom to your street
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. right now I would be happy to swat all with the broom
almost as if slapping down each other is more important than mobilizing action, discussing policy and strategy, deconstructing bushie moves/rhetoric or anything else that can actually contribute to taking back control of DC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #13
29. That's the goal here. To stop the petty rhetoric and get on with
much more important things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangh0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Good luck
Edited on Fri Mar-05-04 07:01 PM by sangh0
but I'm convinced that there are people who have an interest in making sure that never happens. They are not going to stop "for the good of the party" because they have no interest in helping our party.

Take a look at posts # 9 (the sig line),14,15,17,19,22 where I show what Kerry has said wrt the issues one poster says Kerry never talks about. Then tell me where the response is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. It is true. Some people have their own agenda, even if they're
not really sure what it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Some of the reptitive looping
and perhaps intentional distracting, is actually coming from the direction of those who claim to be behind Kerry. Feeding into it from either side - does nothing but perpetuate it. If one is feeding it - and then complains that it won't stop - then one has become a part of the dynamic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. Intentional distracting? Oh really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. I should have written
"some" as a modifier (am usually more careful). Appologies - but yes, some of the intentional distraction comes from that direction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #39
53. IMO *some* of it is intentional
and ignoring it won't make it go away because there are those who have no intentions of seeing it go away. Ignoring only gives them license to spread misinformation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. You know, Maxanne, there's just no pleasing some people!
And I can tell you're one I'm never going to please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. you may be right
I hate hypocrisy. Right now I see you in the pot kettle conundrum.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #21
27. Let me be perfectly honest with you, as I always am.
I have never started anything. ANYTHING!

I HAVE allowed myself to get drawn in to pissing contests, and I know how to dish things out pretty well. But this is all beside the point of my post.

Whether you want to believe me or not at this point is irrellevant to me. Your behavior from here on in is on your shoulders, not mine. ??After this post, I'm putting you on ignore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #27
38. You have never started anything?
Here is what I found with one search using you as the author.

Will there be a role for Kucinich when the smoke clears?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-19-04 02:04 PM (87 replies)


I'm sick of being censored by DU. Goodbye and good luck.
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-19-04 09:43 PM (12 replies)

Will Pitt is right
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-19-04 09:16 PM (8 replies)

Dean supporters for Kerry
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-18-04 06:11 PM (55 replies)

John Edwards--savior or snake oil salesman?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-19-04 12:26 PM (10 replies)

Heady stuff, but polls mean very little at this point.
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-19-04 11:53 AM (0 replies)

Can Edwards stand the heat of scrutiny?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-18-04 09:47 PM (47 replies)

Don't hold Kerry's success against him
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-18-04 09:24 PM (12 replies)

Will Dean still have a role to play in the party?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-18-04 03:34 PM (13 replies)

Is Dean's ego getting the best of him?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-18-04 01:33 PM (61 replies)

Why Dean supporters should make Dean's mind up for him.
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-17-04 01:49 PM (64 replies)

Richardson, Bayh, Edwards or? Who do you like for V.P.?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-11-04 02:49 PM (37 replies)

What was that Edwards was saying?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-11-04 01:56 PM (13 replies)

Dean supporters, please urge your man to quit.
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-11-04 01:29 PM (9 replies)

I supported Dean, but I voted Kerry today!
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-03-04 03:30 PM (49 replies)

When is enough, Enough?
Topic started by littlejoe on Mar-05-04 04:59 PM (37 replies)

Missourians for Kerry.....Check In
Topic started by littlejoe on Mar-04-04 11:20 AM (8 replies)

Al Gore for V.P.?
Topic started by littlejoe on Mar-04-04 09:33 AM (10 replies)

Tweety is making me sick tonight!
Topic started by littlejoe on Mar-04-04 10:11 AM (0 replies)

Kerry reaches out in Florida
Topic started by littlejoe on Mar-03-04 04:59 PM (1 replies)

Why you shouldn't vote for Dean
Topic started by littlejoe on Mar-02-04 12:08 PM (183 replies)

What is your definition of "progressive"?
Topic started by littlejoe on Mar-01-04 10:29 PM (36 replies)

One Democrat, in search of a "No Spin" zone....
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-29-04 04:21 PM (12 replies)

How many gay marriage threads on Kerry is Murikan Democrat going to post t
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-28-04 12:48 PM (19 replies)

Kerry's appeal to southern voters.
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-27-04 03:54 PM (34 replies)

Has DU turned Republican?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-27-04 04:40 PM (103 replies)

Food for thought
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-26-04 02:30 PM (114 replies)

Mathematically, how does Edwards have a chance?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-26-04 07:27 PM (45 replies)

Kerry Supporters---Upset with his stance on Gay Marriage or Not?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-25-04 11:58 AM (99 replies)

Some Sobering News
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-22-04 04:08 PM (127 replies)

Support for Edwards wanes going into Super Tuesday
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-25-04 11:47 AM (0 replies)

Support for Edwards wanes heading into Super Tuesday
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-25-04 11:36 AM (3 replies)

What Will Greens do Now That Nader is Indie?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-22-04 01:18 PM (17 replies)

No No No! I should be president!
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-22-04 02:59 PM (10 replies)

What do the Pope and Mother Theresa have in common?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-22-04 10:42 AM (0 replies)

Why ABB Must Happen Seriously, You Have to Read This!
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-21-04 07:59 PM (19 replies)

Apologies to all concerned
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-21-04 02:51 PM (8 replies)

If Kerry becomes the nominee, why WON'T you support him?
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-19-04 12:58 PM (174 replies)

It's just a terrible, terrible thing....
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-20-04 10:20 PM (43 replies)

Angry DUer's---Don't get mad, get even!
Topic started by littlejoe on Feb-19-04 06:24 PM (77 replies)


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=search_advanced&hits_per_page=25&search_type=advanced&page=1

The above is a complete list of the results of that search. I reported I will let everyone decide. I think more than a few of the titles are self explanatory. You started each and every one of these threads. So, tell us how you "have never started anything again."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxanne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. thanks dsc
amazing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #38
43. So, I'm glad to see that you are thorough in your research, which
still doesn't prove your point.

These threads raise valid questions about the candidates. You still can't prove, nor would you be able to, that I have been mean spirited when addressing any candidate.


We all try to influence each other with our opinions and research. Every single person on the DU does this. Why do you single me out?

I think it is just because you are unhappy with my message.

Any mean spiritedness on my part has come in response to personal attacks directed toward me. That's not really okay with me, but I can handle myself quite well, thank you.

Rest assured, any future attacks on me will be met with the same vigor as before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. Please tell me the nice spirted way in which each of the following
were intened. In all cases the link to the thread will preceed the quote.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=418915

A lot of people that read this thread are naturally going to say that I have an ax to grind; that I have an agenda.

Well I don't have an ax to grind. Honestly, I don't.

But I do have an agenda, and I think most of you know that I am campaigning for Sen. John Kerry.

But, suppose, just briefly, that I were undecided, and had an opportunity to vote in a primary today.

Why wouldn't I vote for Howard Dean?

I have a few good reasons.

When I look at a candidate, I want to know that they are willing to fight for me. Fight, and not fold when the going gets tough.

I want a candidate who has the courage to stand up for his convictions. In other words, a candidate who stands for something.

I also want a candidate who understands the need for consensus and is willing to work with the opposition for equitable compromise.(For a politician to be successful, this is imperitive.)

So?

When Howard Dean dropped out of the race after Wisconsin, he showed to me that he didn't have what it took, to be the Commander-in-Chief. He folded like a tent under intense scrutiny.

That act alone made me question his committment to his beliefs. The very beliefs which he sold quite well to his followers. In my mind, if his cause was so noble, he should have weathered the storm of scrutiny and criticism, as Dennis Kucinich and Al Sharpton have done.

Neither Kucinich or Sharpton have wavered in the face of scrutiny, ridicule and dismissiveness. Even though I feel that their candidacy is a distraction at this point in time, I DO admire them for not giving up or giving in. And neither of them have much money. But that is not a factor to their cause.

So I have to question, not only if Howard Dean really believes in what he gave speeches on, but I also have to question just how hard he really would fight for us citizens, if he was willing to give up on himself and us so easily.

One last thing. I would also like a candidate whose track record jibes with his platform. For Dean, there seemed to be a disconnect here. His record as Governor of Vermont suggests to me that he was a moderate to slightly conservative democrat. Yet his presidential campaign struck me as uncompromisingly far-left leaning. Why the change? I don't know, but I think it is a fair question to ask.

Many will take this post as flame bait, but these are musings that have been gnawing at me for some time.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=362890

John Edwards--savior or snake oil salesman?


Sen.John Edwards has a shiny veneer. Is he the real deal, or not what he appears to be? Tell me if you think he has staying power, or if John Edwards will be "crossing over" to the sidelines.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=356343

Is Dean's ego getting the best of him?


Unlike other Democratic candidates who didn't make the grade this season, Howard Dean, who announced the suspension of his campaign, refuses to go away and gracefully blend into the background.

So, as I asked, is Dean's ego getting the best of him? Could it be that this is his version of sour grapes?

Bob Graham left quietly. So did Dick Gephardt, Wes Clark and Carol Mosely Braun. Is this his justification for clinging to the last remnants of a terribly run campaign? Is this his only opportunity to save face?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=348259

Why Dean supporters should make Dean's mind up for him.


With his campaign in a shambles, as he is now going on his third campaign manager,Howard Dean has no chance to win the nomination. At least Carol Mosely Braun, Dick Gephardt, Wes Clark and Bob Graham knew when to get out, so as not to hurt the party's chances. It appears now, that Dean's continued push is fueled more by an ego who can't decide on a graceful exit strategy.

As a former Dean supporter, one of the biggest reasons that I switched my allegiance, was that I became really angry at the way he had run his campaign. I could not stand to go through what I did four years ago with Al Gore, who I felt, at the time had run one of the most inept campaigns I had ever witnessed. Governor Dean now holds that distinction. He had everything going for him and turned it all into a string of third and fourth place finishes. And let's not forget how he squandered over thirty million dollars on Iowa and New Hampshire. He gambled everything on those two states and lost.

Last but not least there is the matter of wanting to be taken seriously as a presidential candidate, yet deciding to skip numerous states to focus only on one. I want a president who is willing to fight for every vote in every state.

To all Dean supporters: Do your candidate and the democratic party a favor and withdraw your support. Place it directly behind John Kerry and let's all go after George Bush.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=312172

Dean supporters, please urge your man to quit.


The inevitable is at hand and the smoke is already settling. Howard Dean does not have a remote chance of winning the nomination. All of you supporters should e-mail in and urge Dr. Dean to quit. At this point it is nothing more than an ego thing.

Besides, I am furious at Dr. Dean for running probably the most inept and spend-happy campaign in my memory. All of you should be really upset that he blew over thirty million dollars in Iowa and New Hampshire and got ZERO to show for it, except a campaign on life-support.

Dean is nothing more than a distraction now. For the good of the party and the common goal of unseating Bush, withdraw your support for Howard Dean now, and urge him to quit the race and throw his support behind John Kerry

end of all quotes

This time I admittedly cherry picked. But I quoted the entire initial posts in all cases. Bear in mind, your problem as stated in the initial post, is that we are insulting and mean spirited toward Kerry not Kerry's supporters. Please tell me how calling Edwards a snake oil salesman and Dean a quitter isn't mean spirited.














Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. Boy some people are touchy. Where I come from, and, having
Edited on Sat Mar-06-04 12:45 PM by littlejoe
received a double major in journalism and history some thirty-odd years ago, all that you have posted here are valid questions. Don't kill the messenger simply because you don't like the message.

By contrast, if I were to say something like, "Howard Dean is an egg-sucking mule,(I could use much stronger language here to make my point), who looks and acts effeminate," then you might be on to something.

If you can't take legitimate knocks on your candidate, then you are in the wrong avocation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. For those who might have forgotten
This is the conduct you are complaining about in your initial post.

relate this story to former and current supporters of other candidates. First of all, I don't want to make the mistake of painting all with one broad brush stroke. Many have been gracious, when getting behind John Kerry. But there are many who can't or won't let go, without saying things like, "John Kerry stinks, but I'll vote for him", or "I can't stand him, but I will vote for him", or "I guess we're stuck with him", or "He's the lesser of two evils", or "I was a (fill in the blank with your former candidate).

end of quote

Now I would love to know just what difference there is between the words you wrote that I quoted and the conduct above about which you posted an entire thread to complain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. Plenty. If you can't see it, after my trying numerous times to patiently
explain it to you, then I have to come to the conclusion that you are unwilling to listen to the voice of reason.

By the way, how old are you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #54
56. 36 though I haven't a clue why that matters
But no you haven't explained anything. You keep claiming it is somehow a difference between stating Kerry is lacking on issues and Dean is lacking on issues (and that is a very kind way of putting what you said). I would really love to know the difference here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #56
58. It's obvious that you don't, really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. what is obvious is that you can't
because the only discernable difference is who is doing the criticism and who is being critisized. It sure isn't in the respectful tone you took because you didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. are you willing to do that
no more of these hatchet in the skull threads? Because they inevitably spur the exact counter threads that you are decrying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. I'm asking for a little civility and good manners, that's all.
What's wrong with that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. perhaps doing so in a civil manner
might be an effective first step?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. How much more civil can I be for god's sake?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
7. Little Joe, we could fund the campaign!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
info being Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
9. Here's the problem:
Edited on Fri Mar-05-04 05:27 PM by info being
I've spent the last few years doing a lot of research about what our government is doing, how the power structure works, etc. Therefore I can speak with a lot of credibility...and I do, to both Liberals and Conservatives.

But John Kerry's message is muddy. It's confusing. He sometimes uses dishonest debating techniques. You can't pin him down on an issue. In short, I can't trust him because he doesn't tell me what to trust him with. I've watched all the debates and I can't figure out what he stands for. The only thing he does well is criticize others.

OK, so back to my point. If I say "Vote Kerry, he is a good man we can trust. He will do the right thing," I know I'm losing credibility. I know I'm being dishonest with myself. So the only thing I can do is say, "Kerry isn't that great, but he's not as bad as Bush so we should vote for him."

If the mainstream Dems don't like this...then why did they put us in this situation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangh0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Sometimes you use dishonest debating techniques
like claiming that there's no difference between Bush* and Kerry when it comes to military spending when Kerry is clearly against NMD, tactical nukes, preventive war, and several other military-spending-related issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangh0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Affordable Health Care for All Americans
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1214.html

"Seven months ago, I unveiled my health care plan at Mercy Medical in Des Moines. On that day, I vowed to fight for the day when affordable health care is a right, not a privilege, for every American..."

What is unclear about that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangh0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Plan for Winning the Peace in Post-Saddam Iraq
Plan for Winning the Peace in Post-Saddam Iraq

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/iraq/

Speaking in Iowa, John Kerry outlined a plan for winning the peace in Post-Saddam Iraq, trying the former Iraqi leader, and building a lasting coalition to support our operations.

Capturing Saddam Represents an Opportunity for the U.S. Kerry believes that we have recently seen two major diversions from the historical path of American leadership. On one side is President Bush – who has taken America off onto the road of unilateralism. On the other side are those in the Democratic Party who threaten to take us on a trail of confusion and retreat.

Kerry believes that we don’t need a President who will walk away from the world or a President who will walk alone. He believes that we need a President who will lead the nations of the world into a new era of security, freedom, and peace. Kerry believes that capturing Saddam Hussein provides a new opportunity for the United States to build a broader coalition and win the peace in Iraq. Today he unveiled his plan to rally the world’s free and democratic countries into that coalition.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangh0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. So President Bush needs to take four immediate steps.
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1216.html

"...So President Bush needs to take four immediate steps.

First, go back to the international community and to the United Nations and offer a real partnership in Iraq. We need a new Security Council resolution to give the United Nations authority in the rebuilding process and the development of a new Iraqi Constitution and government. Ambassador Bremer and the Coalition Provisional Authority should be sincerely thanked for their service – and replaced by a UN Special Representative in Iraq who will remove the stigma of foreign occupation from our presence there. The United States has ample power and influence to establish a working relationship which guarantees— indeed guides us to—an outcome which meets our goals and security needs.

Second, the UN authorization for international forces in Iraq is finally in place, but to expand participation we have to share responsibility, which the Administration still won’t do. We need to conduct real diplomacy with the goal of really getting boots on the ground.

As we internationalize the work in Iraq, we need to add 40,000 troops – the equivalent of two divisions – to the American military in order to meet our responsibilities elsewhere – especially in the urgent global war on terror. In my first 100 days as President, I will move to increase the size of our Armed Forces. Some may not like that. But today, in the face of grave challenges, our armed forces are spread too thin. Our troops in Iraq are paying the price for this everyday. There’s not enough troops in the ranks of our overall armed forces to bring home those troops that have been in Iraq for more than a year.

President Bush’s policies have overextended our military – and turned reserves into fulltime soldiers. Iowa, with a population of less than three million people, is in the Top 10 states in the proportion of National Guard troops on active duty; more than 2,600 of Iowa's 9,500 Army and Air Guard soldiers have been activated. George Bush and Don Rumsfeld say we have enough troops. I think they’re putting politics and pride ahead of what is right for our soldiers, our reserves, and our security.

Third, we need a reasonable plan and a specific timetable for self-government, for transferring political power and the responsibility for reconstruction to the people of Iraq. That means completing the tasks of security and democracy in that country – not cutting and running in order to claim a false success for the sake of the 2004 election. The timing of events in Iraq should not be keyed to the timetable of the Bush re-election campaign. Genuinely engaging the Iraqi people in shaping new institutions is fundamental to the long term cause of a stable, peaceful, and independent Iraq that contributes to the world instead of threatening it.

The actions we now take to try Saddam Hussein can advance that hope – or set it back. Justice must come to a brutal tyrant who has threatened the world and murdered hundreds of thousands of his own citizens.

But it must come through a new American partnership with the people of Iraq and of the international community. This is a unique time when we can show and not just speak the values of a free and just society to Iraqis, to the rest of the Arab world, and to our own people here at home. We can demonstrate in an unforgettable way that the rule of law includes rights that cannot be denied even to a despot. What a powerful signal that would be – a signal that would reverberate across the globe and even across generations.

So the question of how to structure the trial of Saddam Hussein is not just a legal issue; it is a test of our values and our intentions. Saddam Hussein committed heinous crimes against the Iraqi people and the international community, but we cannot try him in some kind of kangaroo court without due process of law. To do so would reinforce our image as an occupying power and set back the cause of a new beginning in Iraq. We need to work with the Iraqi leadership to create a path to true justice that is fair and credible – in their eyes, in the eyes of other Arab and Muslim people, and in the eyes of the international community.

After working with the Cambodian government and the United Nations for years to form the upcoming genocide tribunal in Cambodia, it is clear to me that we cannot and must not ignore the emotional and political stake the Iraqi people have in this issue. But as I saw in Cambodia, the international community also has a major stake in the quest for justice.

The Iraqi people should see the trial firsthand because that will prove once and for all that Saddam Hussein is gone. It was important that Nazi war criminals be tried in Germany, just as it will be important that those responsible for the Killing Fields be tried in Cambodia. Trying Saddam Hussein in Iraq will provide an essential sense of closure for the Iraqi people. And we and the world have a deep interest in showing the Iraqi people that a judicial process with transparency, fairness, and justice can provide accountability and a penalty that fits the crime.

That’s why I believe a mixed tribunal, in which international judges, prosecutors, and investigators work alongside Iraqis, is the best guarantee of a fair and valid process. While setting up a credible mixed tribunal in Iraq may be more difficult then going to an international tribunal in the Hague, I believe it will be more credible in the long term; it will give Iraqis a place and a stake in the process – and it will lead to a stronger judicial system in that country for years to come.

Fourth, as we establish the rule of law, we urgently need to rebuild a sense of basic order. Today lawlessness and chaos, rampant violence and property destruction, threaten Iraqis and undermine the creation of a civil society. The job properly belongs to the new Iraqi security forces. And the United States and the allies we enlist need to do a far better job of training them – and then transferring authority to them.

The Iraqi military battalion we just trained suffered a massive desertion when about half the troops left over inadequate pay. We need to get the planning right and stop making elementary mistakes. We need realistic support, equipment and pay. And we need to get this Iraqi Security force into shape to achieve early successes so that Iraqis can have confidence in their army and the troops can have confidence in themselves.

Iraqi police forces also need adequate training and mentoring. Here at home, a police officer has four to six months of training. We may not have that luxury in Iraq, but training must be sufficient – not just speedy. And the police forces too need real support, equipment and pay. Countries like Italy, France, and Spain have national police forces with a paramilitary capability. They could contribute by preparing and mentoring a similar Iraqi force.

But they won’t do it unless the Bush Administration changes course, renounces unilateralism, and turns a new page in Iraq and in all our international relations. We must lead, not order.

We should be prepared to act to protect our interest, but we must also be ready to listen to others.

So leadership is the issue – abroad and at home.

In a world shadowed by terrorism, Americans are asking. Who can best defend us? Who can meet the challenge of this dangerous time? In the next election, Democrats owe the American people more than anger; we owe them answers. To earn their trust, we must prove by our experience and our vision that our approach to national security and foreign policy is strong and credible – and the best way to defend our nation.

I am here to say that holding Saddam accountable was important, even if not always popular. I am here to say that doing nothing would have been the most dangerous path of all. But I am also here to say that the price of unilateralism in Iraq is too high, and Americans are paying it – in resources that could be used for health care, education, and our security here at home. We are paying that price in respect lost around the world – respect we need to win the war not just in one country, but the global war on terror. And most important, the price is paid in the lives of young Americans forced to shoulder the burden of this mission alone.

We must change a course of unilateralism and pre-emptive war that is radically wrong for America. Saddam’s capture offers even this Administration the chance to make change. And if we as Democrats are to change America, we cannot seek to replace the Bush unilateralism with confusion and retreat. Let’s bring in our allies, take the target off our troops, and let’s finally win the peace in Iraq. In a time of fear, in a uncertain world, let’s affirm that America’s security depends on our own strength, but also on our ideals, and on the will and wisdom to forge a new era of internationalism where this nation truly and proudly is, as Lincoln said, the “best hope of earth.”

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangh0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Ending the Era of John Ashcroft
Ending the Era of John Ashcroft
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_1201.html

"Iowans who use the public library are used to signs being posted on the wall. They might point to the reference desk or remind people to be quiet while inside the building. But, recently, residents of Iowa City who have visited the public library have been greeted with a new sign. It is a sign that tells us that some of what is fundamental to this country – and that we are right to hold dear – is in danger of being taken from us.

The sign reads: “Attention: Under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act…records of all books and materials you borrow from this library, and of Internet sites you visit on library computers, may be obtained by federal agents. This law prohibits librarians from informing you if federal agents have obtained records.”

In the past two years, speaker after speaker in this lecture series has focused on the impact of the September 11th attacks. They are right to do so. The War on Terror is the defining issue of our time. It is testing us daily. Testing our strength. Testing our resolve. Testing our patience. Testing our vision. And it is testing our faith in the ideals our nation was founded on.

Equality for every American. Liberty and justice for all. We teach out children that these rights are inalienable. But under the Bush Administration, we are being shown how fragile they really are – and how much they must be defended.

Today, I’d like to speak with you about how I will fight the dangers of terrorism here at home without surrendering the very rights and liberties we are fighting to defend. Because I believe campaigns should be about telling people what they’re going to get when they cast their vote for President.

Americans deserve more than a campaign of slogans and sound bites. They deserve substance. They deserve real answers, not just anger. You see, this election is not just about replacing George Bush – it’s about changing the direction of our country. People in Iowa don’t go to caucus just because they support a candidate. You do it because you love America – and want it to be better. And you deserve to know what I – and every other candidate – would do to make this nation all it should be.

As I talk to people around the country, it’s clear there is a broad based fear that the ideologues of this Administration will stop at nothing to get dissenters out of the way. Already, they are summoning the full-power of their communications network – the attack ads, the Ann Coulters, the Sean Hannitys, the Rush Limbaughs – to try to stifle dissent. In the name of the War on Terror, they are attempting to diminish the very rights that define us. They turn civil debate into a shouting match of personal mudslinging that does a disservice to the quality of our democracy. These pretender protectors of our Constitution are trying to intimidate those who dare to speak out. We will not be silenced. We will be heard.

In my first hundred days, I will restore our commitment to civil rights and individual rights. And that will begin with the appointment of an Attorney General whose commitment to and understanding of the Constitution is as great as that of all Americans. An Attorney General who knows we can fight the war on terrorism without attacking America’s freedoms. An Attorney General whose name is not John Ashcroft. If I am President, this government will protect individual rights not roll them back. We will protect equal rights, privacy rights, and a woman’s right to choose. And we will restore the constitutional foundation of this nation.

Clearly in the War on Terror, we need to be prepared. Information is the most critical weapon we have. We need to be able to get and coordinate that information in a real way. And that means we need a President and an Attorney General who are ready to do that in ways that are consistent with who we are. Americans deserve to know there is some buffer between them and the unbridled power of our government.

After September 11th, this Administration gathered and used broad new powers to investigate the private lives of people in this country. The powers were supposed to be used fight the War on Terror. But George Bush and John Ashcroft have gone beyond that. They have used police powers in secret ways and for political purposes. John Ashcroft has authorized his agents to monitor church meetings and political rallies without any cause and without the need to get approval. Thirteen FAA employees and a high-tech Homeland Security tracking system were used to help Tom Delay track down Texas State Legislators who were resisting his plan to give Republicans more seats in Congress.

And the FBI investigated peaceful demonstrators who spoke out against this Administration’s policies in Iraq. I know what it’s like to be spied on by the government because it happened to me under Nixon when I came home from Vietnam and said that war was wrong. And one thing we don’t need in this country is an Attorney General who spies on Americans.

Consider the story of Barry Reingold. Barry is 61 – a retired phone-company employee who lives in Oakland, California. One day in July of last year, while at his local gym, he got into a heated discussion about George Bush. He didn’t say a threatening word and all he did was criticize the President’s policies. But soon thereafter he was visited at home by two FBI agents who were investigating his criticisms of the President.

An America that creates a secret police power which can by its secret discretion invade the privacy of Americans and intimidate them is a far cry from what our Founders envisioned and from what we have fought to protect for 228 years.

A country where you are visited by the authorities for thinking or voicing an unpopular idea smacks more of the Taliban than Thomas Jefferson. Trading in our basic rights for the false facade of security is not worth it – and it is not worthy of a great nation such as America.

We are a nation of laws and liberties, not of a knock in the night. So it is time to end the era of John Ashcroft.

That starts with replacing the Patriot Act with a new law that protects our people and our liberties at the same time. I’ve been a District Attorney and I know that what law enforcement needs are real tools not restrictions on American’s basic rights.

Much of what is in Patriot Act are good ideas. The Act increased penalties for terrorists, limited the statute of limitations for terrorist crimes, and allowed for greater prosecution of overseas acts against America. I fought to include important money laundering restrictions to clamp down on the cash flowing to terrorist enterprises. I had been pushing for these ideas since the late nineties – and after September 11th they were more important than ever.

I voted for the Patriot Act right after September 11th – convinced that – with a sunset clause – it was the right decision to make. It clearly wasn’t a perfect bill – and it had a number of flaws – but this wasn’t the time to haggle. It was the time to act.

But George Bush and John Ashcroft abused the spirit of national action after the terrorist attacks. They have used the Patriot Act in ways that were never intended and for reasons that have nothing to do with terrorism. That’s why, as President, I will propose new anti-terrorism laws that advance the War on Terror while ending the assault on our basic rights.

This Administration has shown a pattern of abusing civil liberties. At this very moment, an FBI agent could be rifling through every website you’ve ever visited – and you would never know it. A Justice Department official in Washington could be reading every email you’ve sent in the last few months – and they wouldn’t need a judges permission or even a reason to do so. School librarians could be being placed under gag orders to keep them from speaking out. Federal investigators could be demanding and receiving upon request your private hospital medical records. Law enforcement officers could be entering your house while you are gone – rifling through your possessions – and leaving without every letting you know they had been there.

While the Administration assures us that some of these things have not occurred, no one feels comfortable with these possibilities. It doesn’t take a cynic to wonder about how far George Bush and John Ashcroft will go.

Many of the victims of the Bush Administration’s civil liberties violations are of Arab-descent – but our Constitution is color-blind. An assault on one person’s rights is an assault on this nation’s fabric and on all our rights. The Americans threatened when basic rights become treated as disposable are not just those from the Mid East. They’re Americans from the Midwest and all over our country.

If I’m elected President, we will put an end to “sneak and peak” searches which permit law enforcement to conduct a secret search and seize evidence without notification. Agents can break into a home or business to take photos, seize property, copy computer files, or load a secret keystroke detector on a computer. These searches should be limited only to the most rare circumstances. And law enforcement should provide notice of the search within seven days, unless a court extends the period of notification.

We will eliminate the potential of fishing expeditions into people’s library and business records. If the FBI wants to make these kinds of investigations, they will need a warrant issued by a judge and evidence that they are looking into an agent of a foreign power.

We will provide Americans with protections from wiretaps, prevent local police officers from spying on innocent people, and that ensures our courts guarantee appropriate national security protections.

At the same time, we need to strengthen the laws that actually do help us combat terrorism and keep America safe. This is some of the hard-work of fighting terrorism which the Administration has all too often failed to do. In the months leading up to September 11th, two of the hijackers were arrested for drunk driving -- and another was stopped for speeding and then let go even though he was the subject of an arrest warrant in a neighboring county and was on a federal terrorist watch list. Firefighters and law enforcement must have access to critical data so they can connect the dots. And we need to simplify and streamline the 58 national terrorist watch lists and make sure they’re available to the right people on the frontlines.

Four of the five terrorists who crashed an airliner into the Pentagon had false IDs. If teenagers trying to buy beer can falsify IDs, can we be surprised when terrorists can fake driver’s licenses and visas? It’s time for a new generation of smart driver’s licenses and IDs that use encrypted technology so they can’t be forged. Instead of the assault on our civil liberties that John Ashcroft is waging, we need to rely on new technology that can protect our privacy and our county at the same time. We need to reform our intelligence agencies so they collect, analyze and share all the relevant information they can about the terrorist threat.

Many of this Administration’s abuses of civil liberties have nothing to do with the Patriot Act. That’s especially true of the hundreds of people that have been detained without explanation and without real cause. John Ashcroft’s Justice Department has been so arrogant and reckless in detaining people that even the Department’s Inspector General has cried foul. 762 people – Arabs and Muslims – were detained, sometimes for many months, regardless of the evidence. Most were never charged with a real crime. Not one was charged in relation to the terrorism probe. But the average wait for the FBI to clear a detainee for deportation was 80 days, with some waiting as long as eight months. In numerous cases, people not accused of any crime were locked down 23 hours a day, sometimes in solitary confinement, and shackled when outside their cells.

Nacer Fathi Mustafa and his father, American citizens of Palestinian descent, were stopped by immigration agents in Houston on their way back home from a business trip to Mexico. They were arrested and charged with altering their passports. The authorities finally decided that there, in fact, was nothing wrong with their passports. After they had been held in a Texas jail for 67 days. John Ashcroft calls the policy “hold until cleared.” That’s just a fancy way of saying “guilty until proven innocent.” It is at odds with everything America’s justice system should be about – and it is wrong.

Americans have a right to expect more from their government. And a right to know what is happening in their country. We are a democracy after all – and in this country it is the people that rule. Yet, President Bush first resisted the pleas to appoint the bipartisan 9/11 commission and now that it is at work, the commission’s leaders – Republicans and Democrats alike – are reporting that the President, John Ashcroft, and other officials are blocking their requests for essential information. Each additional day of stonewalling is another day that all Americans are at increased risk. Our very security is at stake and this isn’t the time for the same-old political cover-up. It’s time to find the truth, face the truth, and tell the truth. If I am President, we will end this Administrations reign of secrecy and inform the American people about what actions are being taken to fight the War on Terror...."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
23. But how many times does a person feel the need to drive their
point across? That's what I'm getting at. What purpose does it serve? And, how does showing good manners betray your principles?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
25. If there is an issue
that you think Kerry "can't be pinned down on" it isn't because Kerry hasn't given a clear answer on it -- you name an issue and I will tell you exactly what Kerry's position is. I'm not saying you will like the answer. I'm not saying the answer will always be a simple yes/no/black/white answer. But it is simply false to level the charge you have leveled.

And I don't think it is a coincidence that you didn't mention any specific issues when making your accusation. A vague accusation can not be answer in a precise manner.

And that is a "dishonest debating technique" as you put it.

So let's get specific. Let's hear it: what issue do you want to know Kerry's position on?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangh0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. I've already done that
Look up above, and you'll see that I made several posts where Kerry speaks about the specific issues the infobeing raises in his/her sig line but I have yet to see a response from ib, though I noticed that ib has since posted in this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RetroLounge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
32. One can start by being an example.
Edited on Fri Mar-05-04 07:37 PM by RetroLounge
One can't shit all over Dean Supporters for weeks on end, and then just say, lets play nice.

I forgive, yes. But forget, never.

RL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #32
36. And vice-versa. As I said earlier, I didn't start the shit, but
I do have a knack for being able to dish it out. If you hit me, I will always hit back twice as hard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
37. I'll tell you what
when you go one week without criticising Dean, then you can repost this. Until then, you are rather like Rush Limbaugh giving lectures on the evils of drug abuse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FredScuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-04 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #37
42. Amen
this thread is one of many examples, but a particularly disgusting demonstration of littlejoe's attempt at party harmony.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=418915
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #37
44. I don't attack Dean. I just tell the truth about him, and you think it's
an attack. When will you learn the difference?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. Oh really
I just quoted from all your threads above. Again, stop acting mean for a week before you lecture others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mairead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. You and I rarely agree, dsc, but...
Edited on Sat Mar-06-04 12:42 PM by Mairead
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. You don't have to reply to me, you know.
As you grow older, I hope that you will begin to understand the difference between legitimate questions concerning a candidate and personal attacks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #49
52. again this is what you are complaining about in your initial post
relate this story to former and current supporters of other candidates. First of all, I don't want to make the mistake of painting all with one broad brush stroke. Many have been gracious, when getting behind John Kerry. But there are many who can't or won't let go, without saying things like, "John Kerry stinks, but I'll vote for him", or "I can't stand him, but I will vote for him", or "I guess we're stuck with him", or "He's the lesser of two evils", or "I was a (fill in the blank with your former candidate).

Please expound on those differences.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cuban_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
51. Use the ignore function, if dissent upsets you that much.
Seems easy enough... :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
littlejoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-06-04 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
55. Dissent has nothing to do with my post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 03:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC