Can someone tell me what idiot comes to a Democratic board to insult Dems?

[bigtree]

There is a withering bullshit campaign coming from the republicans: from the White House on down to every freep supporting bigot that has a forum. What good does it do to come to a Democratic board and spread cynical memes about our nominee? Can someone explain to me what purpose it serves to post insults about our own candidate? The primary is all but over. The target is Bush.

[MasterKey]

1. Perhaps hes just stupid, or likes pain

Not sure,

But he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer. or the brightest bulb on the block....

What kind of idiot does this...?

http://www.letsroll911.org/



doh---
Masterkey--- :)

[corporatewhore]

2. yep me must never question our "leaders" mega dittos!!!

[bigtree]

3. Yep

We must weaken our candidate. We have no responsibility.

[nomaco-10]

4. In other words......

we must become "lock step" in our utter devotion and support for the ham sandwich, I mean the nominee.

If you seek to take away our voices, then you take away everything that makes our party special and unique, you surely don't mean to do that do you?

I'm voting for the ham sandwich by the way, but does that mean I can't say I have reservations? Does that make me an "idiot" or a rebub in your eyes? All this labeling and name calling is starting to get rather tedious. I cast my first vote in 1975 for Jimmy Carter when I was 19 years old and have never cast a vote in my life for a repub. Does that get me a pass with you?

[bigtree]

5. If you hurl insults then you are giving aid and comfort to the opposition

The 'lockstep' argument is a weak excuse to continually insult our nominee. I don't know who or what motivation is behind the attacks. I just see the tearing on this public board doing nothing but spreading cynicism, or worse, spreading or feeding republican attacks. I hate republicans. I am infuriated that some folks just won't put their petty insults of our candidate aside to effectively create a solid wall of resistance to Bush. If you want to express your reservations then why don't you e-mail Kerry or write him a letter. Why come on here and sap the energy from those of us who support him? Just what do you expect to accomplish here?

On edit: Also, It is a clever dodge to act like I called anyone a republican. The insults give republicans aid and comfort is what I assert. What do you think the insults do? Do you actually believe folks are helping to unseat Bush with the insults. Mindless cracks at the candidate is an opposition tactic. How does saying that one is a lifelong Democrat and will support Kerry in the end make alright to hurl insults at Kerry? Don't Democrats have any responsibility to avoid burning down their own house?

[nomaco-10]

7. Oh, I see, good democrats that dissent on occasion.........

are putting a damper on the Kerry lovefest for some of you. Gosh, I'm sorry.
Your advice is that people like myself should go elsewhere, my advice to you in turn would be to start another board that's sole purpose would be to offer Kerry up as a democratic god where no poster would be allowed to question his IWR or his previous voting history in the senate. I would beseech you to look up the word "democrat" in your dictionary. In no place will you find the word "saint" aligned within the definition, that's what drew me to the democratic party in the first place some 27 years ago.

[bigtree]

10. Folks want good leaders

We need some good followers too. Folks who didn't want Kerry as the nominee had their chance in the primary. They lost. They didn't get enough support for their candidate. Now the primary choice is between Kerry and Bush. One of them will be president in November. What purpose does the picking and tearing serve? You speak of issues. I am complaining about personal insults of our candidate here. What good are they to anyone whose mission is to unseat Bush?

[RetroLounge]

25. Folks want good leaders?

Not if you look at their voting habits...

RL

[JVS]

82. Ba-dum-bum.

[LWolf]

29. This is a fine line.

When does disagreement over an issue become an insult?

I disagree with John Kerry on several issues. I do not disagree with him more than I disagree with Bush, obviously. Kerry will have my vote in November.

That does not mean that I have to pretend to agree with him. I don't. I don't think democrats need to demand stepford-style obedience from democrats; I think that destroys whatever is good about the party.

I'll continue to voice support for what I believe in whether John Kerry agrees or not; whether any president, politician, or party member agrees or not. That's one of the things I like about being an American.

Over the last year, I've watched disgruntled supporters of every candidate war with the supporters of other candidates. I've seen a pretty clear pattern. The candidate that is "ahead" always thinks everyone else should pack it in and become one of them, or leave. They express these sentiments in such a way that they alienate people who might have supported their candidate. In the end, the "flavor" Kerry leaves with possible voters might have more to do with the attitudes of Kerry supporters than the man himself.

I like Kerry more than I like listening to his supporters either gush, brush aside concerns, or attack disagreement. The best way to bring people together, IMO, would be to acknowledge that the man isn't perfect; acknowledge that dissenters have valid points; and work together to address those points. Kerry people, and democrats, should be communicating to him about those issues, and working on the problems. If he is worthy of our vote, he'll listen.

[AmyStrange]

8. That would be boring...

everyone here has the right to criticize the nominee. Why don't you read the rules again or better yet ask Skinner if I am not being accurate in my assestment of the rules. YOU cannot as an individual decide whether one person is insulting or criticizing. By the fact that the person in question is still here means he or she is following the rules

I personally don't want the DU to turn into a solid wall of "yes" men and women for Kerry.

You might as well eliminate the starting of threads all together and no matter what anyone post, the only thing that will show up on everyone's post is "Vote for Kerry" ad nauseum and nothing else.

Hundreds and hundreds and thousands of threads and post saying only that. Crap might as well shut down the site and put up a "Vote for Kerry" home page with no need for forums or discussion boards.

My Goddess THAT would be boring,

For the best "unofficial" DU Slang Dictionary in the world:
http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/




Serial Killer Cafe...
and searchable missing person news archives:

http://NEWS.OneMissingPerson.org/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SK-Cafe/



Dave (AmyStrange.com) Ayotte
Please, regularly check the One Missing Person (is one person too many) searchable website for the latest (and archived) missing person news stories:

http://NEWS.OneMissingPerson.org/




Serious Serial Killer discussion:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SK-Cafe/

"The Truth knows no master" - AmyStrange.com CEO "A Touch of Madness"

[bigtree]

11. Key word: Insults.

Insults. You may have the right, but what purpose do they serve at this point for anyone who is concerned with unseating Bush?

BTW, I'd like to come here and find the fight completely focused on defeating Bush. I find the criticism of our candidate unproductive and . . . boring.

[AmyStrange]

13. To pinpoint areas...

that need work as far as talking points and to see if we are all on the same page in these areas.

It's called in some circles as playing the devil's advocate.

When you are out in real life stumping for Kerry in your neighborhoods, you will not ONLY meet people who agree with you. You will meet people who have these same "insulting" questions that you find here and you will have to answer these questions that you are complaining about facing now - while out campaigning for Kerry is not the place to be blindsided.

This is the place to be blindsided and in the process get pointers and "real" facts from other DUers here to help answer those questions and make strong rebuttals to questions asked by "real" people who want to know the "real" facts about Kerry.

You may not like being blindsided, and if not, my advice to you is don't help campaign for Kerry. You will be no good to him on the street.

Those are just SOME of the reasons why criticism should be allowed and why I think it IS allowed in the DU.

d

[bigtree]

15. I've debated criticisms here

I have one campaign appeal for folks I meet. Bush is dangerous for America. Nothing about Kerry is dangerous. I defend our nominee. I won't broach any criticism that would put him beneath Bush. That is the priority now. Kerry or Bush. I don't need to hear every attack that comes down the block in order to defend him in some debate somewhere. This is our forum. We need to put our best foot foward and leave the insults to others.

I gotta laugh at the 'no good to him on the street' statement. What a backwards argument that to insult him here is to help defend him on the street. Just defend him, period. What is so hard to understand about that? I don't need to hear every petty insult to do that. If this is what you are using to defend Kerry then I would suggest that you are way off of the mark. Here: http://www.johnkerry.com No insults here, and plenty to defend John's record with.

[AmyStrange]

17. Just because YOU know all the answers...

don't mean everyone here has. What you find boring other folks here learn from. You or I are not the only person here on this board. "Theoretically" there are 40,000 other people here. Probably still only 20,000 whom are not banned.

There are some people who are learning from this thread here and some who think this is just another boring arguement.

You or I don't get to decide which is which. That's what the mods and Skinner and all the other admins are for.

We hash it out and THEY decide. Not me or you.

d

[Andromeda]

19. Mmmm, it's okay to criticize but not to undermine.

When you say that so and so should do this or that because maybe they would get their message out in a more effective way, then I think it's okay because you're not undermining their efforts.

When you cut somebody down in a personal and malicious way without any thought of the consequences of your remarks that's a different story. That just pisses people off and turns them against you so they won't listen to anything you have to say.

We are all supposed to be on the same side here, supposedly, but there are a lot of different personalities in this forum that converge and clash. People like to argue. It's stimulating and relieves the boredom but sometimes the enthusiasm crosses over into some politically divisive areas.

Democrats have come together and overall I think Bush has united and mobilized the Democrats more than ever before because of their hatred for Bush and not necessarily for the love of any one candidate, but to those whose loyalties were or are to somebody besides Kerry the switch has been more difficult to make.

That said, now that a candidate, John Kerry, has unofficially cinched the nomination we do need to work to get him elected. He's not perfect but compared to Bush they all looked pretty darn good.

We should try to put our differences aside because there's a lot at stake in this election and I'm not prepared to accept another four years of Bush.

[RetroLounge]

26. Key word: Insults.?

and we are lucky that there are people like you here to define to us what an insult is.

Please continue with examples...

RL

[HFishbine]

28. "If you hurl insutls..."

You mean like calling people idiots?

[AmyStrange]

58. very insightful...

I used to call people idiots, but then I realized they weren't idiots. I was merely frustrated in my inability to explain my case as well as I wish I could, and I blamed it on the people who were (not) listening or so I thought. How else couldn't they see my brilliant analysis of their idiocy.

What I've learned since then is they aren't idiots, nor am I incompetent, but rather I just needed to take the time to find a way around the big shaky political and religious walls we build up between everyone else and us. It's not easy, but I always imagine if we had met in a bar somewhere and just talked... before we found out what their political positions were.

The sad part is that many people here are quick to put folks on "ignore" rather than take the time to find out what they would have talked about in that "imaginary" bar I always dream about owning in Washington DC...

sigh,

d

[RandomKoolzip]

30. I agree that the "lockstep" meme is utter bullshit.

All the DUers who claim that others are "forcing" them to "march" in "lockstep" behind Kerry are being comically melodramatic. No one is forcing you to do anything. Relax.

However, we MIGHT take a cue from the republican model: ever notice that you hardly ever see republicans endlessly dissect and hurl insults at their leaders? They're unified, and they win elections. We are scattered (that darn ol' "integrity" again) and certain signs point to us losing Senate seats and the Executive branch in 04 because of this facade of integrity; y'know, shooting ourselves in the foot by undermining our own leaders in the name of.....what, exactly? I think we'd do well to mimic the repub tactic of unified opposition: that's how they gained ground after being discredited in the 70's. I duuno, just a suggestion. I'll probably get flamed for even saying THAT because I'm forcing someone somewhere to "march," right?

This whole "marching in lockstep" word-phrase is just so fucking tired, guys. Find a new meme, will ya? Howzabout: "goosestepping in formation." Or linedancing to Brooks and Dunn." Hmmmm....No, wait, I got it! "choreographing our movements like in a Britney Spears video!" No, too awkward......

Flame away, just a suggestion.

32. to interject a little philosophy/spirituality/history

I've found that when I hate something, I run a real danger of becoming the thing I hate.
In historical terms, look at what happened in the French Revolution & in the Russian Revolution where the victors were guilty of excesses equal to those they displaced.

Some critiques of Kerry are mean-spirited, I won't dispute that.
But some are legitimate attempts to shape the debate.
& who decides what the intention of a particular poster is?
Who decides when it goes over some line?
As soon as anyone starts addressing those type of boundary lines, there is a real danger of the approved speech becoming narrower and narrower.

Seems to me it is much more useful instead of getting bent out of shape about the intent of the poster to address the points and arguments they are making. If you can undercut their arguments, what does it matter what they are trying to do?

[sangha]

35. The answer is the same as the one NSMA gave you yesterday

some are legitimate attempts to shape the debate.
& who decides what the intention of a particular poster is?

Context. When someone spends all their time attacking the Dem while ignoring Bush*, intentions can become quite clear.

Who decides when it goes over some line?

When their arguments consistently depend on fallacies and other propogandistic techniques

If you can undercut their arguments, what does it matter what they are trying to do?

Because addressing the constant barrage of propoganda takes time away from implemting an offense

37. uh oh you remember something I wrote yesterday

now I'm in trouble.
So much for my Buddhist discontinuous self.

On this point "Because addressing the constant barrage of propoganda takes time away from implemting an offense"

Is there any reason that addressing it can't be part of the offensive?
If these posters (I'm not sure who they are specifically) are miming Bush lines, you're going to have to address their points anyway at some point as part of the offense, right?

I guess I just don't see what the problem is here.

Doesn't it waste just as much time or waste time in the same way to spend time on threads like this?

[bitchkitty]

68. What if the insults being hurled are true?

I'm a little uncomfortable with your position too, although I do see your point.

[bigtree]

72. Some insults are designed to be subjective and unaccountable

Like:

Liberal, elitist, warmonger, corporatist, womanizer, gun-nut, homophobe. Idiot. :)

I like debate but I don't see the purpose behind the personal insults hurled at our candidate from this side of the fence.

BTB, the 'idiot' thing was a take off on another post. I don't actually believe posters are idiots. I was thoroughly pissed two days ago when I posted this and I regret the idiot crack.

[countmyvote4real]

6. Ham, bacon, prosciutto, andouille or just plain pork?

I think all flavors are acceptable here, but baloney. ABB

[SendTheGOPPacking]

9. Borne of immaturity

[bigtree]

12. For example

On a talk show today, they played Bush's speech criticizing Kerry, then Cheney's, then Al Hunt comes on citing a clip of Kerry that appeared another Bush ad and did nothing but carp on Kerry for making the clipped statement. No complaint about the lies in the ad, just a echo of the republican's criticism. And he was satisfied to just criticize Kerry. Nothing about Bush lies, nothing about Bush gaffes, nothing about Bush duplicity. Just criticize his own nominee. That'll do wonders to unseat Bush. Do Democrats have any responsibility to defend their nominee, or is that just a republican trait?

[NEOBuckeye]

14. TheInfamousThey

I frequent a message board called Gibe. It's probably one of the few message boards on the web that is a total Free Speech "free-for-all". No Mods. No Rules. No Restrictions, period. You might think that is a good thing, and it can be -- when there aren't any real "morans" hanging around just to try and piss everyone off, knowing that they won't be banned.

One such moran, "TheInfamousThey" is currently bragging about how he was banned from DU for bashing John Kerry. He also hates gays, thinks black people are apes, fervently believes that "The South will rise again," regularly wears a Confederate uniform, and worshipps George W. Bush as if he were the second coming of Jesus Christ. Oh, and he LIES constantly about everything. Says he's a CIA & NSA agent and keeps mummified cats in his barn. Also claims to have been called up for war in Iraq, but was back home (and posting messages) in less than 3 months. Go figure.

The regulars at Gibe have attempted "herding him off" to FreeRepublic several times. It's certainly where he belongs. But he seems to be a genuine masochist, so he continues to hang around, even though he is almost universally reviled and bashed by the regulars. I guess he thinks it is his mission to "convert us" from open, liberal thought, even if he himself won't budge an inch on his own warped views. I don't think I've ever encountered a more stubborn fool anywhere else.

At any rate, we could certainly use some diversity in opinions over there, so, please, check it out. And bring fire-resistant boots. Seriously. It gets pretty hot in there at times.

ON EDIT: Link correction.

[AmyStrange]

16. hmmm...

I used to know this old black woman personally who loved going on message boards and pretending to be a "South will rise again" and "kill all those nigger ape rapist to hell... confederate good ole boy". She did it to get a rise out of all those "white boys" who pretended to be liberals.

She called it her "fanning the flames of activism" work.

I wonder what mischieve she's been getting herself into lately. Haven't spoken to her in a couple years,

d

[Feanorcurufinwe]

18. She sounds like a lunatic to me.

Absolutely bonkers. What a sick twisted way for someone to get their kicks. Lying in order to get people upset. Pathetic and wrong.

[AmyStrange]

60. You'd be surprised then...

at how many lunatics there are on the web today. If you look at any message board, almost all of the most popular threads are negative post (troll bait) that illicite almost instantaneous attacks of outrage.

If you can make these negative post on a board like DU and "pretend" to be a Kerry supporter, you say mean things in "defense" of your "pretend" candidate implying that they will be responsible for abortion returning and other SCOTUS scare tactics.

"Real" Kerry supporters don't use such tactics,

d

[Feanorcurufinwe]

61. I'm not surprised when people lie, just disappointed.

And if your friend gets her kicks by lying to people in order to make them upset, yes, she is a sick, twisted individual. I'm glad I don't know her.

Am I surprised that such sick, twisted people exist? No.

[AmyStrange]

83. I'm not disappointed at all...

what distresses me is that most people in real life lie with almost every other word they say. To me, that's more twisted than what my friend does - in my opinion.

d

[Hav]

44. duh...

"You see, I had them trolled for the longest time. The DUmbasses thought I was a real dyed in the wool Kerry Kommunist! LOL! Then I really pissed them off by saying that "Kerry is too conservative and that we should all support someone who is further left on the political scale".

[NoPasaran]

20. Sunday morning Stalinism

All hail our fearless leader!
With his gaze so true and strong!
All hail the fearless leader!
Who is right and never wrong!

[bigtree]

36. "The essence of being human is that one does not seek perfection,

that one is sometimes willing to commit sins for the sake of loyalty, that one does not push asceticism to the point where it makes friendly intercourse impossible, and that one is prepared in the end to be defeated and broken up by life, which is the inevitable price of fastening one’s love upon other human individuals."

- George Orwell (1903–1950), British author. “Reflections on Gandhi,” Shooting an Elephant (1950).

[TexasProgresive]

21. Mastering the slaves

It’s the age old tactic that the masters use to keep the slaves, slaves. Encourage bickering among them and reward a few informers and moles and the odd well meaning fool like Nader to keep them in a constant state of unproductive but safe turmoil. This was used to great effect in Ireland by the British and is still being used by them in Northern Ireland. If we allow them to fracture us to where we lose critical mass then they stay in power. And if that happens we deserve to be slaves to the freepers.

[RandomKoolzip]

31. Exactly!

We're being played, Machiavelli-style. There will always be third parties and shadowy whisperers keeping us bickering among ourselves instead of unifying to beat the common enemy. A centuries-old plan to keep the moneyed in power, and we're STILL falling for this shit.

Oh, but wait, suggesting that we have an alternative to unproductive bickering is "forcing poeple to march in lockstep," isn't it? Oh, well....

Welcome to DU, by the way.

[MoonRiver]

22. I agree.

Kerry is going to be the Democratic nominee, so the point of some Democrats undermining him is exactly what? I can understand Nader supporters coming here to bash Kerry if they want Kerry to lose, and have some deluded hope that Nader might beat both Kerry and *. I can understand freeps coming here and posing as Dems to help defeat Kerry. But I can't understand "Dems" who state they want our party to win, yet come here and help destroy our chances with anti-Kerry spins, many of which are later proven incorrect and/or straight from the mouth of Drudge.

I have practically stopped posting here because it is incredibly demoralizing to keep viewing messages from some "Dems" who clearly hate Kerry and want to wreck havoc on his candidacy. No matter how many times it is pointed out that doing so only aids and abbetts our real enemy, nothing matters to them but their RIGHT to help destroy our presidential nominee.
:thumbsdown:

[Robb]

24. It's a tough balance, for sure

You want the nominee to be criticized constructively from within the party, and in fact from the entire political left -- because you want his policy to be shaped (a) in a way you like, and (b) in a way that will bolster his support. Some see Kerry's policies like a young ivy that can still be "trained" in various directions, and criticism, questions, and even outright "WTF?" statements are how you might get that done.

The problem begins when you can't tell the intentions of the criticism. Is it to refocus policy? Really? Or is it to bash without that goal? If you start from a place of trust, you're going to enjoy these discussions more than from a place of fear. :)

[jumptheshadow]

23. We have one chance, John Kerry, to:

1) Derail Bush's military machine.

2) Stop Bush's economic unjustice.

3) Support civil rights and end institutionalized homophobia.

4) Protect our freedom of speech.

5) Ensure the separation between church and state.

6) Save social security and support our aging population.

7) Bolster our educational system and help our teachers and librarians.

8) Protect women's right to choose.

9) Save our Supreme Court and our federal court system.

10) Get those corrupt Bush bastards out of there.

[HFishbine]

27. You fall into that category

by calling people idiots.

[bigtree]

33. good point

Sorry Fishbine, if you feel I've called you an idiot. I'm sure you are not an idiot.(It was a play of words on another post that was allowed to stand.) But I am in earnest.

I just can't take another Bush term. I'm desperate, frustrated, and I come here to find support for our nominee, a refuge from the constant barrage of anti-Kerry reporting and Bush cheerleading. But last night I found unvarnished name-calling of our candidate on our Democratic board. I wondered who the posters were trying to influence and why? Can you tell me what positive effect the insults of our candidate and his supporters will have in our campaign to unseat Bush? The tearing down of our candidate is an opposition tactic. It has no value in our campaign against Bush. It does little to inform and it contributes to the spread of cynicism and apathy. What kind of (______) comes here to a Democratic board to tear our candidate down?

[cally]

40. Exactly how I feel

I'm not ready to call others idiots, but I'm so panicked that Dems will lose this election. It's not just about Kerry but about our entire Democracy. If * wins then he will probably carry Congress too. Then they can just lock step in their anti-woman, anti-environment, pro-corporate, dominionism doctrine right through. When folks tell me they don't like Kerry and are angry at some of his votes, that is fine and I agree with them. Some of his votes infuriate me. The alternative is much, much worse. I've lost respect for anyone who does not vote for Kerry this election unless you live in a state that is completely sure. Send a message to the party another way but I don't think there will be a party to send it to unless we win this one.

[Dr Fate]

34. Some DUers prefer a 3 to 1 fight...

...some find it easier to join the GOP & media in attacking DEMS than standing up to the GOP.

IT's a weakness on the part of many on the far left who attack Kerry- they are apparently scared of Bush, so instead of fighting him, they join the GOP & media in attacking Kerry.

Bizzare, I know, very hard to figure out...

[revcarol]

38. FLASH!!

It's OK to criticize Lieberman, a DEM!!

Guess some Dems are more equal than others, so legitimate criticisms of them should be characterized as "attacks."

[RichM]

39. DU is not purely a "Democratic Board." It originated as a forum in which

to discuss the failure of American democracy that led to the theft of the 2000 election.

This discussion has taken 2 main directions. First, we see attention given to the problems of US democracy in general. This line of discussion accepts the idea that our society is in crisis -- but makes no assumption that the Democratic Party should be looked to for solutions.

The other line of discussion makes the assumption that the solution to our crisis must necessarily lie within the framework of the Democratic Party.

The evolution of DU has been such that the 2nd line of discussion now represents about 90+% of what goes on here. IMO, all of this chatter is utter malarkey & virtually worthless.

OTOH, the 10% or so of discussion focused on the crisis of US democracy is often interesting. Any high-quality discussion of this topic will necessarily be critical of the Democratic Party, because the party's hideous failures have contributed so much to the crisis. And partisan Democrats do not wish to hear about this -- true though it is. This is why to you, it seems like it's only "idiots" that come here to insult Democrats. Actually, these "idiots" are the only ones here that make the board interesting.

[bigtree]

41. The insults are destructive and boring.

They give aid and comfort to the opposition. They only serve to further cynicism and apathy.

Proud to be a (partisan) Democrat!
:kick:

[RichM]

42. I agree that the insults can be destructive and boring. However, party

cheerleading is also boring, especially when it's so strongly partisan that it departs from reality & refuses to recognize obvious Dem Party shortcomings.

One possible solution to this conflict would be to tone down the cheerleading so that it stays cognizant of the party shortcomings. For example, Dems should stop trying to bend into ridiculous contortions justifying Kerry's IWR vote. It can't be justified. This should simply be forthrightly acknowledged; then we'd move on to a higher plane of discussion.

So the tone should be, not "Support Kerry because he's a terrific candidate." Rather, it should be "Please support him, because he's the lesser evil.

Also, the Nader psychosis & Two Minute Hate sessions have to stop. For DU to tolerate that stuff, is to frankly admit that most of DU is mentally ill. Nader has a lot of great things to say, whatever criticisms can be leveled against him. He is much better than ANY Democrat except Kucinich, in terms of telling important truths. So, if you want DU to move to a higher level of dialogue, the Nader psychosis has to stop.

[bigtree]

43. Set your own tone

You have that responsibility. No one forces you to project half-hearted support and encourage that from others. As for cheerleading, I won't apologize for putting my best foot foward for our nominee. I won't be stifled to accomodate lead-footed carpers. I don't care how sorry you feel that Kerry doesn't measure up to your views. This campaign is about more than you and I. There are countless interests and concerns that are suffering under the heel of this counterfeit loser who would reign and destroy for another term.

Lesser evil? I don't see Kerry as any form of evil. I don't see any value in presenting him as such. He is a decent man who has served the country in and out of public office. Not just military service but an intense care and concern for people that is expressed through private efforts and activities. The one-dimensional representation by some of his opponents here and elsewhere would take his 30+ years of service and minimize them. I won't.

Go Kerry!!!

Go Democrats!!!

See how effective that is?

[Desertrose]

45. we try to set our own tone and get criticized for not following

the dem party plan.
Rich M made some important points ( as usual) and you seem not to take in what he said and simply repeat the same mantra...

Go Kerry!!!
Go Democrats!!!

we get it already...can we take this discussion beyond kerry cheerleading and ask some seriosu questions and hope for some serious discussion? We all want bush out...we all realize the best option at present is to vote Dem...but there is four+ years worth of stuff to deal with after that...we can't afford not to be able to go beyond getting a dem in.

Simple cheerleading is not an effective way to change things.

Peace
DR

[bigtree]

46. My complaint is with the barrage of personal insults towards our candidat.

I have no problem debating issues and policy positions.

You know that I will respond to an issues debate, so it is a canard to equate my concerns about personal insults with a disagreement about the resonable discussion that occurs here.

Cheerleading helps. I don't see much value in mealy-mouthed support. The other side won't tear their candidate down. I think RichM is entitled to his view. I don't happen to think it particularly relates to my concern about the insults towards Kerry. I don't think they serve the purpose of unseating Bush, no matter that they are allowed here. I wonder who or what they serve?

[Kanary]

56. By calling those who are not enamored of Kerry "idiots"

By wanting everyone to "fall in" (lovely)

By insisting that "cheerleading" helps

By choosing to see anything other than loud cheering for Kerry as "insults"

By thinly veiled accusations that anyone NOT excited about Kerry is a freeper

You convince me that you will be unable and unwilling to hold Kerry's feet to the fire after his inauguration, and assure that the party doesn't continue the rightward drift, as it has for a generation now.

What you don't seem to get is those of us who are lifelong Dems are SCARED for the direction our party has taken, SCARED about the lack of backbone in our party, SCARED at the lack of any opposition to the reichwing and just plain terrified that our very own party will be in the lead as the whole country continues to go down.

Being called traitors by the reichwing is no worse than being called disloyal by our own party.

What amazes me is the seeming lack of understanding of just how willing our founders were to speak out on what they saw as being wrong in the system, and how Dems in history have questioned and criticised in order to keep the party as a party of the people, not a party of the corporations.

I really cannot tell from your words exactly what it is you're afraid of. I suggest reading some background about the Dem party. It might calm your fears.

"I don't belong to any organized political party --- I'm a democrat." Will Rogers

Kanary

Another Delusional Diehard for Dennis!!

Kucinich 2004!

[bigtree]

77. Insults Kanary

I don't believe posters are idiots. The crack was a play on another post that asked what 'idiot' sent Kerry on a ski trip. The complaint I have is with unvarnished personal insults like 'idiot' that are hurled here at our candidate. I wonder who or what they intend to serve?

I knew of Kerry long before he came to run for the presidency. He is a dyed in the wool Democrat. I have not heard him launch any personal invectives at other Democrats. Why do we feel justified to do so against him here?

The falling in thing is a canard. I don't expect that I can browbeat anyone into falling in. Would that be so bad? I don't think so. But folks choose their own path and I'm cool with that. As for holding John's feet to the fire: http://www.johnkerry.com

I like to debate issues and differences of opinion. I don't appreciate when someone comes on with obvious hatred for our nominee and proceeds self-rightously to substitute Kerry's words with their own cynical view, asserting that they know what he 'really' means. The majority of John Kerry's words and actions have taken the Democratic fight directly to the opposition. We may and will disagree with him on some issues, and I will gladly debate the merits of those differences, but I have no stomach for the personal invectives. I regret the idiot crack. (even more so now, days after making it, with none of the anger that I felt the day I posted it)

"You may charge me with murder--or want of sense--
(We are all of us weak at times):
But the slightest approach to a false pretense
Was never among my crimes!
Lewis Carroll- The Hunting of the Snark

[KC21304]

48. You think the tone of DU should be that Kerry is the lesser

of two evils, and that we shouldn't criticize Nader. Well isn't that special.

My feeling about some of the persistant Kerry bashers is they are more interested in saying " I told you so " than in winning.

[LandOLincoln]

73. Take off your blinders. Nader deliberately threw the 2000 election to

Bush, and announced his intention ahead of time:

http://www.hereinstead.com/sys-tmpl/bnaderwantedgoretolose/

http://outside.away.com/magazine/200008/200008camp_nader1.html

http://www.newyorkobserver.com/pages/story.asp?ID=5766

http://www.realchange.org/nader.htm

BTW, I think Dennis Kucinich is a good man--possibly even a great one--but I think some of his positions are not only wrongheaded but dangerously so, and I absolutely do NOT want him to be president.

OTOH, I'm pleased that he's fighting for us in the House, and I'd like to see him eventually move up to the Senate. Also, I'm all for him winning enough delegates to have some say in the Dem platform in July.

There, you see? THAT'S how a loyal Dem criticizes another loyal Dem. Please note also that Dennis--totally unlike Nader the Traitor--works for change from within the Democratic party.

[GemMom]

54. DU history lesson

Thank you for the brief history lesson. I post here sporadically - I unfortunately do not have really enough time to read everything here and still be doing activist efforts while taking care of a family - so I'm still learning about what all the DU forum has to offer. I appreciate the background on the origin of this forum.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

63. Everyone has their own version of history.

[flaminbats]

47. born a cutthroat, cut a throat, and will die a cutthroat...

:evilgrin:

[atre]

49. I don't know...

You'd have to ask that handful of Clark supporters why they devote almost all of their posts to attacking Democratic candidates and Democratic constituencies.

[LandOLincoln]

75. Of course you meant to say the way we Clarkies responded to the

continual attacks from the Edwards supporters, didn't you?

[revcarol]

50. I was away from the net part of the day.

And I really thought that this would be locked.

Such an obvious attempt at "TEN HUP!! Fall in!!" instead of discussing ISSUES that really are going to impact the Democratic Party.

I liked the old DU better, where we would discuss issues in depth.

[bigtree]

51. Just about the insults revcarol

What good are they? I like to debate issues and views. I'm sickened by the personal insults of our nominee. I would like folks to fall in but I can only ask, folks are free to resist. This is not a post about falling in. This is a lashing out at the mindless personal insults. They give aid and comfort to Bush. They potentially undermine our candidate and his candidacy. I wonder who or what purpose they serve?

BTW, would you have the post bearing a like title that calls Kerry a limosine liberal and an elitist for skiing locked?

[dpbrown]

52. Damn good question

I'm tired of clicking ignore on every bullshit crackpot "did you read what they're saying at FreeperUnderground? (FU, in case anyone's keeping track)

In fact, I think that's what I'm going to call it from now on and I think everyone else should call it that, too.

Then whenever anyone comes over here trolling the latest made-up crap we can just refer to another troll from "FU" - FreeperUnderground.

DPB

[oasis]

53. Stealth Naderites. (eom)

[WillyT]

55. I Don't Think We're Allowed To Name Names, LOL !!!

:hi::evilgrin::hi:

[Capn Sunshine]

57. I think I can help you with your question

I have legitimate concerns about the candidate's ability. That's why I joined the National Dean campaign over a year ago.

I think someone needs to WAKE HIM THE FUCK UP as he hasn't won a thing yet, as far as a general election goes and there's some mighty big guns positioning to get him in a crossfire. If you guys want to persist in your echo chamber and tell each other everything is hunky dory that's just swell, but John Kerry is going to need EVERY vote he can muster to win this thing and the tepid attempts to bring the progressives into the traditional party mechanism aren't going over at ground zero.

I just got back from a national meeting for DFA and we have been approached by Kerry's campaign in California exactly ONCE and that was today. Let me tell you about the Kerry campaign in California. These folks are scared, unsupported, adrift and not receiving any leadership from the national HQ and unless the National Kerry org drops this pretense of California not being important, I fear the worst will occur in November.

Now, does this make me a bad democrat because I see serious mistakes being made and point them out? So be it, but don't try to lay any future electoral defeat at Howard Dean or Ralph Nader's door because it's only your poor organization, lack of cohesiveness, snotty sense of entitlement and stubborn insistence on hearing only good news that is going to burn your asses when you don't see the people marching to the polls in November to vote for your man, and sadly you won't have anyone to blame but yourselves.

Of course, that will be the LAST place your look.

[AmyStrange]

59. Well said Capn...

some of it IS the groundworks for blaming Dean supporters and other "imagined" third party voters later if Kerry loses, but those are the "pretend" Kerry supporters doing that stuff.

The "real" Kerry supporters know we all have to pull together to defeat Bush.

d

[Feanorcurufinwe]

62. What you have said makes absolutely no sense whatsover.

The Kerry campaign is supposed to look to the Dean campaign for guidance? :wtf:

Since when does the winner need the loser's advice on how to win?

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

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

[Feanorcurufinwe]

66. This is the passage I was refering to:

I just got back from a national meeting for DFA and we have been approached by Kerry's campaign in California exactly ONCE and that was today. Let me tell you about the Kerry campaign in California. These folks are scared, unsupported, adrift and not receiving any leadership from the national HQ and unless the National Kerry org drops this pretense of California not being important, I fear the worst will occur in November.

[Capn Sunshine]

70. Take it as you will

California is an organizational disaster , and if you can't understand you still need the 40% of the party to win that didn't work for your guy in the primaries, well it's just endemic of the problem.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

74. Your assertion

"California is an organizational disaster"

is based on what? The fact that the Kerry campaign didn't ask for your advice? lol Perhaps you have an exaggerated idea of your own importance. Just a thought.

[redqueen]

76. You're so right

California recently elected Arnold as gov. If Kerry's campaign is taking that state for granted he's going to disappoint a lot of people in Nov.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

78. It is just ego

to say "if they haven't talked to me, they are taking CA for granted"


It amazes me that people who lose elections overwhelmingly still seem to believe that they have the secret to winning elections.

lol

[Exgeneral]

81. if you could stop projecting for a second

And just understand that not calling ME has nothing to do with them telling me " we're scared , we're disorganized, we feel minimized, HQ is not communicating, and they aren't returning our calls".

This has nothing to do remotely with my ego, its a concern I have that a LOT of people are sitting on their asses haughtily declaring that any concern expressed is "just ego driven" especially from some coffeeshop in Bumfuck, Idaho.

[LandOLincoln]

79. So the fact that Dean himself is out there campaigning for Kerry

and has warned against third parties and third party candidates isn't enough for you?

My mom always called it "cutting off your nose to spite someone else's face." :argh:

[bigtree]

80. We have an agenda. We need to defend that agenda

Kerry is our vehicle. He is working hard. Most folks who aren't inclined to support him don't dig at all to find what he is actually doing or where he actually stands. Some are satisfied to replace his words and intentions with their own cynical views. I do believe that it is important to visibly support our candidate. I don't see any value, now that Kerry is all but assured of the nomination, to brand him with everything we disagree with him on. That said, that is not the focus of my post. I am concerned with the unvarnished personal insults towards our candidate. I wonder what or who they actually serve?

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

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

[July]

67. And then there's NO cheerleading at any time.

And pictures and article snips (with boldface!) that cast Kerry in a negative light.

And praise for Lieberman comments that we should look beyond an electoral victory.

And mocking of Clinton.

Things that make you go "Hmmmmm."

[tobius]

69. lieberman praise?!....boldface!?!....... boldface! ..noooo!

nooo,! .. please anything..., anything but the boldface!

stop!! ....... boldface!!! Yeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrgggghhhhh!!!!!!!!!

[July]

71. Don't tell me I need to write "sarcasm" -- or is that a sense of humor

you're showing?

As to the actual content of my post, any thoughts? Do you have a candidate?