Question for all the DUers

[cags]

I am having a discussion with a republican on another political board. He says he would not be allowed here for respectful debate and would be banned for having a different viewpoint. I told him he would certainly be met with debate here and not many would agree with him, but he would not be banned just because his opinion was different than ours.

I would like to ask you all if you are open to having respectful conversation and debate here with a republican... he is not a troll.

He probably won't come here but I want to post your responses to him, to show him he is wrong.

Thanks

P.S. And hi all, I haven't been around here in awhile but have been lurking off and on.

[Mythsaje]

1. I used to post on the about.com CL boards

and had many stimulating debates with thinking Republicans. I can't speak for anyone else, or the moderators here, but just having a different opinion isn't a crime in my book. An inability to effectively argue that opinion without resorting to ad hominem attacks and spewing talking points rather than actively debating issues IS, however, a crime in my book.

[Virginia Dare]

2. There is no Democracy without debate. EOM

[Geoff R. Casavant]

3. DUers are just like everyone else

There are some who would enjoy reasoned respectful debate, and there are some who like scoring points with zingers. No way to guarantee who will respond to his posts, but I for one welcome the growth that comes from opposing viewpoints.

[reDEMption]

164. NO--you are NOT, in any way, 'just like everyone else'!

I've learned TONS of things I couldn't possibly have imagined. I don't think I could've had this experience ANYWHERE else. Indeed, I see why you're here--and it makes perfect sense! Please, PLEASE keep on keeping on--don't EVER change!:popcorn: :yoiks: :bounce: :hurts:

[uppityperson]

165. oh my. That looks nasty

and you still won't answer me. boohoo. sniff. tiny tear

[EstimatedProphet]

166. ?

[uppityperson]

167. !

[A-Schwarzenegger]

170. Popcorn & a toilet.

When you finally reveal yourself, we'll all be shocked I tell you!

[uppityperson]

174. Originally was just toilet

odd sort of statement.

[katty]

169. Sure, why not

[Wickerman]

4. The answer is easily divined by reading the DU rules

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

Who We Are

Who is Welcome on Democratic Underground, and Who is Not

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

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

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

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

Relationship to the Democratic Party

[JuniperLea]

20. We ban conservative disruptors

Key point... We ban conservative disruptors...


We have a member here now who has for days planted flame bait with regard to his support of the UAE... he's still here.


:shrug:



I think we might get some RWers thinking if they are allowed to participate.



Frankly, some of the rules here, although I abide by them, create a scenario where we are spinning our wheels and preaching to the chior.... what's the point?

[Wickerman]

31. I think it's pretty clear

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

Not sure what the confusion is.


Failing understanding, we have a cadre of Admin and Mods who have a lot of man hours of experience that stay pretty on top of what's going on here.

If you have reason to believe someone is here to disrupt, hit alert. If you simply don't like their posting, ignore them. If you are unhappy with the way the site is run, contact Admin and let them know; they are very easy to get along with.

[BurtWorm]

41. Have you ever spent time in a politically "mixed" environment?

If you think DU can get uncivil at times, you're due for a reality check in any Usenet political group. Civil dialogue between left and right and all shades in between in this day and age is almost impossible. But if anyone wants to hang with wingers, there's always Usenet.

[Left Is Write]

160. I have, and I agree with you.

[RoyGBiv]

173. Usenet veteran ...

I still frequent Usenet, although not as often as I once did, and this is despite the fact I find it as a medium of communication far superior to any web-based discussion forum I have ever encountered, mostly because of the interface. Usenet is Electronic Hell and not for the easily offended, nor is it for anyone who generally wants to have a civil discussion on a controversial issue. I can recall death threats uttered over Apple v. Microsoft flame wars, but it's the political discussions where things get really nasty.

I only have one mild disagreement. Civil dialogue is possible. It's not possible in an essentially nameless, faceless environment. To put it in terms popularized on Usenet, assholes are free to be assholes in the electronic world only because we haven't developed the technology to allow a person to punch someone in the nose through the keyboard. Unfortunately, a generation of people is being raised on this form of communication where there are no consequences for your words, and they try to take that behavior into the real world. The mild result in that case is a punch in the nose.

[BurtWorm]

183. Well said.

It's difficult to know, though, if the technology has a part in the determining the awfulness of the culture or if it's merely a reflection of it. There's probably a dynamic at work, with each influencing the other.

[reDEMption]

62. However...

...not every question or statement that is different from yours is 'disruptive'. Those of us who ask the hard questions, the uncomfortable questions--and wish to have contradictory issues cleared up--are quickly snatched off the board.

Someone below asked me why I wanted 'non-progressives' to have a voice here... My answer is: because maybe there's lots of people who don't KNOW if they are 'progressives' or not. They need to have some questions answered, some inconsistencies cleared up before they can throw their whole heart into it.

By limiting the posters on the board to those already convinced 100%, you are failing to build the Democratic party, and you're painting yourselves as unnecessarily weak.

[JuniperLea]

65. My point exactly

We do a disservice to ignore. And there can be civil discussion on opposing views. It's called being adult. It's called intelligent discourse and emotional maturity.

Not my board; I can't change the rules, but I sometimes wish I could. We might all learn something.

[reDEMption]

68. BEST POST I EVER READ HERE!

Good for you for saying what, up til now, couldn't be said!:applause: :yourock: :woohoo: :loveya: :wow: :toast: :party:

[Bridget Burke]

73. Actually, it's been said here quite a bit.

Somehow, we do remain a Democratic board.

[Marie26]

82. Nah. People have said it before

There's actually been threads on it. You can criticize the policies themselves; it's just that you can't espouse a Republican POV. And, hey, you're still here too, no? It's OK to ask about these things, as far as I can tell.

[stepnw1f]

168. Um... no

It's said here a lot.

[BurtWorm]

83. You can't expect emotional maturity from anonymous strangers

on the Internet. Least of all when the strangers are right wing. They're not even emotionally mature on their own sites.

[reDEMption]

106. LOL!

I've been emotionally mature--so has everyone who's responded to this issue...

[BurtWorm]

110. There's no correlation between expecting and getting what you expect.

People of like minds tend to be respectful of each other's opinions by definition, whether they know each other's names or not. This is not the case with people of unlike minds. You can easily check this by dropping in on any political Usenet group, where they tend to "LOL" AT each other instead of WITH each other. ;)

[Marie26]

69. Agree with you in theory

I also wish there was a forum where cons. & liberals could talk. But in actuality, the reasonable posts would probably quickly be drowned out by trolls & flames. People who are not sure can always read the posts here - there's a lot to learn that way, too. While I agree w/banning outright trolls & disruptors, it seems that banning people who genuinely want to learn more could be counter-productive. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference, though. And the bottom line is that we don't make the rules here, and it is DU's decision as to how the site should be run. Probably there'd be disagreemnent no matter which policy they took.

[EstimatedProphet]

121. Really?

Those of us who ask the hard questions, the uncomfortable questions--and wish to have contradictory issues cleared up--are quickly snatched off the board.

Please cite an example. I've spent a lot of time here being a mod-close to a quarter of the time that DU has existed-and I can't think of one case in my experience where that has happened.

[Kerrytravelers]

176. If you're not sure how you feel, lurk for a while, read, and see if your

opinions are considered progressive and/or liberal.

I need not post at Free Republic to know that my opinions are not conservative. Just by reading, I know my opinions to not match that criteria.

[mike_c]

5. in fact, DU has a strong history of banning conservatives/republicans...

...at the first sign of their political leanings. It's one of the things that keeps DU sane, IMO. There are lots of other boards that allow conservatives and liberals equal time, but DU is not one of them.

[reDEMption]

109. What do you do with...

...the new posters who have not put themselves into one camp or another? That's certainly how I came to DU last year (reading).

[YOY]

6. I've actually see a couple here...I wouldn't call them all Trolls

but they don't stick around for long...not because they are booteb, but because they really can't stand being around us too long.

As long as he is a conservative who can back his shit up and not some freaking neo-con republican yes man.

I wonder what would happen if we actually had a board for them to come in and debate without fear of some DUers attacking them and them not freeping all over with rhetoric...

I suppose Skinner has the last say and all.

[melissinha]

27. I agree, a separate forum is a good idea

A separate forum where we would welcome respectful debate would actually really distinguish us from being a super left wing group, perhaps even attract some independent thought too.

I for one would welcome it and think that it might actually really be a nice resource for the party to really address issues that affect disaffected republicans who might be able to swing to our side against the Neocons.


I know that that many here are not tolerant of Republicans on this site and I think thats really disrespectful... Disruptors and trolls are different.

Now if we could have a conservative friendly heavily moderated forum that catered to real debate, I think we might get some real stuff done.

[YOY]

35. One problem of this might be the Mods actually booting DUers from such

a forum for being disruptive in addition to the freeper trolls who just want to come in and call us 'filthy liberals' 'cause Rush told them to. Then there are the the Christine Todd-Whitman pubs (fiscally conservative, morally liberal) that I wish coult truly take back their party from the neocons. I would like them to come in and debate things, but I don't think (even if the mods let them) they would be very impressed as those of us who want to debate would have our voices drown out by those who want to shreik and throw insults here at DU.

There are a good many DUers who are just freaking angry at anyone slightly right of them. Those DUers might become discouraged in the struggle against the neocons and leave there-by further splintering our already fractured party. This forum would have to be clearly labled and ruled as a "Learn to debate or don't come in" affair.

Just playing 'devil's advocate. ':evilgrin:

That being said, I don't think Skinner would ever go for it.

[melissinha]

55. I agree with you

thats why I say it would have to be heavily moderated, for trolls and for DUers too... I think we need to get accustomed to debate, and you are right they'd be very impressed.. It would definitely have to be labeled, entry would have to require acceptance of rules.....

take for example another forum I am into theforce.net which is dedicated to Star Wars, before Episode III came out there was a Spoiler-Free forum. To keep spoiler free people from being exposed to spoilers, they created this forum where anything generated from spoilers especially official Star Wars info was forbidden. WEll, this format can be used. You have to go in, agree to those forum rules and be governed by that moderator. Now is there a possibility to ban DUers from just one forum and not others? (Or do you think it is really acceptable for DUers to be SOOOO sensitive and mean)

I just really think we could gain a lot from meaningful, respoectful discussion and gain some common ground and maybe really internalize some of the issue that our party needs to address....

[JuniperLea]

67. You are right, and they would be booted... rightfully so

Anyone who cannot show enough emotional maturity to conduct themselves properly within the constraints of civil debate should be booted out of that hypothetical forum, at least momentarily.

The Freepers don't have a monopoly on childish behavior.

[YOY]

71. Sadly no...they don't

Granted we can at least be childish here with better grammar.

As much as the though of such a debate is appealing, I would worry that it would still be overrun with jackasses from both sides on a constant basis. It still is a nice thought to have such a place.

Then again we are supposed to be the idealists, non? :shrug:

[reDEMption]

85. No, he wouldn't...

We probably ought to thank our lucky stars we're been 'allowed' to discuss it THIS long...

The reason I'M concerned is because of the things I see here everyday. I see conservatives called everything under the sun--they're 'fundies', or 'freepers', or 'fascist'. They march 'in lockstep', are 'sheeple', straw-chewing Jethros right off the farm, they believe in the rapture, and they don't think for themselves...

Democrats keep losing elections because they view Republicans thusly--and they don't take a look at who they really are, or even how they wish to be.

If you want to beat the Republicans, you need to speak to all of them--not just the handful you can paint with your stereotypes. Using those stereotypes as often as you do--when they are NOT true for the majority--makes you seem out of touch with the real America.

I know PLENTY of Republicans who are atheists, pro-choice, do NOT believe in the rapture etc.; the Democratic party will NOT be able to speak to them as long as they insist on those stereotypes to make themselves feel better.

Republicans can best tell you who the Republicans are. If you want to edge them to the center and consider your platform, you'll need to listen.

[Marie26]

89. And Reps. never stereotype Dems?

So if I go to Free Republic, there won't be any threads insulting liberals? Both sides do it. And there's also a difference between what people say here & the Dem. Party leadership, which has always attempted to reach out to Indep. & moderate Repub. (even, sometimes, to the expense of the liberal wing of the party.)

[reDEMption]

96. "And Reps. never stereotype Dems?"

I never said that--and it shouldn't matter if they did. We need to STOP letting THEM define us. We ought to have ethical standards and live up to them WITHOUT comparisons.

We are not obliged to be good people only when the other side is! Lowering our standards of behavior for ourselves--because they do it too!!!!!--is totally lame, and it communicates the message that we can't run things ourselves, take a firm stand ourselves, or have our own inner reserve of strength.

What do you think that says about our party?

[Marie26]

112. We're basically saying the same thing

I don't like stereotyping by either party; it's just what happens. And now that this country is so polarized, it happens even more. People have withdrawn into their own factions & don't really talk to the other side. So it's that much easier to believe all the negative characterizations created by both sides.

I just disagree w/you on one point- I think it's ultimately the steroptyping of Dems. by Republicans that keep people away from the party. We have let Republicans define us, for too long - as weak, unpatriotic, hippies, "feminazis", whatever. And these stereotypes remain even after people stop believing in the Bush Ad. Many people feel lost, & unhappy w/Reps., but still won't join the Dems. because they believe all the negative images right-wingers have created. It's like the liberal Boogeyman. Dems could roll out the red carpet, have a party for Reps. & no one would come. So I think you're sort of misdiagnosing the problem a little. I don't like it when people are called names, either, on a human level. But on a political level, that isn't the reason Dems. are losing, IMO. It's because the Reps. have been so sucessful in defining & demeaning us. I think it's important to negate those negative stereotypes in order to really win people over.

[reDEMption]

119. I actually agree....

"I think it's important to negate those negative stereotypes in order to really win people over."


That's EXACTLY why a freer discussion here, or one thread, whatever, where Republicans/those unsure can post is a good thing to have and works to our benefit. The 'hippies' of days gone by were always labeled as radical children who didn't know how to listen, just wanted to tear down America, and had no respect for anyone else.

Dems have a chance to redefine that, change it, make it a thing of the past. Dems could make a statement by being the new mature party--interested in bringing BOTH sides together. THAT'S what will win an election.

[Marie26]

189. Dem leaders have done that

Dems have made that statement. Kerry took the mature high road thoughout his campaign & suffered some for it. The mainstream Democratic Party has attempted to bring people into a "big tent". This site mostly represents one small wing of that tent. By "negating negative stereotypes", I was referring to beliefs like that Dems. are unpatriotic, for example. I was talking about taking negative talking points & matching them w/positive visions. You're sort of twisting that to refer to this board, which wasn't my point. I do agree that it would be interesting to have a forum where Dems & Reps. alike could post, mostly so people can see areas of common ground. But I doubt that that would change elections, or probably even change people's minds.

You're projecting here - how does having a closed board equal "radical children who just wanted to tear down America?" Reps. also have closed boards w/o gaining that reputation. Those are the right-wing stereotypes. We really do know that you are likely a conservative, yet you're getting a reasonable, honest debate here (surprisingly!) I was really referring in my post to people like you, who might be disillusioned or honestly searching for something else. While you may wish the board was open to everyone, that's just not how it works right now. But if you ask questions or lurk, rather than expressing Rep. opinions, it could still work. That could help you figure out what you believe if you are not sure of things. The cryptic postings thus far, though, are not helping. Is your agenda to learn or to criticize DU? Is it a little of both?

[EstimatedProphet]

128. "I never said that!"

"Why do you think I'm saying that? I don't understand why you're saying that. Why are you trying to change the subject? Quit trying to switch topics!"

[YOY]

91. We can discuss things like this until the cows come home and

the Admins wouldn't put a stop to it. They might throw their own opinions into it, but technically this kind of discussion really isn't hurting anyone.

As I have stated before if you can't tell the difference between a decent old fashioned traditional republican and a freeped up dipshit neocon then you have never tried to debate with them. Sorry reDEMption, but it is either one or the other. Just like some folks here will scream and kick before discussing things rationally (PETA members cough-cough!...A.N.S.W.E.R. cough-cough!). I wouldn't want them in there either.

These days on the pub side the fundie, jethro, freeper is the screamer and kicker that has taken over the republican party. Republican talking points and Faux news seem to cater to the yesman mentality and not to true rational disection of an issue using conservative tools. There are those who use those conservative tools of analysis to disect an issue. Those who are Republicans and want their party back from the dittoheads and religious right who are welcome for this kind of discussion IMHO.

I'm talking about those folks who seem to let others think for them. THey happen on both sides of the fence and they are the ones who should not be allowed as they are the ones who have no idea what it means to discuss things civilly.

[EstimatedProphet]

97. Maybe our purpose here isn't to convert Republicans

It's nice when it happens, but maybe that's not why we're here. Maybe we're here to discuss things with like-minded people.

Republicans have their own sites where they discuss things among themselves. Why can't we?

[reDEMption]

111. Purposes...

"Republicans have their own sites where they discuss things among themselves. Why can't we?"

I don't recall anyone here saying you could not. With the handy 'ignore' feature, though, it's easy to talk to who you want to. It COULD be the best of both worlds--and I think Dems need to try something different for '06 and '08...

Why not be of some benefit to the Democratic party?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

113. You're saying DU is of no benefit to the Democratic Party?

[reDEMption]

114. You'll have to point out where I said that...

I sure can't find it anywhere...

[A-Schwarzenegger]

116. "Why not be of some benefit to the Democratic party?"

The inference of your question above is that DU at present
is of no benefit to the Democratic Party.

[reDEMption]

120. No...

...that's what you are assuming it is--and that's not true. There can always be more and more benefit to be had, yes?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

122. Reading comprehension begins at home.

You didn't say "some more," you said "some."

[EstimatedProphet]

115. Disingenuous

You are arguing for making DU a site where we can no longer discuss things for ourselves. Ignore is a good feature, but it has its limitations. I don't want DU to be overrun with freepers. That would result in my having to spend half my reading time on DU putting posters on ignore, and the numbers would grow every day with a new crop of disruptors. DU would rapidly turn into a Yahoo or MSN board clone.

Now, why isn't it useful to the Democratic party to have DU as it is? Why is it only valuable if we let Republicans come on?

Edited for clarity.

[reDEMption]

125. EP

Do you think there's anything wrong with THIS discussion we're having?

[EstimatedProphet]

130. Where did that come from?

What's the point in asking this? Is this the kind of discussion that you think will go on if we decide to open the boards to Republicans? Is that what you're getting at?

If that's what you actually believe, you're mistaken.

However, if what you are about to do is reveal that you are actually a Republican, and then use this for your argument that Republicans can come here and have reasonable discussions, suddenly this post makes much more sense.

[reDEMption]

132. Or...

I could just want your opinion on it, thus far....

[EstimatedProphet]

137. My opinion?

My opinion is that you're being disingenuous, as I stated earlier.

My opinion is that you are trying to imply that we're being unfair to Republicans and a burden on the Democratic party, yet when people ask you about your own statements, you claim to never had made them.

My opinion, frankly, is that you are trying to start an argument here that will get you banned for the statements you implied, so that you can then claim we banned you unfairly because you never actually came out and said them.

[reDEMption]

142. Well...

I think you're reading quite a bit too much into what has been a very innocuous conversation.
There's not a lot of damage I could do with the answers I've gotten, so I think everyone will remain safe and the sun will still shine in the morning!B-)

[EstimatedProphet]

144. Sorry to read so much into things...

Perhaps if you weren't so evasive, and so clearly trying to avoid responsibility for the things you've said, and didn't try so hard to weasel out of every point you made when it was questioned, I wouldn't be reading so much into it.

[reDEMption]

148. What do you need to know that you think I'm not telling you?

[EstimatedProphet]

149. I didn't say that, and you know it

What you have been doing, and you are doing with this post, is misdirecting what has been said into something that hasn't been said, and also making statements that you claim to not make when you are questioned about them.

[uppityperson]

158. How about doing what you said you'd do, answer this question:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2477703
You said you would.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

159. She's not here to answer questions. She's here to enlighten.

[uppityperson]

161. she just won't talk with me. I'm sad.

I'm sad. Here is a sad smiley: :-( Here are a couple more :( :( :( :( :( :( ;( ;( I don't think redemption likes me. sad.little tear down my cheek.

[reDEMption]

150. My goals...

You see, I want a STRONG political party. I want to belong to a strong political party. I want to spend my energies and money on a strong political party. And I know lots of folks, who were NOT thrilled with the last election, who are looking for the same thing.

However, that can't happen until I get my questions and doubts answered and figure things out for myself. I've had some surgery, so I'm inside for awhile longer. So far, here, I've barely found a place where I can ask a simple question without someone reading a whole lot more into it than I meant, and friendliness/workinmg together lasts only as long as I can make my posts sound just like the ones already on the board.

Not a great start....

[EstimatedProphet]

151. Nah

That's not true.

So far, here, I've barely found a place where I can ask a simple question without someone reading a whole lot more into it than I meant, and friendliness/workinmg together lasts only as long as I can make my posts sound just like the ones already on the board.

You've spent this whole discussion claiming things, then pretending you never said them. Come on, this is a discussion board. Your words don't disappear into the ether here. We've got proof of your being evasive all throughout this thread.

The original point of this thread was to discuss whether we should bring Republicans here or not. You have tried to turn that discussion into a claim that you are being harrassed. You're not being harrassed-you're being held accountable for your statements, and everyone reading this thread knows it. No one is falling for the "I'm just trying to be nice and I'm getting beat up by the mean Democrats" line. We have all the evidence that that is not the case in this thread.

[uppityperson]

181. bet this poster doesn't talk to you anymore either.

[uppityperson]

145. This is why we are suspicious of posters such as you.

:thumbsdown: Do you practice your misunderstanding, assumptions, refusing to give a straight answer and insulting comments or do they just come naturally. bye

[OKNancy]

134. Do you like this?

He who has so little knowledge of human nature as to seek happiness by changing anything but his own disposition will waste his life away in fruitless efforts." (Samuel Johnson)

[reDEMption]

138. Well, the sentiment is fine...

I have yet to see much of it in practice. The message boards for BOTH sides are not chock full of people 'trying to change their own dispositions'...!

[Kerrytravelers]

177. I have a question for you.

I know it is a bit rude of me to ask it, but being that you do have such low post count (87 at the time of this posting,) why are you so concerned about changing the way DU is set up? Shouldn't you get to know us around here a bit more before leading the revolution to change it? I'm not accusing you of anything in particular, I simply want to know your angle.

[Bridget Burke]

79. Perhaps separate contributions could be accepted for the separate forum.

I don't want to support Republicans spouting their talking points & I don't want to pay for the server space needed.

Here's a novel idea: How about Separate Website! There's lots of room left on the Internet.

[EstimatedProphet]

117. Sounds reasonable to me

And amazingly, that's the system we have right now! Imagine that!

[YOY]

147. Oh most certainly!

Definetly! Agreed 100%!

[JuniperLea]

7. I welcome the idea!

I've had many a political discussion with my staunch Repub father, some were a little heated even, and all is well:)


I think it is a very good idea to open the lines of communication. We may find that we are not as different as the "leaders" want us to believe.


There is a big difference between respectful debate and purposely posting flame bait for the fun of slamming someone else. If honest debate, using facts and back up material, bring it on! If he merely wants to post RW talking points without backing anything up, forget it.


IMHO

[Vincardog]

8. Fine as lone a the "respect" is not all on our side. I for one am tired of

"debates" where the other side spouts RW talking points and we have to disprove them only to have the next talking point paraded out.

The question is does your friend really want discourse or want to spew talking points? Can s/he be persuaded or is s/he looking for an audience?

[I Have A Dream]

9. I personally think that he would be banned.

The FAQ states:

Why don't you let conservatives post?

Democratic Underground is not intended to provide a soap-box for our political opponents. If we let conservatives post here, then this discussion forum would be identical to all the other discussion forums on the Internet. If you want to debate conservatives, there are thousands of other websites on the Internet where you can do so -- just not this one.

By the way... There are lots of conservative discussion forums that don't permit liberals to post, including this one. (where "this one" is a link to Free Republic.)

[RubyDuby in GA]

10. This is a safe haven for Democrats/Progressives

Please refer to the DU rules:

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

[I Have A Dream]

15. Yes, the energy of the place would totally change. n/t

[reDEMption]

90. Why?

Why are you so fragile you need a 'haven'? This is just a message board--and an anonymous one, at that. If you REALLY believe in yourself and your positions, someone else wouldn't be able to pull you down from that.

I think a backbone transfusion is badly needed here!

I'm not afraid of ANYONE, or ANYTHING or ANY WORDS.

[OKNancy]

92. It's not a matter of fragility

It's a preference. We are certainly not without disagreements among ourselves.
If people don't like to discuss things on a website for just Democrats and progressives, then they can go elsewhere.

[reDEMption]

98. But this has been a fine discussion...

All of us have talked about it just fine...

[Bridget Burke]

129. Sounds like you're admitting you're a Republican.

Is this discussion is an example of what we could expect if "opened up" DU.

No thanks.

[Leopolds Ghost]

163. Yes, because Lord knows endless flamefests between left and centrist Dems

are never found on DU. and where they exist, they must be the product of devious Republican outsiders! :evilfrown:

[reDEMption]

175. You know...

...actually, I don't think the Republicans think about us anywhere NEAR as much as we think about them... In fact, to see what kind of a day Dems are going to have, first check out what's doing over on the Republican sites--the Dems will be hanging on every word!:wow:

[EstimatedProphet]

182. That's funny...

Every day there is a post from someone that has gone to Shitheel Republic and points out that they are citing something we have said here, or somehow keeping an eye on what is going on here. Google searches also seem to find a lot of Republican sites that quote DU or negatively reference DU.

I'd say they think about us enough.

[uppityperson]

131. What about finishing our discussion from yesterday as you said you would

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2477703
Eh?

[EstimatedProphet]

133. See, this is not the sort of discussion that has ever tombstoned anyone

I defy you to come up with a case where it has.

What gets someone tombstoned is disruptive behavior.

This is a discussion. There's nothing wrong with it. Also, this isn't a recitation of Republican talking points.

[anitar1]

93. Sounds like you need a new site to post on. n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

99. Why do you have a problem with us having a haven?

Why is it OK for them to have a haven, but not us? Why isn't it a simple solution to go to other websites where there is political discussion for the whole range of politics, rather than forcing DU to be another site like those that already exist?

You want to argue with a Republican, go somewhere else.

[reDEMption]

102. This thread hasn't been an argument in the least.

It's been a decent discussion that has brought many of us a little more together.

It cleared the air fine--and nobody insulted anyone. Problem?

[EstimatedProphet]

108. Your words-post 90

Why are you so fragile you need a 'haven'?

Again, this is a site that is stated in the rules for progressives and Democrats. That has nothing to do with fragility. That is simply what the site is for.

There's plenty of other sites on the internet where a range of political discussion is available. This is not one of them. It doesn't claim to be. There is no need for it to be.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

107. Seems like Democrats is who she wants to argue with.

[nonconformist]

103. There are PLENTY of debate boards out there

Have at it if you like.

I for one love DU because it is my sliver of sanity in this world. I know that I can come here and be around like-minded folk. Believe me, there is enough stuff for us to debate amongst ourselves anyway. But it's comforting to know that in the end, we're basically on the same page.

There are tons of political boards out there, some set up specifically for debate. I think most all of us know of other boards that aren't political, yet have regular political debates. DU is unique, and my haven. If you don't like the rules here, move on. Most of us are happy with it as our sanctuary - the place we can come and not have to get into the most asinine and obvious debates with people.

[Left Is Write]

162. Thank you.

You said that perfectly.

[Bridget Burke]

104. Texas Democrats tend not to be fragile.

For me, it's a matter of taste. I'd rather not live next to an open sewer. Or next to a slaughterhouse. Or anywhere near a petrochemical plant.

See that star near my name? It means I contribute to DU. Many of us do. I do NOT want to pay so Right Wing Talking Points will have yet another home on the web.

[uppityperson]

139. Then why don't you answer like you said you would?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2477703
I know, you aren't afraid, you just chose to not do what you said you would (answer late last night or this morning). Your actions speak louder than your words.

[Kerrytravelers]

178. There has been Republicans who come here, identify themselves,

and ask questions in a respectful manner. And, they are responded to in a respective manner. I would not begin to search for the threads in the archives since I can't recall either the date or thread title or even if I responded or not. On this fact, you will have to just take my word for it (or not, if you so choose.) My point is, perhaps you have not been around long enough to know all that has happened here at DU. Perhaps you may want to stick around longer before leading the revolution to change us.

[Joey Liberal]

11. Bring him on

Nothing is more fun than debating a republican.....The problem is, he will be lost without Rush Limbaugh......

[dogday]

12. I posted a nice respectful post on another freeper board

and the first post, I was booted off. All I said is Tom DeLay should stand up and take responsibility for his actions, like we were taught when we were kids, you take responsibility for your mistakes..... That was all it took.... You tell me about respectful....

[Katherine Brengle]

47. same here--2 non-offensive, polite posts, and i was banned from FR.

[MrBenchley]

13. It's a forum for Democrats....

Does he wander on to forums for gardeners to point out that he's not a gardener but wants to discuss privatizing Social Security?

"I hate football, but I'd like to explain to all you Packers fans why it's no big deal to sell our ports to Bin Laden's pals."

"He says he would not be allowed here for respectful debate"
There must be one somewhere who can engage in "respectful debate"...but I doubt this is him....

Here's what we get from Republicans.....why would we want MORE, beyond mordant amusement?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/mail/index.html

[slor]

14. Is he willing to engage in respectful debate...

or is he a bushbot? I deal with enough of that in my daily life, I come here as a sanctuary from those types of people.

[onehandle]

16. Others will cover the rules in this thread, but my personal opinion is...

This is a war. A bloodless Civil War. Not Republicans vs. Democrats, but the People vs. the Super-Rich and the Corporations they serve.

If I want to hear discussion that supports the enemy, I'll tune into Fox News if I want to hear what the other side says.

[sandnsea]

17. This is a Democratic-Progressive board

The purpose is to help get Democrats elected. It's not a board to debate Republicans, there's plenty of other places to do that. They aren't welcome here, your Republican friend is right.

[gunsaximbo]

18. I for one OBJECT! I get enough republican debate from the ...

news papers, from the tv news and from the radio news. I come here for a respite from the republican propaganda that permeates our society and that put Bush into office and started murdering innocent Iraqi civilians and American Soldiers.

I do not need some repugnant asshole coming into my sanctum santorum to badger me with bullshit.

Gunsaximbo
<http://www.serra06.com>

[jarab]

19. If he's an admitted Republican ...

he will not be welcome, imo.
If he is torn in his allegiances, he might last a few posts, so long as he doesn't support shrub in any manner.
That appears to be the way it works.
...O...

[meegbear]

21. If you're willing to use your screenname ...

let 'em in.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

22. I Know You Mean Well But I Doubt It Would Be Allowed.

It isn't just about disruption, it is about having a message board where we don't have to hear from the bush supporters or deal with their viewpoints, regardless if they do so in a respectful manner.

Though I personally have no problem with the concept especially since he seems to be willing to be respectful, it is not really within the spirit of this community to have him here. There are many other places on the web for those type of debates to occur, but DU is exclusively for us and the rules are pretty clear cut in that way.

[AngryAmish]

23. Those people are rats

Discuss nothing with them. Have nothing to do with those people.

[cags]

24. OK OK... The context of the conversation was this

There was someone who posted that they didn't know where to go to find "Facts" about politics.

I suggested to come here to that person, and the Republican was saying no way, not to come here, we are all nuts and the info here would be just be biased, yada yada...

So I was defending all the intelligent people here, and that we have all kinds of opinions to offer here, and thats how the whole thing started.

I understand this is a sanctuary from all the insanity and probably shouldn't have argued with the guy.

[SoCalDem]

28. Anyone can read what we say.. If he comes here and reads

he will have no problems.. BUT if he reads, is not convinced, and then posts
hit and run" trash, he'll get banned.. It's just that simple..

If he posts at or visits right wing sites, he already KNOWS "that side".. After reading what WE post, if he cannot see both sides and make up his own mind, whose "story" is more believable, NO amount of "discussion" will change a thing.

People come to the truth in their own time..and their own way.. You cannot "convince" someone , by arguing with them..:)

[reDEMption]

25. What he said is absolutely true.

"but he would not be banned just because his opinion was different than ours"



I also post on many different boards--and that question about DU has come up before... I know SEVEN people who have gotten banned here in the last month PRECISELY because their views were not in keeping with everyone else's.

These posters very specifically DID not use profanity, DID NOT flame people, DID NOT post intentionally baiting posts. It was only because their opinion was different that they were scrubbed.

If that's hard to believe, anyone here can try it out anytime they wish; sign up as a new poster, and then post the mildest answer you can think of in opposition to what has been written. You might get a small grace period but, before long, you'll be gone. (And I may also be if someone here dislikes my talking about this. That would be one more indication that posters--esp. low number posters--have to be very, very careful.)

[Armstead]

32. There are a lot of trolls who try to sneak in by sounding reasonable

I don't think it's so much censorship of differing opinions. Rather it is sensitivity to the fact that a lot of Freepers try and worm their way in to start phony arguments and flame wars, just for their own amusement.

It's too bad, because personally I would welcome the opportunity to discuss and debate with honest concervatives here. IMO DU could have a seperate board specifically open to that.

However, in practical terms, Skinner & Co. and the mods have to deal with a lot of Freepers who use devious means to stir the pot just to sow dissent amongst us, or to say ridiculous things supposedly as liberals just to fire the more outrageous side of DU to make it look extreme.

[reDEMption]

40. I'd like to believe...

...that it's just 'differing opinions', but it's not. I've seen some of the posts those banned posted and there was not a scrap of pointless stirring of the pot. Not one of them aimed for sowing discontent.

The posters were banned because they did not espouse mainstream leftist politics.

[Armstead]

42. Read some consrvative discussion boards

One tactic is to say something "reasonable" as a conservative, and then go back and eitehr laugh or cry becauae those nasty DUers picked on them.

As I noted above, personally i'd like to see DU set up a seperate forum (or message board system) specifically for liberal versus conservative debate.

But without that, I think it dilutes the purpose of DU to have to argue with conservatives on the main board....Heck, we already argue among ourselves enough.

[reDEMption]

57. Wha?

Why do you care what some conservative bloggers say about you? Who cares if 'they are laughing'? To use that as the rationale for not allowing a poster to post a question you simply don't like is absurd!

[Armstead]

59. That's not what I meant

If I cared about that, I'd never post on DU, knowing that it might end up on one of those websites that shall not be named as the butt of one of their threads of ridicule.

I'm just pointing out that posters that seem innocent are not always what they seem. Some, disruptors, for example, deliberatly start out with reasonable contrary posts to "infiltrate" and then start doing mischief in more blatant or subtle ways.

It's basically straightforward. This was set up as a board for people who are liberal and progressive to discuss, debate among themselves andf strategize without simultaneously having to beat off freepers.

There's plenty of places for that. This isn;t one of them. It's not a matter of being "afraid" of differing opinions.

[Bridget Burke]

75. Well, if we shouldn't care about the opinions of conservative bloggers...

Why should we care about the whinings of Tombstoned disruptors?

There are lots of disagreements on various DU threads; perhaps you should read a few. But Right Wing Idiots usually don't last long. Even if they don't act like idiots at first, their masks eventually slip.

[Bridget Burke]

72. I can't recall any recent Tombstonings that were not richly deserved.

And I post here most days.

Congratulations, though. "Mainstream leftist politics" is a new one. Usually, we hear about the "Far Left" or the "Loony Left." Now, even mainstream is not good enough if there's even a hint of The Left.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

76. You've been here 5 days and you're already whining like a stuck pig?

Enjoy your stay, reDEMption.

[SidDithers]

101. Hehe, you noticed that too, eh? nt

:toast:

Sid

[SidDithers]

100. If you want differing opinions, wait 'til primary season...

Lots of DU'ers disagree with each other on a multitude of topics. Check out the gungeon, or the I/P forum, or the 9/11 forum and see some of the heated debate in there. Or check any of the various religion threads that pop up regularly. But what all (or the vast majority) of DU'ers have in common is a common goal of the defeat of conservatism and the empowerment of progressives. If you don't share that goal, then no matter how polite, or how well-reasoned your arguments, you won't be welcome here, and you may end up getting banned.

Now, perhaps after you've been here for more than a week, you'll see that disagreement alone doesn't get you banned.

Sid

[shugah]

i don't believe you

i do not believe that you know 7 (or any) people that were banned from DU without good reason.

[Maeve]

127. Actually, you don't know why they were banned

Seriously.

You are not a mod and didn't see all they posted, nor are you privy to some other things that might show they were here to disrupt. We get yo-yos here who claim to be looking for respectable conversation, but are repeat offenders and have been kicked out before. You won't know that for sure as a regular poster.

Anyone booted for less than just cause can petition Skinner to be re-instated, and some have. But the mods are slow to boot unless there is provocation and they usually delete the provocation as a waste of board space before many get a chance to see it.

[EstimatedProphet]

141. Names please

Cite some examples. Don't simply make claims. You're not in a position to evaluate why a poster gets banned.

[EstimatedProphet]

46. So?

Again, this is a board for progressives. Why do you think that non-progressives should have a voice in it? Do you have a voice in a club you don't belong to?

Besides, what you are talking about is against DU stated rules. No sockpuppets.

[reDEMption]

58. Question...

"what you are talking about is against DU stated rules. No sockpuppets."

I'm sorry, I can't tell what you're referring to... What is against the stated rules? A what is meant by the term 'sockpuppets'...?

[EstimatedProphet]

70. Sockpuppets

If a DUer sets up a seperate account, that's considered a sockpuppet. We're, with some exceptions (contact the admins), only supposed to have one account. An attempt to create another account and use iot to ask questions that are disruptive is a form of disruption.

[Bridget Burke]

84. Sock Puppet #1: "DU needs to let Right Wingers post."

Sock Puppet #2: "Gosh, that's the best post I've ever read here!"

Sometimes it's a Tag Team. (Note to self: The mods don't like "Circle Jerk.")

[A-Schwarzenegger]

88. Sock Puppet #3: "If you want to turn a Republican into a Democrat....

then you have to be nice to them and listen to them and have a tea party with them and rub their feet."

[Dora]

56. That's not true.

There is a lot of disagreement within our ranks. If what you posted is true, then I would be banned for disagreeing with you.

At issue is big-picture platform position.

[reDEMption]

61. Actually, it IS....

You have over a 1000 posts, so you're given much more leeway to post your agreements and that upon which you disagree. Someone with just a few dozen posts is not usually given that same latitude. Also, each mod is, of course, different and they have different levels of tolerance for that sort of thing.

Thus, new posters are not going to be tombstoned for exactly the same reason. The decision is a subjective one--but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen regularly.

[EstimatedProphet]

94. Wrong

The mods discuss tombstoning among each other at length. No one, unless they come on clearly to disrupt immediately, gets tombstoned by one mod, and even that is very much frowned upon.Mods aren't allowed to tombstone subjectively, and any of them caught doing that repeatedly would have their priveledges revoked in a hurry.

[Dora]

95. I disagreed with many in my early days.

Tenure has nothing to do with it.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

66. "I know SEVEN people who have gotten banned here in the last month"

Wow, who do you hang with, reDEMption??!!

[uppityperson]

124. you think?

alert is our friend.

[Emit]

188. Maybe this was one of the seven

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=383494

[Ksec]

153. I used to mod here and that aint true

There are constant bickerings and disagreements on DU. Its a full time job trying to keep the peace. The bannings are few and its done by a group of mods who all must agree to the ban. The poster is given every chance and if hes found to be someone who just wants to cause trouble, then the mods all get together and must agree on a ban.

[muriel_volestrangler]

171. The rules seem to say it's not just causing trouble that can get a ban

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

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

So it is quite possible for conservatives to be banned without them being disrespectful or trolling. Consistently putting forward conservative viewpoints is counted as 'disrupting'.

[Kerrytravelers]

179. You know SEVEN people who were banned?

Either you hang around a group of neo-cons or you participate in a online group of some sort who have made a sport out of coming to DU with the intent to get banned. Either one, it shows what kind of people they are... whether or not their claims are even true.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

190. Now she knows 8 since she presumably knows herself.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=185798

[Marie26]

26. I think that's probably true

Look at the rules for posting. No (current) Republicans allowed.

[eek]

29. I'd sure dig it. It is so difficult to have respectful conversation with

those with differing views.
Always seems to degenerate into "you're an idiot!" "oh yeah? well you're evil!"

I am interested in why the non-foaming-at-the-mouth-parrotting-rush-and-bill republicans and/or conservatives continue to feel as they do.

[pocket]

30. this board is for fellowship and activism, not debate with freeptards

it'd be on egiant flamefest if we let them on

[RagingInMiami]

33. Even republicans who debate respectfully are banned

As I learned on this thread. I don't necessarily agree with it, but I don't make the rules and it's not my site, so I respect the rules.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x482512

[lonestarnot]

34. Since when did we hold ourselves out to be "fair and balanced?"

[FreedRadical]

36. I'm sick of their crap too

But if we are to grow as a country don't we have to work to change minds and attitudes? Supporting only Dem's has it's problems too.:shrug:

[immoderate]

126. We don't always support Dems either.

I think Joe Lieberman would not get the time of day around here. This board favors progressives, and corporatists from whatever party get a hard time. Hillary, Biden, and even Big Dog himself have been roundly trounced at times.

I'm all for debate, but after you've spent some time going around with a Republican, (as in the thread RagingInMiami links to above) you realize you are just spinning your wheels. People rarely change their minds, even our own. A visit to the gungeon, or the Theology/Religion forum will convince you.

If a Republican wants to get our point of view, he/she can read all he/she wants. If they're not moved then, nobody will convince them. It took me a while, because I love trouncing a freep, but no good will come of letting debate here. See Monty Python's "The Argument" for a good example.

No Republican comes here to be converted. And they are not going to convert us either. We get some Republicans who realize they've been had, but those are already rethinking what they believe. What can a Repub convince us of? Dump social security? Keep health care exclusive and expensive? Attack more countries? Spend more on useless weapons? Recognize religion? Abandon the poor? Privatize education? Censor literature and art? Which of their talking points will fly here?

Let's not waste our time.

--IMM

[ProdigalJunkMail]

I am a mostly conservative sort

who came here after the death of a family member who was a member of this board. After a brief vetting by a few of the seniors on the board, I was given permission to stay. And I must say, when I take the time to be rational and polite, my opinions that don't necessarily run with other members on the board are given proper respect and discussion. I must also say, that in my tenure here (coming up on three years) I have found that many of my previously held convictions have been swayed (or at least softened).

Just my two cents:
subjectProdigal

[Dora]

37. This is not the place for Democrat VS Republican debate

This is a place for Democrats and other political progressives to debate amongst ourselves.

If a Republican wants to learn more about our opinions, all s/he has to do is do some reading.

If a Republican wants to debate our opinions, that will have to be done elsehwere.

It's pretty cut-and-dried.

[cags]

38. Thanks all for the responses....

My point with him, was the differing opinions by DUers and we were not all cookie cutouts, and you all gave differing opinions. But I'll probably have to eat it since most of you didn't think it was a good idea..

Thanks again

[Armstead]

43. I hope it tastes good anyway

:D

[cags]

45. It will for him, the bastard. I feel dirty...

I think I got used to posting on the other board, and there are dem and repubs and we debate all the current issues and we call each other names but its all in fun really, nothing is ever to serious or gets personal

I see how it could get ugly here though, because it is more serious here

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

39. I was a Republican when I joined DU...'nough said!

:7

[Katherine Brengle]

48. Amen! n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

44. The deal is, this is DU. It's for us.

It doesn't have to allow all speech as free speech. It's a private site. It isn't responsible for the tone or message of the Deomocratic party, or for progressives. The argument that we are intolerant because we don't allow every Tom Freep or Harry to come here and say what they want is false. We don't have to have ALL sites open to them for us to be more tolerant. This is a private site, people join it and pay membership to use all the services, and we don't have to allow anything we don't want to allow.

So, no-I don't want this guy coming here. This isn't a debate site, it's a progressive discussion site. He doesn't have any more 'right' to come here than he has a right to come into my house whenever he wants. I also would respect him not wanting me on Free Republic, if that's where he goes. I don't want to go there anyway. Why not have your discussion on the board you are talking to him on anyway? Why not just invite us there to discuss things?

[cags]

50. I get it...

Don't worry... I'm not pursuing it
He was dissing Free Republic too though and comparing DU to them as the same thing. Maybe thats what got under my skin and had to say " No they are not" LOL

[EstimatedProphet]

54. OK. You're right-we aren't.

We allow a lot more diversity that Free Republic does. We may not allow opposite viewpoints, but FR doesn't allow any differing ideas at all. There is NO range of opinions there.

[meganmonkey]

49. The DU rules are clear

He isn't invited to the DU party.

As an independent, I have to stifle myself in certain ways to be allowed here. But someone who is committed to a party that competes with the Dems is not allowed.

Peace.

[Ganja Ninja]

51. I guess I'm just tired of talking to republican's.

After what we've seen for the past 5 years can you blame me? If Bush had been held to the same standard as Clinton he should have been impeached before his first term was up. So that's why I really don't want to debate these people anymore. What's to debate when people have two different standards for accountability? They are living in denial and it's seriously hurting the country.

[Burning Water]

52. Why would he bother?

Why should we?

Debate here should be about "liberal policies, how to implement", not "liberal policies, right or wrong?"

[never_get_over_it]

53. Nope sorry

I come here to be with like minds - although we don't always agree how to get there it is evident for the most part DUers want mostly the same thing. I hear enough of the repunk BS in every day life - MSM - etc - I don't want to see anything from anybody who could support that murderous rat bastard in the White House - we are far beyond any excuse for him or the rest of them. I came here a long time ago to be with my own kind.

[FreedRadical]

60. Thanks cags this discussion helps me too

Being new to DU I need to know this shit too. I do have a sadistic need to give sheeple crap.

[Norquist Nemesis]

87. LOL! Welcome, FreedRadical

:)

63. I got a bunch of snarky remarks when I just posted a link

to a Free Republic article. I felt it was a well written and factually correct article, but people are like it is us against them, like the Hatfields and McCoys.

[Ksec]

64. politically mixed environs dont work

been there , done that.

You get nowhere . Its a constant pissing match. Useless imo.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

74. Judging from my experiences on other boards, if you let Repubicans in

they eventually can't help spewing their talking points. They begin posting flamebait threads aimed at bashing Democrats, and the whole discussion degenerates.

(That's how trolls and infiltrators eventually out themselves here.)

[Catherine Vincent]

77. No! We don't want his kind here!

Just kidding. But it's not up to us, it's up to the mods.

[Nutmegger]

78. NO REPUKES

I don't care how decent they are. Any Repuke who supports Bush Inc is nothing more than trash.

I come here to avoid nasty, dirty Repukes. Long live the "Repukes not allowed" policy!!

:puke:!!!!!

[SmokingJacket]

80. The purpose of the board is not for debate between R's and D's.

There are other boards for that!

[Swamp Rat]

81. Did he vote for Bush?

If he did, he should get his ass to Iraq NOW!, regardless of prior service.

If he renounces his conservatism and actively protests for Bushler's removal, then I would welcome him. Otherwise, he's no better than the "Good Germans" who allowed the destruction of their country.

[Norquist Nemesis]

86. It depends. If he just wants to defend Bush etal, then no

If he wants to have respectful discussions about ideology, positions on issues, politics in general, then I'd say yes.

One thing someone else mentioned above about 'respect' I'd like to second. I'm tired of being told by Cons what's "appropriate" or not. The world does not revolve solely around their yardstick.

[applegrove]

105. There are thousands of boards where you can discuss with a freeper

or a repuke. And you can put up two websites at the same time.

We don't allow repukes here - because they have not shown a pattern for anything more than obfuscation. And we like debate. And we have a right to a place to go to discuss amongst ourselves. With intelligence and good information.

Issues GOP types bring up again and again that are lies include:

1) Germany's poor economy is because of liberal policies. TRUTH: Germany's economic voes are because they have huge immigration from Middle East and Eastern Europe, they are integrating Eastern Germany into their economy & they went with the Euro so lost any monetary policy options to devalue their currency and thus stimulate the local economy.

2) Fascism comes from left of centre politics. And the leaders are left of Centre. TRUTH: Fascism comes from right wing leadership.

3) Etc.

Why do we need to be involved with a bunch of myth makers? They lie about the facts so that the facts work backwards to the "reality" they want.

Why on earth would we want to debate the issues with purposely phony facts? It is hard enough when we debate with the facts that are known. I mean there is so much secrecy in the WH & GOP, and that makes it hard to be discerning as it is.

WHY ON EARTH ADD ANOTHER LEVEL OF MISINFORMATION AND FALSEHOODS by letting in GOP "role-players".

[EstimatedProphet]

118. Hear hear!

Well stated madam!

[applegrove]

123. Tks.

[iamthebandfanman]

135. i dunno...

could go either way. i once got ban in the hecktic times of the 2004 election under a different name for saying we shoulda picked dean.
im sure it was just a mistake tho, since the night was so chaotic.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

136. I doubt that's why you were banned.

So you admit you were banned and are back under another name?
Tsk, tsk.

[iamthebandfanman]

143. blah

why would i admit to if i didnt think it was a mistake ?
sheesh.
sorry, im not a neo-con so im not that much of an idiot.

im sure it was a mistake, that was the only comment i made and next thing i know...
like i say...
DU says during elections they are sorry if it happens, if someone accidently gets banned, because of the chaotic nature of those nights. its understandable. i was upset at first but then logic and reason made me calm down ;)

by the way, if they ban me merely for saying i thought dean shoulda been chosen n said i thought that outcome would happen with kerry... thats just crazy. it was just an opinion, and not an anti-democratic one at that.

[EstimatedProphet]

140. How did that work? Did you petition to come back on?

That was before my stint as a mod, so I don't know how it went down. If you were banned, and you were let back on, then it would seem to me that that is a way that the mods would be apologizing.

[iamthebandfanman]

146. everythings fine now

no harm no foul so i didnt even make a big deal outa it at the time.
like i say, i just chalked it up to the craziness of that night.
people were posting LIKE CRAZY and i have no doubt that some bastard rethugs were trying to post negative things...so i understand :)

[Catchawave]

152. Honey, I'm a refugee from the old AOL usenet boards....

and those were pretty nasty. If your friend wants a respectful conversation with a democrat, may I suggest the many other online communities who have bigger budgets for fire hoses :evilgrin:

Hey, I'm married to a repuke, I come to DU to get away from those so-called "respectful conversations" ...snort...:patriot:

[reDEMption]

155. LOL!

Well, I came here to experience the Democratic party, check it out, try it on--and I guess I have!

I have....


Thanx

[Catchawave]

156. Welcome to DU reDEMption !

:hi: Hope you enjoy the ride and stay with us :patriot:

[Kerrytravelers]

180. Experience the Democratic party? Try it on?

What does that mean?

[Sparkly]

186. Me too -- I still peek in there now and then.

It's incredible -- children (or childish adults) and parrots.

[SammyBlue]

154. Tell your "Republican" discussion mate to go here

www.freerepublic.com

He'll/She'll fit in nicely with the conservative republican fascists there!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

157. no. this is a board meant for progressives.

there are plenty of "mixed" boards...but you cant identify as a republican and be here.

[LittleClarkie]

172. We are the mirror image of Freeperville

They don't allow lefties, we don't allow righties. Those wishing to spar with someone of the other persuasion will have to find non-partisan board.

I've been on lefty boards that didn't moderate, or block, freepers from the board. The freeper trolls got very tiresome very quickly. They weren't there to discuss. They were there to be rude and insulting. I reckon some of us would be the same on a righty board. We'd just go there to heckle. Both sides have their safe havens. This is ours.

[Redneck Socialist]

184. He can go Cheney himself

And I'm only being half tongue in cheek here. DU is by and for Democrats and progressives. There are plenty of other boards where he can yell at, I mean "debate" Democrats.

He would be banned in a heartbeat and rightly so.

[Brewman_Jax]

185. If he's such a republican...

he should be enlisting for the war and going to Iraq, since that's what he voted for, not looking to "debate" democrats.

[Sparkly]

187. Respectful debate with a Republican, fine -- but not here.

That's not what DU is for. I think the message board rules here make that pretty clear.