DU is Freaking Me Out

[BeFree]

It is being spread that because I demand the Iraqi occupation end now, that I am being radical.

That because I see the most immediate way to get rid of bushco is impeachment, that I am not playing along with the party.

That standing up for my right's is hurting others.

Those kind of statements are freaking me out. Have I wandered into a skake-pit filled with apologists for the bushco?

Has DU been so radically altered that it is no longer ok for me to demand what I know are the real solutions to our problems?

Tell me it's not real. Tell me that I am not a voice in the wilderness... that DU still stands for correction: not assimilation.

[NMDemDist2]

1. the alert key is your friend n/t

[MADem]

9. You don't alert on people who disagree with you--that's what the IGNORE button is for.

If opposing views in a political forum cause angst, that IGNORE button removes them.

But there's a wide swathe of views in the Democratic Party, so the ALERT key is an inappropriate tool in this instance.

We run the gamut from Dennis Kucinich to Zell Miller, after all....













z

[Fuzz]

57. The alert button is used too often

Gotta think in lock-step around here lately. Getting sad.

[MADem]

60. Well, I'm not a lockstepper, and if people can't handle diverse viewpoints, they should avail

themselves of that swell ignore feature. It will make their lives happier, and they won't have to issue BS diatribes about how they're being picked on for being different, or what have you...!

[Laelth]

67. Just as an aside ...

Zell Miller does not count any longer, does he? As a Georgia democrat, I need to know. Please don't tell me I have to tolerate Zell. I may have to leave the party if you do.

(only half-joking)

-Laelth

[MADem]

77. I realize he's gone, but I chose him as the most-well-known Democratic asshole in the firmament!!!

I thought about using former Senator John (Let Me Go Suck Up At The White House At Every Opportunity) Breax, but not enough people know who he is. And Lieberman, why, he's no longer OF our Party, though he pretends to caucus with us.

Zell gained fame with his Chris Matthews "DU-EL!!" comment, and I figured even the most obtuse peruser of this thread would recognize the asswipe!

But no, you don't have to put up with him any longer, and I can appreciate your unrestrained joy at that simple fact!

[EFerrari]

2. It's not personal, BeFree, it's just business.

And, fwiw, I agree on all points.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. I believe we should have been out of Iraq yesterday

and I not only believe impeachment is the way to go, I call and write my repuke conman about it. Don't know what rights you are standing up for, but I believe in the Constitution and all the rights given us there. Just so you know.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Well I agree with you

But I am more freaked out about the executive branch of this country than by anything here on DU.

[Kajsa]

5. I don't know who is telling you that.

I agree with your positions on the war in Iraq
and impeaching Bushco.

Most Democrats I've met agree with you, also.

Too radical?

I don't think so!

[bigtree]

6. you complain about your views being miscast

then you call your detractors 'apologists for the bushco'

mirror.

[MADem]

14. And that's a violation of Rule Two, too!

Yep, that IGNORE button might make the OP happier, I'm thinking.

[Jack Rabbit]

7. Desiring an immediate end to the occupation of Iraq now hardly seems radical

The New York Times, not exactly a symbol of the fringe left, called this morning for essentially that.

As for impeachment, I don't only see that as the most immediate way to get rid of BushCo, I see it as the only way to get anything positive accomplished (like ending the war in Iraq) or preventing more disasters in the near future (like starting a war against Iran).

[MuseRider]

8. There are still those of us

who agree with you. Yes, I too get freaked out by that. I don't know about the assimilation, I see a real movement to make that so through loyalty oaths and scathing comments and childish name calling about those of us who do not follow the line that is being drawn. You are not alone even though it often feels like it.

[mitchtv]

10. first of all,disagreement with you does not make one an apologist

being that there's probably not enough votes for a conviction , some may chose another route, like the budget process, where the votes may be easier to get. Get a grip, this is politics, and there are many many "solutions" preceived by many different people. Personally I would love an impeachment, but think it will draw energy from ending the war. I would be happy with a minor impeachment like VP or AG to start, but our majority is sooo slim, one wonders

[mike_c]

11. don't worry about it-- you're certainly not alone....

Lots of us here believe in doing the RIGHT thing rather than the politically expedient thing, and are loyal to liberal principles rather than to political parties that embrace those principles when it suits them and discard them when it doesn't.

[MethuenProgressive]

12. "Have I wandered into a skake-pit filled with apologists for the bushco?"

I can't remember ever having read a post of your's, but if the above is indicative of the tone of your posts how can you be surprised that some DUers aren't receptive?
:nopity:

[BeFree]

44. Oh, they are receptive

Just look at the replies. I struck a nerve, eh?

Enough of the apologies... we need action, and we need to quit picking on each other. Ya know, kinda like you just now picked on me attacking the messenger and not the message.

Your reply is what I am talking about.

[Rosemary2205]

13. Is this another 1 guy said 1 thing and all of DU gets blamed?

The posts I've seen on DU generally fall into 3 categories

I'd guess 70-80% of DU is impeach now period.

About 20-25% is impeach when the rest of the country catches up.

3-5% is don't waste time on impeachment and work on other stuff instead.

1-3% Freeper trolls who flip flop around just to start shit.


So where is this "DU changed it's mind on impeachment" coming from????? :shrug:

[Totally Committed]

21. No, I don't think it is.

Go over to GD: Politics and disagree with ANY post about Clinton or Obama. Or, have an opinion about the DLC that is not the prevailing one. You will be called names. Your integrity will be impugned. It might even be said you are a "troll", no matter how many thousands of posts you have.

It is truly shocking.

TC

[Yukari Yakumo]

22. Not entirely accurate.

You're going to be called names regardless of which stand you take.

Civility is a dying concept in DU.

[Individualist]

26. That's exactly why I stopped going to GDP long ago

Control freaks are boring.

[Rosemary2205]

27. Well heck!!!

If GD politics is being mean come on over here!! We only make fun of each other's hair!! LOL :)

Well I did have ONE poster call me a "shriveled up bitter old prune who's jealous because I don't get any".

Sometimes all you can do is LOL and move on. :)

[Warren Stupidity]

65. You don't get any either?

Oh wait. Can I delete that?

[Marnieworld]

15. Honestly

I think that there are a lot of posts/threads masking other agendas. I think that trolling has become more sophisticated. They are like the Raptors in Jurassic park. They try different things, learn together and remember. So they mask themselves as supporters for one person or other, they fake it better. And there are also other members who aren't trolls per se in the fact they are actually Democrats and will vote that way. Yet many campaign workers I'm sure post here. Say I work for Hillary and I post a thread declaring Al gore to never run and anyone who still hopes for this is deluded, or I just won't shut up about Edwards wealth etc. In GD-Poltics you see a lot more of these sort of concerned posts- like I like candidate A but I fear their (RW perceived weakness talking point) will hold them back etc.

Favoring pulling out of Iraq and Impeachment have now become mainstream American views, hardly radical, and certainly ordinary on a progressive site like this. Du is fine. Better than ever. I find all of this a sign that this is actually a place where activism is amazing and has a big impact. We can only be a target if we are a threat so I welcome it. Even from the status quo DLCers. You are not crazy or alone. You just need to filter out the losers better is all. :patriot:

[rosesaylavee]

42. Well, you're just nuts to say so!!111!!

:hi:

[Marnieworld]

70. .

:D

[johnaries]

16. ?

The vast majority of posts I have seen are for immediate withdrawal and for impeachment.

[Individualist]

17. Ignore those who try to control what others say and think

They don't seem to understand that the majority of us are capable of thinking for ourselves.

Don't let anyone discourage you from voicing your beliefs and opinions. (See my sig line.)

[Me.]

18. Yes, The Chiding Has Begun, On A Daily Basis

Too radical, too extreme, won't give an inch or compromise when demanding justice or that our beautiful country be restored. The shaking of the finger for daring to question the job the dems are/aren't doing. One wonders if and what the agenda is.

[Yukari Yakumo]

24. Conversely

Opposing impeachment while explaining it will only result in an acquittal for BushCo will get you being called "coward", "enabler", and a couple dozen other things.

[bigtree]

29. or a "bushco apologist"

:eyes:

[Me.]

33. But We Don't Actually Know That Do We?

We won't know the outcome unless/until we attempt it.

[MADem]

61. Yep!!! Where you stand depends on where you sit--that "chiding" is a two-way street

The reality of it all is that the Democratic Party cuts a wide swathe. There are actually CONSERVATIVE and MODERATE Democrats, as we know, and many here refuse to acknowledge that fact. The entire party isn't Kucinich-left, and that's just a fact!

There can be, and are, differences of opinion on issues between Democrats.

And that "Bush Enabler" and "GOP Apologist" garbage that gets tossed is not only incredibly lame (the last resort of a shitty debater), it's against the DU rules. Of course, that tends to get overlooked, rather like logic does, when those arguments rear their weak little heads!

I've been on the receiving end of plenty of halfassed 'chiding' for refusing to go with the flow on a number of 'wishin' and hopin' pipe dream' issues. But hey, I won't be bullied. I'm not about to stop doing my work for Democratic candidates just because a few clowns with keyboards try to tell me I'm not 'progressive enough,' simply because I don't agree with them!

[UTUSN]

19. Well, *I* believe we never should have been in Iraq & that Shrub never been pResident, AND?!!1 n/t

[DeepModem Mom]

20. Could you provide some examples, BeFree? Not being argumentative...

but I thought those were the views of the majority here (in favor of an end to Iraq, impeachment), even considering that DU rules don't allow nonproductive attacks on the Democratic party. I'm on the board quite a lot -- but maybe I've been in different threads.

[BeFree]

23. Examples

I have been reading a lot of thick threads about how people like me are not helping the corporate dems find solutions to our problems. That I should be more moderate, that I should watch what I say. If you haven't seen them, good for you, it made me sick and I wouldn't want that for you.

[DeepModem Mom]

31. Yes -- "thick," burning-fire threads are often combative.

I think I'm usually too busy looking at articles, and posting, to scroll through them.

[Rosemary2205]

32. You should be who you are.

If some DUer don't like it and is rude about it then tell them to bite you where the sun don't shine.

To be quite honest I'm one of those moderate dems who think it would be politically wise to get the rest of the country on board first -- and I get some abuse now and again from the "impeach now" crowd. Not often but sometimes.

We got room for everyone. :)

[BeFree]

35. Heh

Room for everyone?

I don't think so. We can, and do exclude those who profess opposition to making progress.

Which is the point.... are the people freaking me out making progress?

[bigtree]

47. this is absurd

"We can, and do exclude those who profess opposition to making progress."

You think DU should be 'intolerant' of anything you consider to be "opposition to making progress?"

Who determines which initiatives, proposals, or strategies to opposing Bush are "opposition to making progress?" You?

[BeFree]

50. Hey bigtree

Yes, you were one of the posters who prompted this. But my battery is dying. Seeya tomorrow!

[bigtree]

58. I told you then that advocating impeachment can coexist with support for other Democratic efforts

apparently you disagree.

You said, "I see the most immediate way to get rid of bushco is impeachment"

My argument was that your drive for that impeachment should not prevent you from supporting efforts pending to press forward with legislation calling for an end to the occupation, including a reauthorization and a change in deployment rules. Indeed, I see a refusal to support ongoing Democratic efforts to confront Bush on Iraq through legislation which has demonstrated enough of a consensus to proceed with a reasonable chance of reaching Bush's desk, as pernicious and counter to all of the concern that you've expressed behind your desire for an immediate impeachment.

Also, I see the refusal to acknowledge or support the ongoing efforts to confront the crimes and abuses of the Bush administration which may fall short of impeachment as pernicious and counter to the goals expressed behind the rationale for an immediate impeachment; especially since many of those efforts could very well lead to the impeachment you advocate.

I think you desperately want to argue that my point of view on this falls under your Orwellian offense of an, 'opposition to making progress.' I actually have written several times of my ultimate support for any impeachment. I won't second-guess or stand in the way of an eventual effort. But, I won't pretend that I believe an impeachment would solve every concern we have; and I believe that a partisan impeachment based on charges coming exclusively from our party is doomed to failure because of the balance of power in this Congress.

That's not opposition to impeachment, It's a recognition that these isn't yet enough support in this Congress to convict the Executive on any of the charges swirling around. Moreover, my position is that the investigations which are ongoing have the best chance for producing the outside prosecution which I think will be essential in galvanizing enough bipartisan support for an impeachment process which would lead to a conviction. I believe a process which leads to actual criminal convictions is far superior to the one that I project would be decided in favor of the administration in an effort generated entirely by our party alone. I think that kind of process would lead to an acquittal, which I think would be far more egregious than the prospect of generating the confrontation we all want by relying on the efforts already underway by Conyers, Waxman, Leahy, Levin, and others.

You got it all wrong BeFree. I think you may not be reading deeply enough into these arguments and are projecting your own bias as viciously as you accuse others of attacking your own point of view. But, I think you should continue to press your point for impeachment. I just think it's wrong to castigate Congress for not moving there immediately and wrong to dismiss all of the other measures they are taking to confront the administration which, so far, have fallen short of the degree of confrontation you want and expect.

[BeFree]

73. Heh

It's a recognition that these isn't yet enough support in this Congress to convict the Executive on any of the charges swirling around.

Well, if you don't think they can be impeached, then what makes you think they can be weaned from war? How's that working out?

I know, I know, I am too radical, too much of a lefty to have the patience required.

Too much of a troublemaker, too. Why, I am causing all sorts of greif in the congress because I won't get in lockstep.

Hooey.

[John Q. Citizen]

55. I must have missed them. Otherwise I'd be there getting your back. I support

Kucinich as the only liberal Dem currently in the race. i think the rest are all pro American Empire. If I was forced to vote for one of the "so-called" top tier 3, I'd have to go with Edwards, I like his wife and his sort of populace theme on poverty, but since he wants to subsidize private insurance companies and he introduced the IWR, and he talks like a neo-con on Iran, I'm not that keen about him.

I've been for impeachment as a great stratigic tool for the Dems for more than a year. I support Kucinich's plan to completely and totaly leave Iraq and to get the UN in, with 50% of the peace keeping forces coming from Moslim countries, and the US footing the bill for the entire peace keeping force.

We are in the majority here, BeFree. Take heart! Heck, we have the largest Dem caucas in congress, the progressive caucas. The DLC always has tried to say, imply, and leave the impression that they speak for Democrats. Well they don't, and Howard Dean can prove that. BeFree, we are winning. Al Gore is on our side.(impeachment aside, he doesn't vote in congress anyway) He's endorsed single payer, and I bet you one dollar right now he's running!

So, do take heart and don't let the nay sayers get you down.

[MADem]

62. You need to point us to some of these specific threads and provide specific quotes

That broad-brush bullshit is ...er...bullshit. IMO.

You can't throw down an accusation like that without backing it up.

Well, you can, but you can't stay credible without backing it up.

I really want to see one thread where you were told to "Watch what you say."

Last time I checked, Ari Fleischer wasn't a DU member.

So, let's have a few LINKS that illustrate your deep CONCERN over this issue, mmmmmkay?

[Buzz Clik]

25. I disagree with everyone on the board at one time or another.

I've been invited to leave DU by several of the most popular posters here. I've done multiple eyerolls as my immediate reaction to the top admins.

It isn't that DU is "this" or "that", it's because it's made up of people, and people are generally bizarre and unpredicatable.

If you're looking for affirmations, this ain't the place, no matter what your position might be.

[Greyhound]

37. Add that, particularly in groups, they are soooo dumb. n/t

:kick:

[quinnox]

28. Overly Dramatic

Not everyone will agree with everything you think, not even impeachment. I think your thread is melodramatic with some martyr like influences, as if you are proudly standing for all the right things against overwhelming odds. Please.

[BeFree]

38. Overwhelming odds?

What.... bushco isn't overwhelming? Who's winning, bushco, or progress?

Dramatic? No doubt. Certainly.

But DU always leaned against bushco and it has always been at it's best on full tilt against the machine. Join with us, why don't you?

[Me.]

56. To Your Point

About who's winning...actually progress is. The country is trending progressive. David Sirota had a good piece last week how the west is leaving conservative 'values' behind, Media Matter posted an analysis of the country as a whole trending progressive and young people are tending to be more progressive than their parents.

[personman]

30. Ask Cindy Sheehan. nt

[The Backlash Cometh]

34. Sounds like you ran into a swarm of DLCers.

[camero]

36. It's not freaking me out but it's not as much fun to be here now

and no, I don't think you're radical. Of course sometimes I don't articulate my point well enough as per one post I made where pols are steering the terms of debate to more social issues than economics as a form of misdirection because the ruling class for the most part doesn't care about social issues.

I think people should stand up for their rights. I also think they should look at the bigger picture and not let themselves be used by politicos for nefarious purposes.

My fault. Sorry.

As per the war, I think the people that say we should stay are the same people who say it's a dog-eat-dog world. From my experience the people who say it's a dog-eat-dog world like it that way.

[Swamp Rat]

39. You, me and Jesus.

:)

[rosesaylavee]

40. Where have you been?

If you are crazy, count me in too.

[Moochy]

41. DU has been changed

The hyper partisan war apologists have won.

on edit: Thankfully DU admins provide a way to ignore the hyperpartisan DLC hacks, and really their contribution to DU is minimal even on good days.

[Tom Joad]

43. Demanding an immediate end to US occupation of Iraq is like .

a child demanding ice cream now.
at least, that is what i have been told here.

like demanding the end of a genocidal program now is somehow analogous to demanding a sweet. go figure.

[BeFree]

46. Yep

It's almost as if they want it to continue. Don't think they do, but it sure could be construed that way.

Don't they have something better to do than attack us for wanting what's best?

[Perky]

45. There is soma difference between being apologist for Bushco and being pragmatic.

Ultimately the power of the net roots does not easily translate into action on capitol hill. It might in ten years but not yet.


I think that is largely because campaign finances are disconnected from those who blog and those who comment online



I fear democratic politicians will treat the netroots the way the GOP treats the religious right. "thanks for you votes, see ya in two years or six years.

[BeFree]

48. Your point is?

That we have no bearing? I disagree.

But lets say you are right. Why attack me then?

[Perky]

51. was not aware that I had.

:shrug:

[leftofthedial]

49. the "democrats" in the DLC and the "center"

are a wing of the repuke/corporate takeover of aMurka and are actively engaged with the repukes in the destruction of the American middle class.

They have many supporters and even paid advocates who post here. Plus, there are many here who have no true philosophical commitment to Democratic ideals, just a big-game, rah-rah-for-the-home-team mentality.

[camero]

52. That's true, I agree

But I think they are really for the destruction of anyone who is not rich.

[leftofthedial]

59. they want a planet inhabited by

100,000 or so members of a permanent aristocracy, serviced by about 100,000,000 serfs worldwide and a miniscule number of professionals and technocrats.

[camero]

63. yep, and that explains

the topic of overpopulation without addressing overconsumption. God forbid the rich have to stop using thousands of gallons of water for cosmetic fountains and McMansions that use huge amounts of electricity.

[Individualist]

54. Absolutely!

"This is why the DLC is dangerous. For all their claims of supposedly wanting to help Democrats, they employ people like Marshall Wittman who specifically try to undermine the Democratic Party, even if it means he has to publicly defecate out the most rank and easily-debunkable lies. They reguarly give credence to the right wing's agenda and its worst, most unsupportable lies. They are the real force that tries to make sure this country is a one party state and that Democrats never really challenge the Republicans in a serious way."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/why-the-dlc-is-so-dangero_b_13640.html

"Without a doubt, the DLC is the most fundamentalist organization within the caucus, the most ideologically rigid, and the most destructive to the progressive cause."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/5/24/1712/23448

[Geek_Girl]

53. I guess some centrist on DU are pretty convinced

that sitting on the fence and doing nothing to stop the criminals in in the White House, will result in winning elections. I think they're wrong but they're entitled to their opinion.

Don't take it personal, they just lack courage and the principal to do what is right.

[Warren Stupidity]

64. The vast majority here agree with your positions.

But this board does not talk with one voice. What fun would that be?

[thereismore]

66. DU should be "du". I never thought it was a DU, but apparently some people do. nt

[Matsubara]

68. I think the majority still agree with you. I do.

NT

[Vidar]

69. Just ignore the DLC trolls.

[mmonk]

71. Then I must be "radical" too.

Take my advice and don't take it personal.

[H2O Man]

72. I agree.

I think that the democratic party is big enough to attract people with a wide range of opinions. We have the potential to benefit from that variety. An example can be found on the issue of impeachment: there are many DUers who are strongly pro-impeachment, and many who suggest that the congress should move carefully, and focus on investigations.

That provides for the potential common ground -- because serious investigations are a serious step towards impeachment. What many pro-impeachment democrats find insulting is that some folks take a "no impeachment" stance, without hearing what a serious investigation would uncover. There is no room for common ground there.

Likewise, most democrats are in favor of ending the Bush-Cheney madness in Iraq. There can and should be serious discussion and debate on the different options for accomplishing that. However, it is wrong to pretend that congress took a step towards ending the military occupation of Iraq when they increased the funding for the war.

[BeFree]

76. Yeah

Maybe they aren't many bushco apologists here, it just seems that way sometimes.

What freaks me out is that here, on DU, there are people more interested in attacking me than attacking bushco. We need a fully unified front to fight back and I just don't see that happening.

Shame on those keeping us dis-unified.

[WindRavenX]

74. I feel the same way

I think a lot of it is there are a TON of "concern" trolls about nowadays...

:hug: from radical to the next.

[hiphopnation]

75. i hardly recognize it anymore either

but i'm comoforted that i'm not the only one who's witnessed a radical change in tone here

change is the only constant, however, so take the good with the bad. there are still lots of level heads here, outnumbered as they are, perhaps have always been.