General Discussion

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)

206. I have personally proved that I accept '16.

Mon Oct 23, 2017, 02:26 PM

Oct 2017

Anyone who campaigned for the ticket in the fall proved that.

And nothing that's happening right now in the party has anything to do with what people think about Hillary.

The primaries did not mean that the debate over where we stand as a party or what tactics we use in the future is over. And so long as the discussion is carried on with respect and tact, what is the harm of open debate?

And as to Hillary...she's not going to run again, so, while she should be considered an elder statesperson(in the best sense) in this party, what exactly does that mean? Are we supposed to treat her like she's the leader of the opposition? Are we supposed to give her the final say as to what we continue to be about? She should be one voice, one important voice...but how far does that go?

And is it fair to equate ANY calls for change in what we stand for, or how we fight elections, with a call to stop opposing institutional bigotry? Even though none of us in the rank and file, no matter who we might have supported in 2016 are saying that bigotry is trivial or doesn't matter? Even though none of us are saying we shouldn't address it or address it less than we currently do?

Why can't everybody just work from the assumption that Dem and progressive activists, no matter which side they were on in the primaries, no matter what any former candidates say, are united in opposing racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and xenophobia? Why can't there just be an acceptance that everybody on the left is together on this? What purpose is served by this continual "you're not on our SIDE" thing? How, in any way at all, does that help?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

240 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

DNC chairman aims for diversity with delegate nominations [View all] DonViejo Oct 2017 OP

Thank you for posting the facts. SunSeeker Oct 2017 #1

Thank you for a nice, informative article, murielm99 Oct 2017 #2

I like the "everyone gets a voice" approach. Wwcd Oct 2017 #3

I Quite Agree Me. Oct 2017 #57

Hello & thanks. I'm finding some smart, aware & friendly ppl here. Wwcd Oct 2017 #59

You Are So Right Me. Oct 2017 #62

Its truly the people's party Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #71

Yes. :) Planned increased representation by millennials is Hortensis Oct 2017 #129

Indeed. And THESE young people were also becoming aware, some 40+ years ago Wwcd Oct 2017 #136

Yes, that was my generation too. I was in Nevada in high Hortensis Oct 2017 #142

Thanks for posting this. Was just browsing the other thread when it was locked. eppur_se_muova Oct 2017 #4

Amazing the difference using this as an attack against Dems and simply laying out a story factually. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #5

Criticism of something someone in the party does is not "an attack against Dems". Ken Burch Oct 2017 #20

Criticism lacking fact equals, bad. We see too much and this is a perfect example. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #24

Look, nobody on this side of the spectrum dismisses the need for diversity. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #28

Look, I disagree. I have watched and continue to watch the effort to put some aside. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #29

What do you mean when you say "the effort to put some aside"? Ken Burch Oct 2017 #32

I am referring to your claim that this side is not putting diversity to the side. I argue that point Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #36

We are all for diversity and we all support the fight against social oppression. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #56

I call bullshit to gaslighting. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #65

And I don't gaslight. I don't have power over you and I don't have the capacity Ken Burch Oct 2017 #70

You are right. You do not have that ability which is the theme of my posts, repeatedly. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #73

If you accept that I wasn't even trying to gaslight you Ken Burch Oct 2017 #80

I do not "need"anything from you, lol. You put out division and then step back. I do not play. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #81

I didn't put out division. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #82

Correct... NurseJackie Oct 2017 #93

Finally, someone describes it in words that make sense, I have been trying to do that, well done Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #203

THANK YOU! (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #179

Not when issues that involve POC, women and LGBTQs are dismissed as ehrnst Oct 2017 #178

It was one former candidate who said that. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #199

A former candidate that is posturing himself for a future run. It matters to us, the Democratic base Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #201

OK, so put it on Bernie, as an individual. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #207

Incorrect. we hear the language today. That is what we are addressing, today. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #210

I'm not telling you to hush up. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #214

This Op was DNC and a faction attacking DNC. I do not need your help on how to maneuver my political Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #215

+1000. (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #217

Straw man. ehrnst Oct 2017 #218

That is the response I've seen every time anybody mentions the words. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #219

No. It gets mentioned whenever there is hyperbole that was not ehrnst Oct 2017 #233

No straw man. I'll narrow it down...it was the response I got to all the post-election OPs. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #234

I think you need to re-read the posts you are referring to. ehrnst Oct 2017 #235

I know what the posts I wrote said. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #236

Doesn't sound like it. (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #237

They were nothing but positive suggestions for change. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #239

I read what you posted, and commented on it. ehrnst Oct 2017 #240

Sounds like you're going to post "The Party is Always Right" song again. betsuni Oct 2017 #38

I am done with that. I am done with the coddling. Done. Some refuses to learn from the past. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #39

For some, diversity apparently means angry, impolite "street level" radicals who think Democrats betsuni Oct 2017 #41

What I feel, adamantly, is some people telling me what is happening, is not happening. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #42

Yes, the gas is turned up real high. betsuni Oct 2017 #43

I am hoping we are seeing the Democratic Party taking a stand too. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #47

I'm not gaslighting you. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #48

I do not really care about your end result. I do care about the effort to once again, trashing the Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #49

There are a lot of people who had issues with the personnel thing. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #54

As we clearly see, it was presented for some to cause controversy that wasn't there. I oppose. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #66

Yep, sure was. Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #204

Mostly, these are people who cannot accept 16...and are bitter..those who hated the Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #183

I have personally proved that I accept '16. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #206

I will repeat my point this once, for you. Sanders is posturing for a future run. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #211

Then it's enough to put it on him as an individual. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #213

My conversation isnt about you. It is about the divisiveness being created for the Democratic Party. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #216

+1000 (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #238

I have no doubt he is posturing for another run...but he won't win a primary...I hope he does not Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #220

I am right there with every thing you said. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #222

I am as much of a Democrat as you are. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #52

No. And I admitted that was a stupid thing to do, so why are you still mad about it? Ken Burch Oct 2017 #45

Oh right, that was in The Apologies of Ken, Volume Two. betsuni Oct 2017 #51

I apologize when I make a mistake. People make mistakes. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #53

You have made another one with this issue. See Mrs. Coffee's #25 below. stevenleser Oct 2017 #78

No I haven't. It's enough that I've said I hope it works out well. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #79

Oh wait, suddenly now it's okay to be flawed and make mistakes? betsuni Oct 2017 #92

I've never demanded flawlessness. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #150

Support Is Always More Progressive Me. Oct 2017 #58

There's nothing that's being done that people need to be hardballed into accepting. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #63

No One Is Me. Oct 2017 #64

I am so done with being told I really do not see what is in front of my face. I agree with you. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #69

Too Much Of That Lately From All KInds Of People Me. Oct 2017 #72

Yes. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #74

Exactly. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #68

The support comes in the form of working to elect the candidates. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #208

Yes...if we say we will unquestioningly vote for the Democrat...it will lead to an electoral Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #182

I agree. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #190

Sounds good to me... Wounded Bear Oct 2017 #6

Diversity is something Democrats have always stood for. sheshe2 Oct 2017 #7

"Diversity" achieved entirely at the expense of the Sanders/Ellison wing of the party markpkessinger Oct 2017 #8

Just as you did not bother to read the article in the OP, I cannot be bothered to read your comment. DonViejo Oct 2017 #9

Neither can I. nt Atticus Oct 2017 #10

. . . markpkessinger Oct 2017 #11

There is nothing in what that post said that contradicts the article Ken Burch Oct 2017 #22

I look forward to reading your letter to Tom Steyer, telling him he and his money are no longer DonViejo Oct 2017 #27

Well shit... GulfCoast66 Oct 2017 #60

I wasn't saying anything about you, for God's sakes. Ken Burch Oct 2017 #67

I read your op and the Vanity Fair article and a number of other articles this morning.. CentralMass Oct 2017 #133

Out of the 75 Eko Oct 2017 #12

,,, lapucelle Oct 2017 #40

Huh, look at that. Eko Oct 2017 #46

This is a great list! mcar Oct 2017 #106

Stop posting divisive stuff, please. No reason for that. nt Blue_true Oct 2017 #15

Seems to me the divisiveness is coming from Perez n/t markpkessinger Oct 2017 #16

Getting underrepresented Democrats Blue_true Oct 2017 #17

Yes, how divisive of Perez to include LGBTQ, AA mcar Oct 2017 #23

No wonder Perez named Ellison to the Executive Committee. lapucelle Oct 2017 #44

Nope, see Mrs. Coffee's #25 below. The facts are against what you are saying. nt stevenleser Oct 2017 #77

Baloney. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #25

And there you have it. All of this nonsense from people trying to manufacture outrage against the stevenleser Oct 2017 #75

Not at all baloney. The DNC's official line is classic misdirection. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #88

Petty squabbles and attacks on Democrats or the party do not seem reasonable. Period. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #90

At least you're impliedly admitting that there was retaliation involved. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #116

No, I implied that it is the job to make the nominations. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #124

No, it completely blows up the arguments people are using to complain. stevenleser Oct 2017 #99

And I thought DU was a place to SUPPORT the party, but attacking the party is welcome Eliot Rosewater Oct 2017 #205

And there it is...this is always and continues to be about Sen. Sanders...who cannot have a "wing" Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #184

How is it an attack angrychair Oct 2017 #13

Wow. Eko Oct 2017 #14

Yes he did angrychair Oct 2017 #18

How is it parsing words? Eko Oct 2017 #21

Pres. Obama supported the Keystone at one time...there are differing opinions...and it is no longer Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #31

To be clear angrychair Oct 2017 #85

The Dems have always been a big tent. But I too was unhappy with the endorsement of Mello. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #134

The Democratic Party is a big tent party...and what you consider important...may not be Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #177

With all due respect angrychair Oct 2017 #196

What would you do about the "anti-choice" Democrats? Jim Lane Oct 2017 #212

Perhaps Keith Ellison should turn down his nomination by Perez lapucelle Oct 2017 #50

Yet again, to be clear angrychair Oct 2017 #86

Anyone who is not happy with the "compromises" lapucelle Oct 2017 #91

Again angrychair Oct 2017 #131

The post I responded to was your defense of criticism lapucelle Oct 2017 #145

We don't need to kick people out of the party because they have jobs you don't like...too bad. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #30

Maybe you replied to the wrong person? Eko Oct 2017 #33

I did sorry...we are in agreement...Mea Culpa...I should be more careful. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #34

No problem, Eko Oct 2017 #37

During my misreading episode...sorry again mea culpa mea maxima culpa. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #135

People have jobs and we have never based party membership or activism on jobs. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #35

See Mrs. Coffee's #25 above. It's an attack and it ignored the facts. nt stevenleser Oct 2017 #76

These are the "lobbyists and corporatists"? mcar Oct 2017 #19

+1 MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #26

+2 betsuni Oct 2017 #55

+3 JHan Oct 2017 #113

Democrats should be in good shape from here if we all pull together. oasis Oct 2017 #61

K&R... spanone Oct 2017 #83

K&R betsuni Oct 2017 #84

On some matters, DU is less credible than progressive boards like JackPineRadicals. philly_bob Oct 2017 #87

### NurseJackie Oct 2017 #95

LOL SunSeeker Oct 2017 #96

Lol JHan Oct 2017 #110

I don't see how anyone could look at that sentence without bursting into peals of hearty laughter. betsuni Oct 2017 #161

My thoughts exactly. (nt) ehrnst Oct 2017 #176

Is JPR still photoshopping feces onto pictures of Hillary Clinton? yardwork Oct 2017 #97

Incorrect, see MrsCoffee's #25 above. JPR is never credible on anything. stevenleser Oct 2017 #102

Wasn't JPR founded so people mcar Oct 2017 #103

Pretty much...although some left willingly and some are back. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #185

Oy. greatauntoftriplets Oct 2017 #104

That would be the site that calls women harpies, at the very least? No identity politics. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #105

Cool story bro JHan Oct 2017 #109

Especially if Russian propaganda is what you consider "credible." brer cat Oct 2017 #148

They're on Prop Or Not's list lapucelle Oct 2017 #151

Which means they and their posters revmclaren Oct 2017 #164

That's true, but there's one respect in which they're almost exactly the same. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #166

I dont see you attacking JPR posters the same way, tho. R B Garr Oct 2017 #167

I'm not going to fight with shadows. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #168

Okay. Its just obvious that JPR engages in conspiracy R B Garr Oct 2017 #169

It's truly amazing how often you "respond" to something I haven't said Jim Lane Oct 2017 #172

Sorry, not buying it. This is just your version of "both sides do it" as an attempt to R B Garr Oct 2017 #195

Both sides do it, both sides are the same, what about the men, blue lives matter too. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #198

Me too. Im tired of the browbeating that we have R B Garr Oct 2017 #227

Totally, and absolutely agree. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #228

There's only one sentence in this post of yours that makes sense. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #209

Sorry, but your posts here attempted to ridicule R B Garr Oct 2017 #226

I went into one link, calling women, Democratic women, harpies. That said everything. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #229

Great post! Squinch Oct 2017 #232

There isnt a real progressive in the lot at JPR. Its a cesspool of posers. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #173

+1 betsuni Oct 2017 #175

Uh...LOL...Bwahaha...etc. MineralMan Oct 2017 #202

Did you really write that? Squinch Oct 2017 #231

The official spin about "diversity" is not completely congruent with the facts. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #89

Isn't the Intercept Greenwald's site? George II Oct 2017 #98

Correct. Russian propaganda 24x7. nt stevenleser Oct 2017 #101

I don't know. Is the statement I quoted true? or do you not care about that? (n/t) Jim Lane Oct 2017 #108

JPR, Breitbart, Greenwald/Intercept, FR, and various others aren't worth the effort to check stevenleser Oct 2017 #112

Isn't Greenwald connected to Assange? I know that doesn't work for me. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #114

Exactly. And they are lying again now, MrsCoffee's #25 above has all the facts. stevenleser Oct 2017 #115

I stopped listening to Greenwald at least a couple years ago. He has proved his agenda counters Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #118

Your subject line is false. Demonstrably false. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #120

People are done, and hopefully the DNC and Democratic Party is done with the petty fighting. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #122

There are two ways to be done with the fighting. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #126

I have watched childish, false, irresponsible attacks on the Democratic Party. Done. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #127

And I have watched childish, false, irresponsible attacks on progressives. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #130

I am a progressive. You mean populist, right? Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #132

Getting into an argument about who deserves the title "progressive" is generally unhelpful. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #138

Using it to bash the majority of the Democratic base is harmful and untrue. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #139

Sick of these empty threats. You have to live in the same R B Garr Oct 2017 #140

You post yet another straw-man argument, again based on huge distortion Jim Lane Oct 2017 #146

No, your wall of words is where the straw man arguments R B Garr Oct 2017 #147

What right wing? lapucelle Oct 2017 #153

The right wing that holds power in the federal government Jim Lane Oct 2017 #165

There is already one minor party lapucelle Oct 2017 #170

+1 betsuni Oct 2017 #171

People can read the posts and agendas on JPR. R B Garr Oct 2017 #137

I agree. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #141

Your post is a good example of a distinction without a difference and manufactured outrage stevenleser Oct 2017 #128

Their well-known reputations precede them. I must say, it reveals much about anyone who would... NurseJackie Oct 2017 #117

I agree. And I have to read MrsCoffee #25 that you all are pointing out. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #119

I respectfully request that you also read my # 88 in response. Get both sides. Thanks. (n/t) Jim Lane Oct 2017 #123

It is not "both sides". I am done with agitators that caused our problem 2016. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #125

Lots of attention is being paid to those who were removed, little attention to.... George II Oct 2017 #121

Then pray enlighten me about the new members OF THE COMMITTEES Jim Lane Oct 2017 #191

I don't know much about them yet, but I sure as heck didn't jump on the bandwagon... George II Oct 2017 #193

Your response epitomizes one view of how to oppose Trump Jim Lane Oct 2017 #194

This message was self-deleted by its author Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #200

No it is not true...it is about helping the Russian loving Republicans. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #186

"It helps the Republicans" doesn't prove it's false. Try again. (n/t) Jim Lane Oct 2017 #192

Anything that helps the GOP is wrong...period. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #223

If you want to say that something is wrong, fine, but don't say it isn't true. Jim Lane Oct 2017 #224

I categorically deny that the assertions you made are true. Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #225

+1. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #230

Nothing the Intercept writes should be trusted. It's Greenwald's site. nt stevenleser Oct 2017 #100

Well... THAT certainly explains a lot. (And I'll just leave it at that... NurseJackie Oct 2017 #107

+1000, thanks Steve, that sure explains everything. R B Garr Oct 2017 #111

so if they make a claim, somebody could correct the record. Sure, take it with a pile of salt. Are JCanete Oct 2017 #144

Nope, just like we dont bother with other reichwing sites stevenleser Oct 2017 #149

They are now like Breitbart...so none of their statements need be addressed...they Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #187

It looks like the Party is hurting for money also. Maybe this diversity will help fill the coffers. jalan48 Oct 2017 #94

Sanders grassroots organization was a prolific fund raiser during the primary. Do think that .. CentralMass Oct 2017 #152

We have no idea who contributed to Sanders. It could R B Garr Oct 2017 #154

We have some pretty good data on who contributed to him CentralMass Oct 2017 #155

There were pages of discrepancies promoting a R B Garr Oct 2017 #156

When you have millions of contributions being takien by a newly CentralMass Oct 2017 #157

Just because you are a Believer doesnt change the R B Garr Oct 2017 #158

What I believe is that the DNC just made a mistake with this recent purge. CentralMass Oct 2017 #159

Lol. Mediumsizedhand Oct 2017 #160

Bernie purged himself a while ago. If he makes R B Garr Oct 2017 #162

Now that is an excellent point. MrsCoffee Oct 2017 #174

You took the words right out of my mouth! NurseJackie Oct 2017 #181

No-but at least we have Wall Street and the billionaires to fall back on. jalan48 Oct 2017 #163

I dispute that they are not being listened too...and why should anyone follow a Senator Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #188

Cool...sounds like a puff piece though. If you are going to talk about who got nominated as if JCanete Oct 2017 #143

Why...would that be useful? You can infer anything by such choices... and it is just more endless Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #189

You don't give a damn about it. Other people do. But of course it would be useful. If some people JCanete Oct 2017 #197

"Stop giving them your support" and elect Republicans...not a great plan but one that works out Demsrule86 Oct 2017 #221

'draw a distinction between his priorities and those of President Trump.' Baconator Oct 2017 #180