So let me get this straight

[newsguyatl]

i post a thread merely ASKING if anyone here at DU (a political site for political junkies) knows anything about info drudge has just posted on his site alleging clark fundraised for republicans in 2001 and =I= get attacked along with my credibility and sincerity?

unbelievable!

not only have i NEVER bashed clark or any other candidate here, but the folks here who know me know that i very much like and respect clark...


some of you people are absolutely shameless and repulsive... i've never felt this much hatred and anger at ANY site i've ever visited.


something's very wrong here...


this site is becoming less and less educational and discussion oriented, and more and more vile, immature and unpleasant.


it's a shame.

[whirlygigspin]

1. Clark for Prom king!

[BigMcLargehuge]

2. Take a deep breath newsguyatl...

this is GD afterall, the DU gladiatorial ring. It seems that with the primary approaching and Clark's announcement today that everyone has gone apeshit.

This too will pass.

FWIW, I don't have any info on what Drudge has up, but I'll see what I can dig up for you.

:hi:

[clar]

3. I'm sorry this happened

We have every right to examine Clark and his record. Doing so is not attacking. Hang in there.

[CMT]

4. it is a legitimate question you asked

I don't know if it is true or not, but if it is true other candidates, and not only Dean, will use it to question the Generals credibility as a Democrat. If it isn't true, and with Drudge that could be the case, then we should find out as soon as possible.

[trumad]

6. .

[newsguyatl]

13. thanks for validating my point

priceless... speaks wonders for you as well.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

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

[shance]

73. Newsguy some of these guys are Freepers, dont sweat it

Just doing their best to destract and destruct.

:)

[oasis]

33. "deanie baby" ?

:-)

[Malikshah]

67. Hmm...where have I seen this...

Oh yeah--see it a lot on mixed boards when freepers don't have anything better with which to argue.

Resorting to the crying baby. Tried and true tactic of the clueless.

[markses]

77. That's a self-portrait

From when the guy hid for six months after Ohio State won the Nat'l Championship.

A laughable display.

[jonnyblitz]

5. and I thought the Dean supporters were....overzealous

The Clarkbots win the prize so far for, ummm, intensity.

[indigo32]

9. They are at least giving us a run for our money

LOL

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

10. Clark's campaign has been paying close attention to Dean's

Amazing isn't it - the Clarkites are out-Deaning the Deanites lately. Too bad their policies are both the same - 100% DLC!

[Tinoire]

22. Honestly, Dean's wasn't this bad

and with few exceptions, most of the Dean supporters were people we knew and they were reasonable to deal with. There were only a few who were a royal pain in the ass and instigating all the trouble and, almost to the last poster, they were brand new and have since a. either disappeared or b. changed their affiliation. This was discussed during the mayhem itself because it was quite... blatant.

I specifically made a post to that effect which was later referenced by a few other DUers who had noticed the same thing.

[madfloridian]

31. I agree, Tinoire, thanks.

There were and still are some who cross the line, but on the whole most of us are pretty reasonable.

[ScreamingMeemie]

63. Tell that to the DLC about Dean, they sure don't sound like it...sigh

yet another....

[PurityOfEssence]

52. Ah calls 'em "Clark-Barkers", but that's just me...

For sheer vehemence, the hotheads among the Clark camp are easily worse than those in the Dean camp, and the severe Deanie-weenies are a stiff cup of hemlock themselves. Surely the Clark camp has no justification to bellyache about being treated unfairly; their extremists have been dissemblers of historic proportions.

What's most notable is the use of traditionally Republican/Freeperish tactics from certain Clark types: Dancing on your grave, calling people "whiners" (a virtual trademark for smug, right-wing bullying), and blizzarding with vigorous dismissals and counterattacks.

I just hear Nelson Muntz from the Simpsons: "Ha-ha".

Flame away, I'll be back in a few hours.

[wyldwolf]

7. I agree...

... there is a vocal MINORITY here who tries to intimidate others when you disagree with them.

Have you been called a freeper yet but this small far left contingent?

[JanMichael]

17. Clark supporters aren't "far left".

At least that's who I think newsguyatl was refering to:shrug:

[DealsGapRider]

34. Yeah, but the wacky, LIHOP left...

...are the ones who are most promiscuous with accusations that you're a Freeper if you don't parrot the Chomsky line about this or that.

If you suggest that Bush really DIDN'T allow 9/11 to happen, you MUST be a Freeper.

Don't think America's foreign policy is principally an exercise in exploiting the downtrodden, spreading misery and enriching corporations? Freeper.

And so on.

[Rich Hunt]

47. LIHOPers don't strike me as leftists

....and I don't think Chomsky would endorse LIHOP - he tends to be very skeptical.

The LIHOPers are more diehard party activist types, not "leftists". Not at all. When I go to left or progressive boards, I see nothing of LIHOP. Maybe some criticism of intelligence failures, but that's not the same thing.

The left isn't too fond of conspiracy theory.

[Capn Sunshine]

57. I Think you can be a supporter of LIHOP and not be wacky

Lots of people trust me with their millions of dollars, many with their entire lives, and I am no wack job, bucko. I'm a realistic open minded person willing to believe that the Bush bozo running things fronts for a group whose evil is almost beyond the ken of rationality.

I've seen greed turn people nuts before and I base my LIHOP belief on that. The evidence is piling up.

Unless I see a full blown investigation, unhindered by the Bush administration , in my lifetime, I'll continue to believe in LIHOP.

[Sterling]

61. That's funny when I read LIHOP threads I see

LIHOPers talking specifics and people shouting them down calling them names and ignoring relevant information in favor of insults.


Most people I know who believe Bush LIHOPed or MIHOPed do so based on a pretty compelling set of facts.

[Tinoire]

29. What did you expect to find on this progressive, far left board?

The majority of this board is "far left" and damn proud of it.

And don't you for 1 minute pretend we're not over-run with people who are openly admitting they were/are Republicans, Independents or Reagan Democrats. If this board isn't... conservative enough for that particular group, there are plenty of others out there.

Why on earth would a bunch of people who "sneer" and "snarl" at the far-left choose to make this their home?

Must be to turn this into a Clark propaganda site so the DLC can later quote "and the progressives are firmly behind Clark" or "even at Democraticunderground.com , the sounding board of the far left, the buzz is all about Clark".

Naw, we heard the stomp of those boots coming from miles away.

[bicentennial_baby]

32. ?

"And don't you for 1 minute pretend we're not over-run with people who are openly admitting they were/are Republicans, Independents or Reagan Democrats."


Where are these hordes of DUers "openly admitting" (shocking!) that they were Republicans/Independents/Reagan Democrats? I read DU for several hours a day on average and I have not seen this phenomenon of which you speak.

[Tinoire]

39. You'll have to spend a little more time reading ;) n/t

[bicentennial_baby]

49. No

You made a prettywild assertion there, and the burden is on you to provide evidence to back that claim up. So please show me these former repukes who we are absolutely "overrun" with.

[Cheswick2.0]

70. you need to spend some more time getting to know us

anyone can claim to "read DU". Tinoire is correct and I could tell you exactly who they are but it is not for me to say.

[bicentennial_baby]

72. WTF

I have been here since fucking January and I need to spend more time getting to know you guys? With my former screename and this combined, I have well over 2000 posts and have done quite a bit of writing as well as reading here at DU.

I would go on, but it would just get deleted.

[buddhamama]

74. bicentennial_baby

you're all right! :thumbsup:

[wyldwolf]

44. I think that is BS...

...I think the majority of this board is moderate. The "far left" ones are the vocal minority I spoke of.

If the board is "over-run with people who are openly admitting they were/are Republicans, Independents or Reagan Democrats" as you contend, then how can the majority be far left?

[dfong63]

66. think about it, both claims can be true

If the board is "over-run with people who are openly admitting they were/are Republicans, Independents or Reagan Democrats" as you contend, then how can the majority be far left?

both claims can be true. it only takes a very vocal minority to "over-run" a discussion board, regardless of the majority's opinions.

[wyldwolf]

75. Correct, and I see the vocal minority as the far left fringe...

[Bake]

54. Uh, because this is the "Democratic" Underground

Not the Chomsky Underground. Not the Far Left Underground.

And now you're telling us that mainstream Democrats aren't welcome here? I'm sorry (NOT), but I'll call this home if I feel like it, regardless of your lame attempts to take it over by squatters' rights.

There was a poll done here recently, and the "far left" hardly constitutes the majority of DUers. You can find the link.

Bake

[RobinA]

58. Far-Left??

This board is far left? Where do you get that? Some of the conspiracy nonsense is far out, but far left? "Far left" does not mean "knee jerk Bush hater."

[ScreamingMeemie]

64. The majority on this board are Soccer Moms.

Okay, well your comment is just as ridiculous. So I thought I would post my own.

[dpl202]

8. That's why

i hardly post. Just observe. Things get to personal around here. Civility is dead, be it Rupub or Dem. If you would not say it to the posters face, you should not post at all.

[BigMcLargehuge]

14. TAKE THAT BACK!!!

just kidding. I know what you mean about civility, but we are all pretty amped up right now, add to that the pressure of trying to live happily in the Bush economy/climate, and you get a recipe for short fuses.

I always try to be nice. I figure posting lots of nice things helps balance the lunacy of some of the others.

[Sophree]

59. Let US be the ones to bring civility back.

Because you know damn well the Republican party is not going to take up the cause any time soon.

[Tinoire]

11. Hang in there. These bullying tactics

must not be allowed to drive a single progressive from this board.

Contrary to some people's belief, this is not the 'Alleluia- the-Messiah-has-come-Clark-Underground!

You ask all the questions you want. If I find any information for you when I get home tonight, I'll PM it to you and post it.

Peace

[Dookus]

18. Why

must you disparage the genuine support people have for Clark? Calling it "Allelulia-the-Messiah-has-come-Clark-Underground" is simply demeaning to people who've made informed decisions on his candidacy.

My support for Clark is no more intense OR unwarranted than the support people here have for other candidates. I have NEVER insulted what I believe are others' truly-held beliefs. To assume that I support clark as a messiah insults that support by attributing it to a "religious" zeal rather than a legitimate political analysis.

Also, I have NEVER gone to a pro-candidate thread in order to trash that candidate or his supporters. Why do you do it?

[bicentennial_baby]

21. Thank you for saying what I was thinking

You phrased it much better than I. Also, I am not a candidate-basher, for the record.

[Tinoire]

36. I don't really disparage the people who support Clark

What I disparage is the attitude of most of the over-zealous posters who act that way.
"Allelulia-the-Messiah-has-come" is the general drift of approximatately 50% of the posts. I use the term Messiah as in "Savior" not to imply religious zeal but a political fanaticism shared by too many of the posting Clark supporters. And you can't tell me we haven't constantly been hearing that

1. Only Clark can beat Bush
2. 1-several of the other candidates should drop out

I have no problems with people sincerely supporting Clark. What I do have a problem with is people who attempt to stifle all discussion on this board as if they were on a personal mission from Mark Fabiani.

The rudeness we've witnessed in the last few weeks was something never before seen at DU- not even in Israel/Palestine where it also began very recently.

One thing also is that Clark supporters are going to have to get over this business of sacred threads. This is a discussion board, not a ra-ra board and I think that was clear from the start. Rules do not change just because Clark has entered the race, do you think they should?

[Dookus]

42. well, to be honest...

I REALLY, TRULY do not see the Clark support as being any more zealous than Dean's or Kucinich's. We're just seeing a lot of Clark support lately because of his official announcement.

And I don't begrudge those people their opinions at all. I respect them. Which is why I have NEVER posted something derogatory about the candidates or their supporters in their threads.

There has been rudeness directed against the supporters of all candidates, and I'm opposed to all of it.

I've never suggested these threads are sacred, and I didn't propose changing any rules. You're free to be as insulting as you want, and I will defend your right to do so. I just won't respect it.

[Sophree]

62. The Clark-as -Savior argument is a Repuke/Mediawhore

Talking point and it drives me crazy, too. Especially coming from Democrats. This is a VERY strong group of candidates. They all (EVERY SINGLE ONE) have much to offer and are all infinitely better than the White House squatter.

I spoke with some young guys about to join the Marines. Really intelligent kids and very anti-Bush. I told them that it's great to join the Marines if that's what they want to do, be this is not the time to do it, since we have a warmongering insane person in the White House. They agreed. They were registered to vote, but were skeptical about our chances- "The Democrats don't have anybody."

I told them, don't believe what the media is trying to tell you. We have an amazing field of candidates. I told them about Kerry and Clark and they seemed highly interested.

Let's not make the same mistake as well-intentioned-but-uninformed 18 year olds. That sentiment is total BS.

[Pepperbelly]

45. Pot, meet kettle ...

I cannot believe how sanctimnoniously you decry that poor newsguy got his feelings hurt after he posted DRUDGE on the board in an attempt to smear a candidate that you happen to not support. So far as newbies go, I suppose that I might fit that category since I didn't get here until 2001.

The people on this board on the far left have trashed Clark since his name first came up. Relentlessly using smear tactics that are positively Limbaughistic, they have not let up and if anything, with Wesley's announcement, have grown absolutely hysterical in their condemnation.

I for one do not want to see DU lose a single moderate due to the bullying tactics of the lemming left. Of course, since I have not yet concluded that Dean walks on water, I realize that my opinion will matter little and that is ok with me. But I will point out that if Clark supporters seem a little defensive, it is no wonder considering the near-constant bashing they have endured on the board.

[Rich Hunt]

48. It has nothing to do with who is "moderate" and who is "left"

Honestly, I don't see it.

Man, if people think Clark's supporters or detractors are automatically "left" they really need to do some research.

The furthest left people on this board that I am aware of (socialists, etc.) are among the most logical in their interactions with people.

[Pepperbelly]

50. in case you didn't notice ...

what I am doing is refraining from calling names* which is in direct violation of DU rules and I do not intentionally break the rules of the forums so kindly provided to us by the legandary citizen-philosopher Skinner.

You can, however, refer to groups of people so long as you do not do so in a hateful fashion.

I stand by every word I wrote.

on edit... * proper, real or screen names.

[Bake]

55. Nor is it the "Dean Is The Messiah Underground"

Although you couldn't tell it by many of the posts. EVERYBODY needs to chill a bit. Zeal on behalf of your candidate is fine. The kind of crap that has gone on here on all sides is most definitely NOT. I don't know if it was a Deaniac or a "Clark-barker" or a DKer or Kerryite who posted the wordless reply of the "crybaby" photo (see above), but despite the poster's apparent belief that it was an incredibly brilliant riposte, I thought it was immature and offensive. LAME. CHILDISH. We, of all people, should be able to keep the discussion on the issues. We're not freepers, after all.

However, recent history on GD shows this is not the case. We're no better than those whom we disdain.

People around here -- of all persuasions -- need to grow the fuck up. This place has pretty much sucked large of late.

Bake

[MoonAndSun]

12. The thread started out good, but unfortunately it took a very bad turn,

why do we do this to ourselves? I thought you asked a very good question, "does anyone at DU know about this particular Drudge posting?"

What in the world was wrong with that?

[Terwilliger]

15. newsguy

you can't ever cross the line and SUGGEST that Dems are anything other than moral...you'll always be attacked

haven't you seen any of these Nader threads?

[trumad]

25. Oh and Greens are God's gift to little old earth

LOL... T yur still cracking me up with your Dem Bashing ways....

[Terwilliger]

38. Put the helmet ON before you play

why did you think you had to wear them shoulda-ma-pads?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

16. vile, immature and unpleasant?

I doubt those words are in your very limited vocabulary for you surely do not recognize those traits where they are most abundant.

[LSdemocrat]

19. Here's an article about Clark and the Republican dinner

http://www.nwaonline.net/pdfarchive/2001/May/12/BZ%205-12-01%20A2.pdf

By the way, I have nothing against Clark, in fact he will probably be my second choice behind Howard Dean, once I find more info on the guy.

[madfloridian]

27. A couple of quotes.

Quote"— Retired NATO
commander Wesley Clark told
a Republican gathering Friday
night in Little Rock that American
involvement abroad helps
prevent war and spreads the
ideals of the United States.
The retired Army general
commanded NATO during the
78-day air war against Yugoslav
forces in 1999 that forced the retreat
from Kosovo.
Clark was the keynote speaker
at the Pulaski County Republican
Committee’s annual
Lincoln Day dinner...."

SNIP...."During the war, Clark made
little secret of his belief that the
alliance must actively consider
a ground invasion, and he
chafed at the graduated air campaign
pursued by the Clinton
administration. The former general
did say the airstrikes were
necessary......."

[GeronimoSkull]

20. You better shape up, buddy

This here's Clark territory.

</sarcasm>

[whirlygigspin]

26. Free cool-aid in the parking lot

follow me!
:beer:

[madfloridian]

23. Newsguy, I have noticed this here and at other Dem forums.

I am not sure how to say it, but it seems very organized. My hubby and I are not especially left-leaning, more moderate I guess, and we would even be alarmed at fund-raising for a Republican as early as 2001. Yes, it bothers me if true.

They have been going after Dean unmercifully, but now they don't expect their candidate to be scrutinized. Of course he will be, of course they all will be.

I have been very careful not to criticize other candidates, but I am going to criticize the atmosphere of the announcement. I have begun to associate the rapid flag-waving with the Bush patriots. I hated to see so much of it there at his announcement today.

If other campaigns have done that, I did not pick up on it. I get very cross with the intense flag-waving, and I never used to do be that way. It is a touchy point for those of us who live in conservative areas. It is used here to say "I'm waving a flag, so I'm patriotic, and you're not."

I have my views on the way this is playing out, but I won't post them here. I did call some offices yesterday about the fact of whose candidate this is. They have had other calls as well.

The attacks on Dean were non-stop for weeks, and I was insulted by Clark and Kerry supporters just for supporting Dean. He was called names, I was called idiotic, and now I don't want to hear a word from them if their candidate gets attacked.

[KittyWampus]

69. A Keynote Speaker Is Not A "Fundraiser"

It's someone who is paid to deliver a speech.

By the way, did you know that Paul Krugman worked for Enron? (trying to make my point)

[WillyT]

28. Welcome To The Generally Disgusting Forum, LOL !!!

We can't have dissent here, this is a progressive message board.

:evilgrin:

"You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!"

[tom_paine]

53. "I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed..."

"but no more than ten to twenty million killed, depending on the breaks."

:evilgrin:

You know, Willy, when Annthrax echoed that comment I wondered whther it was a conscious decision or if her subconscious just kind of spit it out because that's the kind of Nazi bitch she is and the only analogue (outside of a Leni Reifenstahl film or a history text covering Nazi Germany) is an over-the-top satirical character..

[DoveTurnedHawk]

30. ***Now YOU Know How It Feels, NewsGuyAtl!!!***

You're probably feeling exactly how I felt when I asked about Dean's "soldier" comment, and you jumped all over me.

FWIW, I think your question was legitimate.

DTH

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

35. Yeah but most of us aren't...thanks for asking the question

I think a DEM raising money for Repubs is a valid question especially if the question is going to be attacked by Dems who accuse Nader of doing the same thing.

The reason Clark's supporters gave for his lack of declaring a political party was that he was an apolitical officer. Guess that excuse cannot be used if he was so apolitical he was fundraising for Republicans now can it?

[salin]

37. not sure how big or little of a deal

local county (big county? smaller population rural county) annual Lincoln Day dinner. Most county dems (and state wide) have an annual fundraiser dinner and during campaign season the chance trot out and shake hands with the current candidates - the Dems dinner = the Jefferson Jackson Day dinner.

So Clark spoke at a county Lincoln Day dinner.

It was an off election year - which could be significant (in down playing the significance) - given that it is sometimes hard to get the local party folks to comeout on off years to the dinner. Thus groups often look for a "draw".

If Clark was apolitical - he may not really have known the nature of the dinner - thinking of it as a general dinner/meetng rather than the annual fundraiser. He was probably brought in not to pump up the troops (as happens in elelction years) but as a 'draw' to get the regulars to attend (home grown hero... and all that).

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

40. Thanks...not saying it is an impeachment of him..just saying it may be

relevent. I take it you downloaded the pdf? My pdf at the office is on realtime and freezes up my puter so I didn't.

[salin]

41. I did.

the comments were innocuous - only thing of note that it was the Lincoln Day dinner which means it was the annual fundraiser.

I think it may or may not be notable. It is one of those things we remember - and watch. May turn out to be nothing. Or maybe other little red flags go off - and it suddenly becomes a tad more important.

[madfloridian]

43. I posted a couple of paragraphs in this thread above.

Not a whole lot, but this does indicate he wanted to move ahead faster:

"SNIP...."During the war, Clark made
little secret of his belief that the
alliance must actively consider
a ground invasion, and he
chafed at the graduated air campaign
pursued by the Clinton
administration. The former general
did say the airstrikes were
necessary......."

[library_max]

46. It's not your fault, but

a lot of threads similar to yours have been opened disingenuously as a haven for DUers to bash this-or-that candidate (mostly Clark, lately). Yeah, we all ought to be more forthcoming with the benefit of the doubt, but many of us are so - tired - OF ALL THE - BASHING!! :argh:

[kentuck]

51. Oh you're just angry 'cause someone has made your secret public...

:) Cheney will not be on the ticket in 2004!

Just kiddin' newsguy...

[Sophree]

56. The intense nature of candidate discussion

Results from us knowing how much is really at stake in the next election. This is not just a normal election- our democracy, our country is what is on the line and we all know the damage that will be done if the BFEE are not stopped.

That said, let's all take a deep breath and put things in perspective. I know we all want to put forward who we think is the best candidate, but personal attacks on others (candidates and supporters) who do not feel the same or think the same way only hurt our chances in '04. If you can't form an argument about why your candidate is best without Repuke-style attacking, well, then you don't really have a case.

We are going to need the support of most Americans, including some Republicans/former Republicans/Independents to win in 2004. It might be good to have a candidate who can reach across party lines. Petty attacks repell voters and keep them away from the polls, too and we definitely don't want to do that.

We can do better than this. Support your candidate. Wish the others well. Be civil.

If we do this, we can't lose.

[sendero]

60. really...

.... some of the candidate position-detail stuff here, usually used as a bashing wedge, is positively amusing.

Of all 10 candidates, at least 8 of them would make a president infinitely better than the one we have.

Vote for a *person* because a a person's opinion and hence policies may, and perhaps *should*, change.

And it would sure be nice if certain posters would give the "John Blow dated a Republican in high school" crap a rest already. Nobody gives a damn and it just makes the poster look like an ass.

[Sophree]

68. I know, it's retarded.

"And it would sure be nice if certain posters would give the "John Blow dated a Republican in high school" crap a rest already. Nobody gives a damn and it just makes the poster look like an ass."

Republicans are not the enemy. In the real world, Republicans and Democrats have to work together. Remember when we used to have a common goal? Doing what is best for the country? Compromising?

I realize that it was Gingrich/DeLay/Atwater/Bush/Limbaugh who created this warlike atmosphere between the political parties. The whole "working with Democrats is like date rape attitude." But that doesn't mean we have to buy into it. The real enemy is this contingent of un-American bastards, not conservative Americans and not the majority of Republicans.

[KamaAina]

65. Clark gorges himself on fried puppies!!

oh, wait a minute, that's hush puppies...

...never mind.

</sarcasm>

[gristy]

71. By "asking", you give the negative allegation legs

i post a thread merely ASKING if anyone here at DU (a political site for political junkies) knows anything about info drudge has just posted on his site alleging clark fundraised for republicans in 2001 and =I= get attacked along with my credibility and sincerity?

especially since you did not do your own research first (or didn't report it anyways) to try and substantiate or discredit the report.

If I wanted to try to discredit a candidate, I could just post unsubstantiated allegations against him/her in the way you did, and let everyone fight it out. When all is done, there will be more than a few who will have another seed of doubt sown in their mind.

Kind of like the old line: "I firmly believe that there is no substance to claims that my opponent frequently kicks his dog."

[janekat]

76. Sorry - I disagree with you on SOME points

Maybe YOU personally are not a "muckraker" BUT I think a lot of people are getting REALLY tired of the politics of personal destruction. I know I am. This is a tactic the Republicans have been using ever since Clinton came along.

I know you're a journalist and may need to find this out - but I look at journalists who do play this game as "enablers."

If people want to discuss REAL issues OK - but I'm getting real tired of people digging up "mud" or looking at some small thing that someone did that doesn't really matter.

Does it REALLY matter that he gave money to a Republican (who was probably a friend of his) NO!

Does it matter that he voted for Reagan: NO!

I voted for Reagan - I'm sorry I did now and would never even thinking of doing so now. But - I was born into a family of "rabid" Republicans and lived in "Republicanville." It wasn't until Bush I came along that I had a conversion.

One of my uncles was friends with John Anderson and supported him in a major way in 1980 (gave him a ton of money, had fundrasiers for him) - and you would have thought that he committed a murder!!! They still talk about it to this day! (You can imagine what they have to say about me.) Even people who are "dyed in the wool" Democrats may vote every once in a while for a Republican - especially if the person is a friend of theirs.

How much do you want to bet that John McCain will vote for Wesley Clark (or whomever) over Dubya (in secret of course)? He probably voted for Gore in 2000.