Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why Kerry Ran For President: He's An Egomaniac With Historical Ambitions

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Itsthetruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:49 PM
Original message
Why Kerry Ran For President: He's An Egomaniac With Historical Ambitions
Left Hook

Drinking the Kool-Aid: On the Death of Idealism."
By Morgan Southwood

In 2004, I gave money to Dennis Kucinich, because I loved him. Money was all I would give, however. I voted for the imploding Howard Dean in the primaries and then campaigned and voted for John Kerry, a man I had no affection for whatsoever and who often, in fact, made me feel embarrassed. I felt a guilty twinge whenever the Kucinich campaign sent me an e-mail update, knowing that I was voting in a way that betrayed my values. But hell, I told myself-I've got to be realistic about things. I've just outgrown my immature romanticism. Besides, Bush scared the hell out of me. Fear is an ideal vehicle for rationalization.

.... Dennis Kucinich .... A genuine idealist if there ever was one. The rarest of politicians, he is sincere, well-studied, and confident of his convictions. A fellow who quotes great foreign novelists and politicians in his speeches. A man who knows the GATT and NAFTA contracts like the back of his hand. A man from the working class who actually knows and gives a damn about the standard of living of his constituents. A man who has been utterly consistent in the application of his moral values when voting in the House. A vegan for ethical reasons, for Chrissakes.

He was lambasted from the very moment he entered the presidential race, mercilessly savaged by the mainstream press and the Comedy Channel simply because of his idealism. And because he is homely and nerdy and, well, unapologetically working-class. Working-class is unfashionable, and what else can you say about a guy who wears plastic Velcro tennis shoes and short-sleeved plaid shirts?

The Democrats chose instead an aristocrat multimillionaire who was more than willing to shamelessly exploit the most meaningful experiences of his life-serving in Vietnam (but not, very tellingly, his later leadership in the anti-war movement)-for media consumption. John Kerry did not run because he cared about America and its future. His future and the futures of his children are guaranteed by virtue of his astronomical wealth. John Kerry ran because he is an egomaniac with historical ambitions, an utterly unexceptional politician who abandoned any deeply-held moral convictions decades ago. In a testament to American cynicism, he was chosen over half a dozen more worthy candidates not because he was the best man for the job, but because he was thought to be electable. And we must be realistic about things, must we not?

I campaigned for him, I put his sticker on my backpack, and eventually I voted for him. Towards the end, I was even rooting for him. I did not just reluctantly settle for mediocrity, I mentally endowed that mediocrity with merits and virtues it did not possess.


http://www.lefthook.org/Culture/Southwood062505.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. .
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. No kidding!
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waynew706 Donating Member (200 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. I really hope he does'nt waste...
time running in 2008. IMHO he is an absolute whimp, and I would so like to see people like Congressman John Conyers and Senator Barbra Boxer take to the spotlite and run for President and VP on a ticket.
These people really care about Americans, and the important things in both the US and the rest of the world as a whole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #2
57. oh?
a. thats a right wing talking point--please explain how Kerry is/was a wimp.

b. welcome to DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MODemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #2
68. Kerry is not a Wimp
The swift boat liars were successful in their poisonous smear against a true :patriot:. The wimp is in the office of the presidency. He was appointed to the position. I don't see why anyone would think of John Kerry as a wimp. Maybe he gave up too easy on becoming president, but, after all he knew what happened to Al Gore. He won the votes, but he lost the presidency. He was not a wimp either. :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. this guy is too hard on himself
Kerry was a perfectly worthy candidate to have voted for, regardless of who one preferred in the primaries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. yes he was worthy (though I agree with this article on Kucinich, who I
campaigned for).

This is a wonderful article on Kerry by Will Pitt:
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/22/6525




Introducing John Kerry
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Thursday 30 September 2004

Everyone knows John Kerry by now, right?

He's the tall guy who went to Vietnam and then wounded himself three times to get his medals, while simultaneously conning the bureaucracy of the Navy into giving him citations for valor. Or he's the guy who volunteered for Vietnam, and then volunteered for Swift Boat duty, and then was wounded three times while serving with distinction. He's the guy who opposed the war upon his return and thus became a traitor, or he's the guy who opposed the war upon his return and thus became a hero.

The John Kerry people know is a fellow of wealth and privilege, a rich man who married richer, a silver-spoon type of guy who lives in the most expensive neighborhood in Boston when not gallivanting from one townhouse to another. The John Kerry people know is a Forbes, and a Winthrop. The John Kerry people know isn't all that trustworthy because of his wealth, because despite notions to the contrary, we are still a society based upon class struggle. It is an article of faith among the 90% of Americans who aren't rich that those with money aren't to be trusted. That this same measure of distrust isn't extended to George W. Bush is a triumph of 'regular fella' marketing.

That is the Kerry people know, or think they know, thanks to this brainless campaign season. This is the Kerry created by commercials, by inane debate on the national cable news channels, by reporters who believe the shortest way to the truth is a straight line in the other direction.

There is another John Kerry to whom America deserves to be introduced.

The story of any person begins with their parents. John Kerry was born to Richard Kerry and Rosemary Forbes, who met in Paris just before the war. Richard Kerry, marked early in life by the suicide of his father and the death from polio of his sister Mildred, became a student of the law who eventually distinguished himself in the Foreign Service during the Eisenhower years. Rosemary, despite her Forbes and Winthrop heritage, was not spared her own deep trials. When the Nazis invaded Paris, Rosemary had to flee the city on a bicycle. She spent weeks foraging for food, hiding in barns and cellars, avoiding German soldiers and falling bombs, until she finally reached Lisbon and boarded a ship bound for Boston.

How do the ordeals of parents affect the fate of the child? Because of his father's government service, John Kerry saw the world, and came to know the art of diplomacy. He learned very young that there is much beyond the borders of America to value. His time abroad with his father shattered the quiet xenophobic tendencies many Americans get with mother's milk.

Because of his mother's narrow escape from the Nazi armies, John Kerry learned that there is indeed evil in the world which no amount of money or privilege can deflect. Living in post-war Berlin during one of his father's diplomatic postings, Kerry saw the bombed-out buildings, the refugees who were everywhere, and the tens of thousands of people who left everything behind to flee the Soviet sector. Kerry learned that such evil must be confronted. In the experiences of his parents, John Kerry developed the nuanced, intricate and informed view of the wider world that has since defined his life.

Of course, he came from privilege. Educated at the exclusive Fessenden School, and then at the super-exclusive St. Paul's School, and then at Yale University, Kerry was surrounded by the scions of wealthy families and was afforded an education available to only the richest few. In order to fit in with his fellow students, Kerry should have adopted the attitude of world-weary condescension, of laid-back expectancy, which marked children of the wealthy Eastern Establishment in that time and place.

He didn't. Inspired by teachers like Reverend John Walker, who taught those privileged children at St. Paul's about the realities of race in America, and later by President John Kennedy, whose call to service motivated millions, and always by his father Richard, who taught by word and example that service to country is the highest calling, John Kerry became a man of action and of ambition. Here was no callow youth marking time until his family's money became his money. Kerry became active in politics, and augured his life towards government work.

John Kerry served in the Navy from 1966 to 1970, volunteered for combat duty in Vietnam, and earned the Silver Star, the Bronze Star, three Purple Hearts, two Presidential Unit Citations and a National Defense Medal. Upon his return from the war, he became centrally involved with Vietnam Veterans Against the War, helped to create Vietnam Veterans of America, and brought the realities of Vietnam into living rooms all across America. He served as a prosecutor in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, beginning in 1976. From 1977 to 1982 he served as First Assistant District Attorney, during which time he successfully battled organized crime, prosecuted and jailed the number two crime boss in New England, fought for victims' rights, and organized rape counseling programs.

From 1983 to 1985, John Kerry served as Massachusetts Lieutenant Governor, and transformed what had been a symbolic position to one with muscle. He organized Governors all across the country to combat a new and disturbing reality - acid rain caused by industrial pollution that was destroying lakes, rivers and the country's water supply. This activity began what has since become a lifetime of activism to protect our environment, a lifetime of activism that has made John Kerry perhaps the most effective fighter for environmental protection in American government.

In 1985, John Kerry was elected to the U.S. Senate, where he has served for the last 19 years. Coming into the Massachusetts delegation under the long shadow of Edward Kennedy, who had already cornered the hail-fellow-well-met market of Massachusetts retail politics, Kerry worked to the strengths he had inherited from his parents and became a master of national and foreign policy issues. It would take a great deal of ink to detail the committees he served on, the legislation he shepherded into passage, the arguments he championed and the policies he pushed.

The best illustration of the man Senator John Kerry became, the man we now see standing for President, came when he decided to wage war against one of the most far-reaching and dangerous criminal enterprises ever seen in the world. In 1988, the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, or BCCI, was a highly respected international financial institution which catered to the most powerful of the powerful. BCCI had allies all through Washington D.C. and across the world.

The public reality of BCCI changed completely when John Kerry, fresh from his lead role investigating the Iran/Contra scandal, was tasked to run down Iran/Contra drug connections as chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Operations. Very soon, Kerry discovered damning BCCI connections not only to Noriega and the laundering of drug money, but to a massive international network of dirty cash moving to and from the most dangerous people in the world.

Immediately, Kerry met with opposition from power-players in Washington. Everyone - literally everyone, from both parties, including President George H.W. Bush, whose son George W. had enjoyed BCCI financing for one of his doomed oil businesses - pressured Kerry to back off. Instead, Kerry took the information he had gathered and gave it to New York District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. Morgenthau agreed to begin a criminal investigation into BCCI. By 1991, the investigation had blown up what Morgenthau described at the time as "one of the biggest criminal enterprises in world history."

Journalists David Sirota and Jonathan Baskin, writing for Washington Monthly, published an article titled 'Follow the Money', which chronicled Kerry's work against BCCI. In their article, Sirota and Baskin state, "As Kerry's subcommittee discovered, BCCI catered to many of the most notorious tyrants and thugs of the late 20th century, including Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, the heads of the Medellin cocaine cartel, and Abu Nidal, the notorious Palestinian terrorist. According to the CIA, it also did business with those who went on to lead al Qaeda. And BCCI went beyond merely offering financial assistance to dictators and terrorists: According to Time, the operation itself was an elaborate fraud, replete with a 'global intelligence operation and a Mafia-like enforcement squad.'"

"By July 1991," continued Sirota and Baskin in their article, "Kerry's work paid off. That month, British and U.S. regulators finally responded to the evidence provided by Kerry, Morgenthau, and a concurrent investigation by the Federal Reserve. BCCI was shut down in seven countries, restricted in dozens more, and served indictments for grand larceny, bribery, and money laundering. A decade after Kerry helped shut the bank down, the CIA discovered Osama bin Laden was among those with accounts at the bank. A French intelligence report obtained by The Washington Post in 2002 identified dozens of companies and individuals who were involved with BCCI and were found to be dealing with bin Laden after the bank collapsed, and that the financial network operated by bin Laden today 'is similar to the network put in place in the 1980s by BCCI.' As one senior U.S. investigator said in 2002, 'BCCI was the mother and father of terrorist financing operations.'"

Here is a man who came from a level of privilege most Americans have never known. He could have become what so many children from the upper echelons of money and power become - callow, shallow, lazy, biding his time until he got everything he thought his position granted him, leaning on powerful family friends to make up for the shortcomings that arise from an idle life and the sense that the world owes him whatever he desires, believing that making money and enjoying position are the alpha and omega of life.

John Kerry went in the opposite direction. He was raised to believe that privilege has its duties, that public service is the alpha and omega of life, and has worked every day to fulfill the obligations his parents and his education and his own deeply-held beliefs instilled in him. In his fight against BCCI, he revealed himself to be a man of great purpose, of mission, who refused to bow before the altars of status quo and go-along-to-get-along that are all too worshipped in Washington.

A life of service and study crafted a man of depth, of intelligence, who can see all the sides of any issue and incorporates all available data before making a decision. The opponents he has faced and defeated throughout his career have enjoyed painting him as vacillating, as indecisive, as a man who holds several positions at once in order to cover his political backside. In truth, these incomplete views on John Kerry are born from a modern political landscape that cannot fathom a man who is judicious, contemplative and thorough, because such attributes have been all too absent from our political discourse.

Judicious, contemplative and thorough. In a dangerous world, made vastly more dangerous by politicians who think in violent black and white because simplicity polls better and fits into soundbites, a man like John Kerry may seem out of place. He is, in fact, in exactly the right place at exactly the right time.

----

Author's Note | This article is dedicated to my father, who was born in a small Southern river town, who heard Kennedy's call, who volunteered for Vietnam, who returned to spend his entire professional life as a public servant in a variety of government positions. He was not born into the same privilege as John Kerry, but the fact that their lives have followed incredibly similar tracks speak volumes on the character of each man.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times and internationally bestselling author of two books: War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know and The Greatest Sedition Is Silence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Itsthetruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #10
35. Was It Written For Kerry's Campaign Committee?
I actually thought that was a pretty weak "fluff" piece on Kerry which totally ignored John Kerry's record in Congress on little insignificant issues like the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, NAFTA, etc.,

This would have been a very good article for the Kerry campaign committee to release because it presented Kerry in the most favorable light among liberals and progressives. Did Kerry's campaign committee do that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
55. WOW! Thank you for posting that.
Somehow, I missed that background piece during the campaign but I'm definitely going to save it now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waynew706 Donating Member (200 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
25. Kerry would have been a worthy candidate...
if he had stayed until the end of the election, instead of bailing half way through. I don't care if you don't like what I say, but it is the truth. If your in the middle of a steet fight and you get hit and knocked down and your opponent means to kill you, I doubt like hell if your going to just lie there and take it, I sure know I'm not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
4. Talk about Circular Firing Squads
Is there any need to kick other Dems around?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. It, oddly, makes some Democrats feel better.
I've never gotten off on it and hope I never will.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #4
21. Awww..c'mon. Kerry can take it. He's a "hero".
As his apologists never fail to tell us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldeneye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #21
38. That's pretty lame.
Although I've never used this in an argument about Kerry, I'm going to say it now, he is a hero. Have you ever read about his service in vietnam? Ask anyone of the people who were on his swiftboat.

Second, there are plenty of people who liked and were inspired by Kerry. I'm one of them. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and calling anyone you disagree with an apologists is a little babyish.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. Gee, did I hurt your feelings?
As for him being a "hero", he volunteered for Vietnam. The true heroes are the ones who refused to kill for the politicians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldeneye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #42
47. Yeah, you're breaking my heart.
I always get really upset when people I've never met, who I know nothing about(including their motives) get pissy about something posted on a message board. :wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #47
53. Where was your "hero" for the IWR vote?
Where is he now about the continuing occupation? Where's his voice about getting the hell out of Iraq?

I was a supporter of Kerry before he ran. Thinking that he would have the balls to stand up for peace rather than go along with Bush. 23 other senators had the nerve to do so, but Kerry decided to put his ambitions ahead of common decency and voted for the war.

Heroic? I think not.

My motives? I have a deep and abiding contempt for ambitious politicians who are willing to shed blood to further their careers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldeneye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #53
62. Always the IWR vote.
Edited on Sun Jun-26-05 04:11 PM by Goldeneye
He has explained this over and over again.

"This was the hardest vote I have ever had to cast in my entire career, Kerry said. I voted for the resolution to get the inspectors in there, period. Remember, for seven and a half years we were destroying weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In fact, we found more stuff there than we thought we would. After that came those four years when there was no intelligence available about what was happening over there. I believed we needed to get the weapons inspectors back in. I believed Bush needed this resolution in order to get the U.N. to put the inspectors back in there. The only way to get the inspectors back in was to present Bush with the ability to threaten force legitimately. That's what I voted for."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/121003A.shtml

It's easy to criticize Kerry. It's easy to criticize any politician and to impugn their motives, because none of us know what it's like, or what they were thinking. This qaurterbacking from an online chatroom is devisive and pointless. If you don't like Kerry fine. But attacking people who do is babyish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #21
48. Kerry has no need for " apologists " as far as I am
concerned. He is a true hero.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
5. Sour grapes?
Who cares? Personally, I don't see how anyone can say these things without having sat down with Kerry and gotten to know him on an intimate enough level to say he "did not run because he cared about America and its future" and he is "an egomaniac with historical ambitions, an utterly unexceptional politician who abandoned any deeply-held moral convictions decades ago." Where's the writer's support for these statements?

Eh, whatever. Just sounds like sour grapes. I like Kucinich, too, admire him greatly, in fact. And I voted for Kerry. I put far more of the blame of 2004 on other factors outside of the Democratic party, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
7. By definition - anyone running for president fits that definition
or wouldn't put themselves out there to run in the first place.

Okay a few run with little hope, to make a bigger point.

But for the most part - that is part of the gig.

This seems to be intentionally inflamatory, no?

Bushco is finally teetering - real trouble ahead. There is a chance that he will push public opinion to turn on congressional GOP as well - not that they are having any trouble on their own looking like corrupt little chieftains. So now my fried - try investing energy on congressional races. If you don't like the current dems - run opposition. Get progressives into the pipeline by getting them in office. And the more progressive voices in the public - the more our ideas once again become more mainstream.

But sowing dissent ? Save that for the next presidential primaries. We need to work together now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Placebo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
8. If Kucinich had been the candidate (that's even hard for me to SAY)...
who knows how badly we would have lost and how it would have damaged the image of our party for years to come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. You never answered my question
How do you feel about David Cobb and Medea Benjamin?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Itsthetruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #9
27. In Regard To What?
""You never answered my question. How do you feel about David Cobb and Medea Benjamin?"

William: You never answered my response!

How do I feel about David Cobb and Medea Benjamin in regard to what?
I'll guess that your question has to do with the Iraq war but I could be wrong. If your question concerns one of a hundred or more other issues please let me know and I'll respond to a specific question and/or issue.

I'm glad that Cobb and Benjamin are opposed to the occupation of Iraq and would not expect anything less from them. They opposed the war from the beginning. And I'm also pleased that they along with leaders of Progressive Democrats of America do not support any more funding for the war against Iraq. To me that's a key test. I only wish that most members of the Congressional "Get Out Of Iraq" caucus, promoted by Progressive Democrats of America, would also oppose any futher funding for Bush's war against Iraq.

It's really difficult for a member of Congress to organize and build opposition to Bush's occupation of Iraq when they vote to fund it. Let's hope they don't give Bush any more money to conduct the war. Far too many U.S. troops and Iraqi's have died in the this military adventure. If and when Congress cuts off the funding, the war will end and our soldiers will be brought home.

I hope that members of the Congressional "Get Out Of Iraq" caucus(working group) publicly endorse the September 24th anti-war March on Washington. Perhaps you and other PDA members can influence some "anti-war" Democrats in Congress to support the national anti-war march and even vote against any more funds for the occupation. That would be great!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #27
39. I mean in general
Let's say Cobb and Benjamin appeared on a national ticket together, running against Nader and Camejo. Whom would you support?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Itsthetruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #39
51. That's Not Going To Happen
Edited on Sun Jun-26-05 04:04 PM by Itsthetruth
That's not going to happen in 2008. It's not even a remote hypothetical. It's obvious from all the stats and other information that David Cobb's campaign did not attract very much support among Greens or anyone else in 2004 so it's extremely unlikely he'll be the Green Party candidate for President in 2008.

I'd say it's far more likely that Cobb and Benjamin will support Peter Camejo if he's a candidate in 2008 and Cobb or Benjamin might even appear on the same ticket with Camejo. Nader might not run simply because of age and endurance. Just a guess on my part.

It appears that most Green Party members either voted for Kerry or Nader/Camejo in 2004 and only a tiny minority actually supported Cobb's campaign. Just check out the "meet-up" stats, financial contributions, media coverage, votes cast, etc.,

I could ask who would you support if Kucinich/Camejo run as a Green Party ticket against the Cobb/Benjamin independent ticket in 2008. But, I won't. It's way to early to speculate on what might happen in the 2008 election.

Any idea on why many members of that Congressional "Get Out Of Iraq" caucus voted more funds for the continued occupation of Iraq? I'd be interested in learning what their rationalization was for funding Bush's war operations in Iraq. I'm sure this was a big disappointment for everyone in Progressive Democratics of America and everyone else who opposes the occupation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
12. Isn't that why most folks run for president? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
13. Oh hell, what a waste of time and energy.
I voted for Dennis Kucinich in the primary and John Kerry in the general election. And YES, I was disappointed with Kerry's mediocre campaign and his quick concession, especially since it was Diebold and ES&S who stole the presidency from him and I'm sure he knows it. And I've been disappointed with his low-key or delayed response in other areas since the election. But does this sort of sour-grapes bashing really accomplish anything?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. WOW
I think I'm looking in the mirror ...

HI me!!! :) :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #14
40. Hi Clarity! Glad you agree with me.
I've enjoyed reading your posts on Election Results and GD too, even though I often don't reply. I often find myself critical of Kerry's actions or (more often) inactions. But I don't think we can afford to throw *ANY* of our high-profile leaders in the trash like this, even though they aren't perfect by a long way. We just don't have any to spare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waynew706 Donating Member (200 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. It's not a waste of time and energy because 2008..
is just around the corner and we need a candidate that will stand up and fight and keep on fighting long after the lights are out for Democracy. Thats why we are all in this mess today, the hell with standing back and letting these POS Republicans steal another damn election. Get the hell out there and fight to win, scratch, pull hair, kick em in the nuts... do whatever is necessary to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #22
46. It's HIGHLY unlikely I'll support Kerry in 2008...
...or anyone who voted for the IWR, including Hillary Clinton. Not impossible, though. I've always had a hunch (maybe totally irrational) that if Kerry had a choice between prosecuting the BFEE and being president, that he would choose prosecuting them. In the BCCI and Iran/Contra investigations, he did accumulate more evidence against them than anyone else I know of. Maybe he'll find a way to recycle that material before 2008, and if he does I'll even consider forgiving him his IWR vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
15. Kerry sold out with his IWR vote and pandered to the right.
I (reluctantly) voted for him, even though I live in a "safe" state. I agree completely with the article. He is an egomaniac, and an ambitious politician, both traits common to politicians of either party, but more telling, he is a mediocrity and an opportunist.

But, he did bag that ferocious goose!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Have you ever been attacked by a goose?
He was defending the homeland from a goose that supposedly came across the border from Canada, but which really could have come from anywhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Well he shoulda got another medal for it. And, a ribbon to fling.
That sneaky goose was probably gonna steal some good 'murikan's job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #18
33. we don't know what the goose was doing
but John Kerry undoubtedly prevented a horrific attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waynew706 Donating Member (200 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
16. Part of the reason the damned election was stolen...
is because Kerry did'nt stand up there and fight tooth and nail to prove election fraud (by machine manipulation). If he had faught harder instead of throwing in the towel who knows where we might be today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
helderheid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. I think part of the reason he didn't
is because of the supposed "popular vote win" (read vote padding in all states with evote machines)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryWhiteLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #19
28. Funny, that didn't bother Bush...then again that's why they kicked our ass
It's hard to win a dirty bar fight when you roll over and expose your belly at the first sign of blood. Repukes don't have this problem...

JB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. I firmly believe that Kerry conceeded because
Edited on Sun Jun-26-05 03:22 PM by DanCa
his church put so much pressure on him and intimidated him into rolling over if he pursued his victory. That being said I was proud to have voted for Kerry even though i wish it were either clark or al sharpton who got the nod.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. or he saw how long the pillorying of Gore went on
and how quickly he was urged NOT to run again. Gore could step out of the limelight and regroup. Kerrry is still an acting Senator. I believe he acted honestly in conceding - that they didn't think there was enough for a real challenge and that the ensuing damage would hurt him - not just in the sense of a potential run in the future - but in the sense of an acting senator.

Truth be told were it 1996 and the same situation - I would guess that Dole would have done the same thing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #24
34.  I am still amazed at how they public is woefully ignorant of the senator.
One woman was saying that kerry offered no specifics and he kept saying "I had a plan" and another liberterian friend of mine who hates the chimp because kerry would have given us authority to the un, and finally my aunt believed that shrubya wouldnt touch her ss because the good christian chimp wouldnt lie.
I didnt think that part of the problem was that Kerry didnt realize how the right wing echo chamber has zombified the right. I also keep wondering if I could have done more personaly to help pierce that echo chamber.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #34
43. Ding Ding Ding
Yes - the media was used (esp the talking head media) to calcify some really odd beliefs. What is differentis that this time part of the echo chamber was from a larger number of pulpits. Folks were getting bombarded with these crazy and incorrect ideas. A zombified right... that does describe it. And yes - i think in all future elections we have to do a lot more talking and sharing of information to counter it.

Question - do you know how any of these folks voted (presuming bush based on your post)? And if they voted for bush - what are they thinking now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zalinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #34
73. You also have to factor in the "war"
Bush was a "war time President". The fact that he started the war so he could win a second term was left out. No President has not been re-elected in war time (I don't know if that's accurate, but I read it somewhere), but Kerry came very close. Besides, 75% of the people who voted for Bush believed that Saddam was connected to 9/11. And then, also remember that they did every little dirty trick in the book, to slam Kerry.

The biggest problem was the 2000 election. The dems were just not prepared for that dirty little trick.

zalinda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #20
37. If y'all will remember, right after the election
Fallujah was almost obliterated. If Kerry had made noise contesting the election with no proof of misdeeds, he would have been drowned out as unpatriotic in the middle of a major offensive in Iraq. It was planned that way in case the Dems started anything about the outcome of the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #37
44. Wow. I never put that together.
We heard rumblings that it was going to happen - and I wrote the timing off to not wanting having ugly side of war coverage occur before the election. Never thought about it as a post election (if needed) distraction. Something to ponder. Grrr.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DisassemblingHisLies Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
23. Focusing on coulda, shoulda, woulda is counterproductive.
Kerry was an excellent candidate & actually won the election. End of story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Southsideirish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #23
31. How else can we learn from our mistakes?
And he was so "electable" that's what kills me. I knew he wasn't and I'm no psychic - he had no charisma. None.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DisassemblingHisLies Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #31
69. Whether or not he had charisma is a matter of perspective.
To me, the sexiest guy in the room is the one with intelligence, not the one who comes off looking like a used car salesman, or should I say, a failed oil man who went bankrupt when he couldn't find any oil in Texas. As you can see, voting for shallow reasons can get this country into a mess.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KC21304 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #23
56. Love your sig line. Ain't that the truth ! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DisassemblingHisLies Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #56
71. TY, KC.
Fort Bragg is also located in Walter "Freedom Fries" Jones' state - the one who now wants the troops to withdraw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
26. I must disagree.
Kerry has a phenomenal background of fighting for the people of this country.The author apparently knows little about John Kerry and proves it by the falsehoods contained in his first few paragraphs.Aristocratic multimillionaire? A half Jewish son of a government worker who got his clothes and schooling due to the charity of his mothers sister? Excuse me? And to this day Kerry is NOT rich. He happens to have a rich wife, who has made sure that the money stays with the Heinz Trust for her children.
There were many qualified politicians running in the Democratic Primary, but none were "more" qualified than John Kerry. The author needs to do some research and investigate the accomplishments of Kerry before writing such tripe.
I think it is a shame that such completely fallacious junk would be posted on DU. We certainly do ourselves no favor with the posting of unsubstantiated vicious attacks on our own.This tactic is reminiscent of the other side of the aisle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #26
45. He funded his campaign
by mortgaging his house.

Non-rich people cannot do this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #45
54. and in doing so he risked losing his house
If he would have lost in the primaries, he would have had to pay back the loan. If Teresa paid off the loan, it was clear Kerry would have been accused of abusing campaign finance laws.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XemaSab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #54
58. My point isn't
that he risked losing his house, the point is that he had a multi-million dollar house that he could risk losing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #26
65. Yes, the facts have to be skewed a bit to believe the OP
I think his worth was a couple of million. Teresa's the billionaire. The billionaire with a prenup agreement so that none of what she has is his.

He has one house. She has 4. He mortgaged his one house, the one he bought with her, for the campaign. He is far less upper class than Bush. He actually has held jobs in his life. His middle of the road bureaucrat dad supplied a decent upper-middle class life for his kids, but nothing opulent. He also instilled a sense of duty and an interest in policy in his kid.

The article writer his weaving his opinions out of half truths and some of it comes from right wing talking points. The farther left you go, apparently, the closer you come to meeting the far right comin' round the other side.

Eh. The article writer should try doing a bit more research. He appears to be going by what he's heard about Kerry, not the facts. Sad really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
29. Yeah, he really stands out
from all the shy, retiring guys battling inferiority complexes that usually run for president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taxloss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
30. I always liked Kucinich.
I thik Charlie Brooker had Kerry nailed. Kucinich presented an honest left-wing programme, and was a genuine guy who spoke from the heart. I admired, and admire, that.

Of course, he stood no chance of becoming president, but frankly considering the incumbent, that's something that doesn't lessen him in my esteem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Southsideirish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. I could never figure out why he sided with Edwards in Iowa to help
defeat Dean. I liked what he said but there was just something weird or strange about him that I never trusted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taxloss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #32
63. As an outsider, I couldn't follow the details.
But I must admit I liked Edwards as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waynew706 Donating Member (200 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
36. Big problem is that 2008 will have the same outcome..
if we don't get a candidate that will hang in there and fight like hell if he/she even suspects dirty pool from the other side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waynew706 Donating Member (200 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
41. I think Kerry could be a great candidate with a few...
modifications... ie: Fight like hell... He beat the absolute shit outta Bubba in all debates, hands down, he is vastly supperior in smarts to Bubba (probably goes without saying) and he obviously was much more charismatic than Bubba.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
49. I think we should save our attacks for Republicans.
All of us who supported other primary candidates had our reasons for doing so. Obviously, we all thought they were somehow better than Kerry. Yet none were perfect, all made mistakes, all had something the GOP would have used to smear them, all would likely have followed some bad advice or another from some imperfect campaign manager.

We could rehash and fight over that forever. But why? The fact remains that John Kerry won the primaries, and was a far, far better candidate than Chimp. He's intelligent, liberal, accomplished, courageous, articulate, and sound on policy.

Does it help assuage our disappointment to keep fighting? I think we should be keeping the party together, fighting Republicans, and urging our Democrats in DC to fight them, as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waynew706 Donating Member (200 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #49
52. I personally don't view this dialog as attacks...
I think it is healthy to discuss what needs to be done to win 2006 and 2008. Some of those things have to include yelling if we see the other party cheating on us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #52
60. "Egomaniac," "shamelessly exploiting," "abandoned moral convictions,"...
I see the article as an attack on Kerry, reviving a Kerry/Kucinich fight.

I think we can look ahead to 2006 and 2008 without this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #49
66. The GOP can use anything to smear anyone.
>>Yet none were perfect, all made mistakes, all had something the GOP would have used to smear them, all would likely have followed some bad advice or another from some imperfect campaign manager.<<

Smearing people is what they DO, after all. I think Dems tend to worry excessively about that. OF COURSE they're going to smear our candidates! If they can't find something, they'll just make it up like they did with Kerry (the Swift Boat smears). The trick is to find a way to defend assertively without sounding "defensive" or whiny. Maybe by going on the offensive ourselves? Maybe by NOT apologizing for anything under any circumstances--not even if we're wrong!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MichiganVote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
50. This to me is an example of exactly what republicans mean
when they say, 'get over it'. Sorry, but in this instance, I believe they are right. Throughout history there have been scores of able or worthy men who sought but did not win the WH presidency. So what?

Setting aside the issues of voter irregularity or stolen votes, the only candidate who sought the WH who I did not and would not have hired is the jerk that is in there now, George Bush. Would that George Bush merely offered mediocrity in place of the mendacity he so clearly displays.

As for the Vietnam stuff, Kerry was in the war, not me. To me, he has the right to do with his service whatever the hell he wants. I don't care what he does and that had little to do with his public service accomplishments anyway. This is a man with an elegant approach to his message that at the time of this election was lost on many. To bad, so sad, but.....when the vast majority of Americans shop at dumps like Walmart, read People magazine, and get fat because they are too lazy to so much as make their own food, one can only say....

So what?
So what?
So what?

This was the 911 election. In an emergency, people don't and won't vote for a "genuine idealist". The fault of the democrats may have been to miss the cues society was giving about wanting a cowboy with spurs in place of a distinguished diplomat. So, was Dennis Kucinich their cowboy? Were there any cowboys on the Dem. end? Ostensibly, only one, Howard Dean. And we know where that went.

So what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
59. Oh well, that's his opinion
I don't happen to agree. Rather wildly I don't happen to agree.

But he's welcome to his twisted little opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicasista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
61. Another day, another flamebait post
We only help the right by continuing to eat our own. Too bad so many can't see that.

Yawn. :boring:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldeneye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #61
64. I guess they've gotta get it out of their systems.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waynew706 Donating Member (200 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
67. You better have a look at this post...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
70. most of you are MISSING THE POINT
look at the title of the article again ... "The Death of Idealism" ... all people want to discuss here is whether this is another Kerry bashing thread ... sheesh ...

the hell with Kerry ... it doesn't mean a damned thing what you think of him ... it's not relevant to the article ... the author used him as an example based on how the author felt about him ... if your view of Kerry did not match the author's view, that's fine ... say so and move on to an analysis of what the article is actually about ... take the "People Magazine" sticker off your car, already ... the article is not about people; it's about idealism ...

many of us in the so-called ABB movement fought very hard for Kerry's election ... instead of seeing an author like this as a purist, as a "circular firing squad", as a Dem basher, why not appreciate that in spite of his feelings, whether you agree with him or not, he supported Kerry's election ...

frankly, i am sick and tired about being sick and tired feeling like the Democratic Party no longer represents me ... i hate that i don't love the candidates i've financed and work for ... i wish we did have candidates whom i felt inspired me ...

but that hasn't been the case in national elections since McGovern ran in 1972 ... i do feel like, whether it applies fairly to Kerry or not, there is too much belief that idealism means extremism ... that idealism means unconventional, non-mainstream thinking that won't sell to the center and is thus not pragmatic politically ...

the truth is, leadership is not about settling down in the comfy center ... good ideas are good ideas regardless of where they are slotted on some imaginary political scale ... we do a real disservice to the country by running every play between the forty-yard lines ... there's a whole lot more field out there worth considering ... the myth of centrism is that it will have the greatest political appeal ... sometimes it might ... but overall, what will have the greatest political appeal is plain old good ideas and the courage of candidates, and parties, to put them before the American people ...

idealism is not dead but it is certainly in grave condition ... it makes good policy sense and good political sense to help it recover ... i thought that's what being a progressive was all about ... without passion for our deeply held beliefs, we are reduced to being nothing more than political technicians and calculating political hacks ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
72. "Towards the end, I was even rooting for him" says Southwood. If that's
the degree of his commitment to defeating the Bush regime, he was part of the problem.

Todays whiners are tommorrow's enablers.

Southwoood should shut the fuck up, take his marbles, go home and stay there. We don't need his sorry ass to win in 2006-2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-05 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
74. Locking.
(from the DU forum rules)

Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here.

You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.

<snip>

Do not post broad-brush smears against Democrats or the Democratic Party.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 11th 2024, 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC