I'm sickened by all the people here who wouldn't vote for a DEM

[xultar]

to take back the house and senate. FURTHER FUCKING MORE...yes I said that. WHY NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY? What is with the CLINTON HATRED in this place.

If HILLARY IS OUR DEM CANDIDATE IN 2K12 AND YOU DON'T VOTE FOR HER THEN YOU SHOULD TURN IN YOUR DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND SIGN-ON AND PASSWORD.

Why is it ok to bash Dems here? I DON'T FUCKING GET THAT SHIT. (Zell may be a different animal all together but I'd wear a bio-hazard suit to vote for his ass to take back the house from the Rethugs.)

SHE who controls the house and senate control the government. Apparently LIBERALS have forgotten that. APPARENTLY y'all would much rather not vote for HILLARY than win some shit. WTF is up with that?

If that is the case I don't wanna hear any fucking WHINING about the election was STOLEN. Perhaps DEMS staying home or Dems voting GREEN cuz KERRY wasn't LIBERAL enough caused us to lose. Didya ever think of that? So it's ok to effin dis dems @ democraticunderground. I'd never thought I'd see the effin day.

Should we rename DU
DemocratswhohatetovoteforDemocratsunderground.com

If you don't wanna vote for democrats then why bother being here?

[meganmonkey]

1. You tell 'em, xultar!

:popcorn:

[DanCa]

204. I second.

:toast: :beer:

[ray of light]

306. I third! Dem and progressive bashing is just plain wrong!

unless you represent the right winged fundies!

[xchrom]

2. whining? takes a whiner to know a whiner.

altogether though -- that was pretty funny.

[Mr_Spock]

4. Very helpful

:popcorn:

[xchrom]

6. thank you -- it was hard on my finger tips.

[xultar]

32. WOW. What a beauty. I think I'll frame it and send it to your Mama.

[YDogg]

3. I would vote for Hillary ...

... although I think she might have a tough time in a general election. But I'd sure vote for her.

I don't know that we have any "perfect" candidates ... but what the hell ... I'd sure vote for a Democrat against any of today's 'Licans.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[Mr_Spock]

11. Mmmm, popcorn

Want some? :popcorn: :popcorn: I got two boxes :D

[shadowknows69]

44. It's the First Amendment in action

right here at Democratic Underground folks. Don't fucking miss it!!!

I fucking love you guys.

:applause:

[Mr_Spock]

55. Sorry I didn't offer you some popcorn

Here - I got you a box as well :popcorn: :popcorn:

[LittleClarkie]

78. Where's the junior mint smilie

that's what I wanna know.

[xultar]

34. Yup. Another bute! Do you talk to your mom with that republican mouth?

[Mr_Spock]

7. The funny thing is, most would vote for her IF she was nominated

Now so many people (I believe) are deathly afraid that she may get the nomination but will not be electable - thus giving us four more years of absolute HELL. I think people want a knight in shining armour to come along and sweep us all away - even I would prefer that outcome if at all possible.

[alittlelark]

169. Clark is that 'knight in shining armor'.

[Mr_Spock]

182. Ya think?

I like Clark - he's kinda cute. I wish he wasn't so soft spoken though :D

[alittlelark]

191. He speaks softly and carries a BIG stick.

He didn't get to be a general by kowtowing. I've seen 2-3 interviews in which he got SERIOUS. When his eyes gleam like that I want to salute and do whatever he says. He has power written all over him.

[madeline_con]

226. Yep, check Clark out.

[mestup]

8. Democratic Socialists of America site

http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html

They have interesting Q/As at link regarding why (in this for-now tight two party system) they encourage voting for Democrats.

[Pirate Smile]

9. It isn't all of DU. Just some of the more vocal people. I'm with you.

There are a lot of people here who aren't Democrats at all.

There seems to be some who STILL believe Nader's crap from 2000 -"there's no difference between the parties". What a load of Bullshit.

I'm a Democrat. It says so in my Avatar. I wish the people who hate the Democrats would show it in their avatars so we know where they are coming from when they bitch. Something like "I hate Republicans and Democrats". OK. I'll take that into account when you trash Harry Reid, John Kerry, Howard Dean, Al Gore, Bill and Hillary Clinton, etc.

[xultar]

35. I know but you know how you can't talk about specific folk in the rules

So I have to say y'all.

[meganmonkey]

37. Oddly enough, as someone who has never technically been a democrat

I am often the one defending them, and I know I am not alone. I came into the Democratic party realm last year fully aware of what the differences between the two parties are and aren't. I made the conscious decision to participate in the Democratic party coming from a further-left perspective. Aware of the Dems' strengths, their shortcomings, and the reality of our political system.

I think the people to worry about are the people who are just now learning this reality, those who are surprised at the similarities between the parties, or that the Democrats aren't fulfilling their idealistic vision, and who are getting very frustrated with the reality of 2-party politics. Those are many of the people who I see reacting with comments like 'I'll never vote Dem again!'.

Those are the votes we need to worry about losing, because I truly believe that the majority of folks like me, who have finally decided to dive into the 2-party system after years of resisting it, are here to stay. Things take time, and I for one will be patient.

[Pirate Smile]

116. I'm glad you took the dive.

:hi:

My Mom describes how while growing up her Irish-Catholic family would constantly argue, sometimes the uncles would almost come to physical blows, about politics. They would never agree on anything - and they were ALL Democrats.

I see a lot of that here, but there is also a different level of the criticism like I mentioned above - it is beyond the intrafamily squabbles.

[mountebank]

10. We're here to promote progressive causes which should be, but

unfortunately are *not* always espoused by Democrats. By showing any elected official that they will be held accountable for their views, you ensure that your views will be represented. If any politician begins to feel that they can win your vote by simply being a Democrat, then they as a matter of course will become a corporate DINO whore.

Sticking to your strategy, you'll be wearing that biohazard suit everytime to walk to the voting booth. Have fun.

[Mr_Spock]

19. Do you think Dems really care about being held accountable here?

When people fly off the handle and attack them willy-nilly for a single phrase they said, what makes you think they consider the criticism here to be meaningful? If we could simply provide constructive criticism we would be listened to more, but the screamers tend to drown out the more reasonable messengers here. I think we have problems here and I'm glad Skinner is attempting to do something about it.

[mountebank]

111. I agree about the screaming. We could do with less screaming here

all across the board. And singling each one out for hate messages based on one phrase, one interview - yeah, it's pretty a pretty toxic way to be.

But it's not just the screamers that the original post addresses. It's *anybody* who would not support a Dem, period.

I don't buy into it. It's just as knee-jerk.

[Mr_Spock]

137. I disagree.

I think if people would simply just post constructive criticism, then many of us here (I tend to agree with the sentiments of the O/P) would join in and try to figure out how to steer our wayward Democrat in the right direction - or perhaps think of supporting another candidate if this is possible. But the angry one issue screamers really do aggravate and taint the mood here so much that many of us feel compelled to fend them off. What's wrong with having a more constructive message coming from this board?

[LittleClarkie]

145. And there are times when I see "Why aren't the Dems...(whatever)"

and when I post otherwise, including reasons and or links, I'm called an apologist.

Like a few days ago, when someone asked accusingly "Which Dems have met with Cindy." I coughed up a link showing exactly how many.

Sometimes I get the feeling that perception is more important than fact. And that does bother me.

[Mr_Spock]

161. Some just want to scream something and have people say "Hallelujah!"

I agree with you there - it's as if the tenor of the message is more important that if what you said is even correct. It's called screaming from the mountaintops and I, for one, am a little tired of it. Sometimes I want to scream too, but I rarely come here and do it just to ruin the day of thousands of people. Negativity is catchy - I feel like the screamers are actually trying to bring us down. I know they don't do it deliberately (well, most aren't trying to hurt people's feelings), but the net result is bad for the mood at DU. Let's be more thoughtful before we scream. Perhaps we could just raise our voice a little :D

[mountebank]

151. The original poster said nothing about constructive vs. destructive

criticism, and my first reply was to the original post. I agree with you completely. I tend to say nothing at all rather than some toxic spew. But I disagree with the original poster, whose opinion is just as toxic, authoritarian, and partisan in the worst possible way.

[Mr_Spock]

171. Well, I agree in that sense as well.

The O/P was actually trying to help even though the tone was harsh. It was clearly a reaction to all the thoughtless Democrat bashing that has gone on here in the past few days. I'm sure this thread and those other threads I'm thinking of are giving our adversaries on the other side a chuckle - oh well :shrug: :D

[nadinbrzezinski]

162. People have trried

but the tone is given by those in the leadership, who are doing all they can to banish progresisves, a mark of a group that may be loosing its hold on power.

Look we have said what is wrong, and what is wrong is the perception out there that the parties are not that diferent. Nader said it, but people believe it, why? look at the roll call for oh I don't know CAFTA and tell me how many Dems are on there?

I don't expect purity from my candidates but it gets to the point (DiFi) where they must face some accontablity... why? they are taking teh base for granted. Now this post, by the OP shows that nobody can take the base for granted anymore, and why she is railing about this.

[Mr_Spock]

179. "who are doing all they can to banish progressives,"

The minute I read that I had to stop and simply repost it back at you. Unless you can prove that there is a concerted effort on the part of the Dems to "banish" progressives, then I have nothing to say to you. This is the kind of rhetorical talk that is tearing us apart here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

203. The DLC leadership has made these statements

in many of their writings and you missed the last jewel from US Senator Shumer didn't you? He was not talking of IA when he said that they don't listen to their fringe. He said this clearly on C-SPAN

There has been a two + year effort from the DLC to stop the rising tide...

[Mr_Spock]

264. I disagree with your assessment.

You haven't convinced me that the DLC is is "out to get" the "fringe" or "banish" progressives. I would suggest that they stay away from the fringe element here at DU too - unless they want to give us a bigger Republican majority and subject us to a further erosion of our rights as Americans.

[nadinbrzezinski]

268. Well then we can do the adult thing and agree to disagree

personally I do believe they are driving people away, and it is on purpose, (or accidental) but they are.

So we can do the adult thing and call each other names

;-)

Or just agree to disagree

[Mr_Spock]

275. Agree to disagree

There will be many more times when we'll have an opportunity to continue this discussion - I'm getting to actually remember some of the user names here due to these 300 post extravaganzas :rofl:

:hi:

[nadinbrzezinski]

282. yep you are right on that

[xultar]

46. OK then help the republicans by fuckin the Dems you don't like.

That's the ticket.

[mountebank]

128. Short term vs. long term. I wouldn't mind unseating certain DINO Dems

even if it meant a temporary loss of a seat (speaking of the Senate here mostly) because I am confident that a Dem that supports progressive causes could beat the Repub next time around. This is to be used in certain cases only, when the Dem is very far out of whack with his/her own constituency (e.g. Feinstein). In short, I have faith in the ultimate triumph of progressive ideals over time and through many political cycles. The politics of short-term partisanship lead to their own corruption, IMO.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

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

[Hello_Kitty]

188. Couldn't a good primary challenge be mounted against some of them?

At the very least it might send them a message that it's time to get their priorities right. Feinstein and others need a wake up call.

[leeroysphitz]

12. Why is it ok to bash Dems here?

Because this is DEMOCRATIC underground where the free exchange of ideas, information and opinions is considered a virtue. If you can't tolerate opposing points of view then by all means go ahead and start up "Xultar Underground" and ban everyone who disagrees with you. Just try to ignore the sound of all those crickets chirping.

I am sick to death of people, any people constantly trying to TELL everyone else how to think instead of using reason and persuasion.

If you support Senator Clinton then by all means shout it from the roof tops and when the time comes VOTE your conscience but quit trying to heavy handedly quash valid criticism and debate on this forum.

[Mr_Spock]

25. Funny thing is, when someone who criticizes a Dem is taken to task here

they start saying things like "people constantly trying to TELL everyone else how to think". It seems the free flow of ideas can only flow against Dems in those threads or the Dem criticizers cry foul. That's how I see these conflicts. They are anything but constructive criticism IMHO and don't dare disagree with the person who called out a Dem on an issue!!

[leeroysphitz]

58. But you must agree that there is a difference

between someone shouting at you telling you you are wrong and do not belong here because of your opinion and someone who tells you in a quiet tone of voice "I disagree with you on that and here is why..."

The OP pretty much told everyone here that criticizes Senator Clinton to leave D.U. Is this use of reasoned persuasion or an attempt to verbally bully people into forgoing dissent?

Am I being unreasonable to not want to hear "you are either with us or against" talk here on D.U. after five lousy years of hearing it from the spoiled brat in the white house and his noise machine?

[Mr_Spock]

74. I can relate to the posters perspective - and I understand the sentiment

You and I both know what the O/P means when they say "agree or leave". Did it really bother you that much - I thought the overstatement was good because it would stimulate a better discussion of a very very very divisive issue occurring on DU at this time. Namely the idealists reaming the ass holes of Dems who are not perfect enough and tearing into any DUers who agree with the Dem in question. We think we are just being pragmatic by trying to have a coalition of different viewpoints work toward a common goal, but for some "one issue" people here that's not good enough and make them angry at us. Then they start a flame-fest post. Is that a good free-flow of ideas? or...?

[leeroysphitz]

148. I can see that you and others feel put upon

but conversely there are those on the other side who feel just as put upon. This post is a prime example. I have taken issue with Senator Clinton's vote and continued support for the war. Now I am anything but a one issue voter but I simply can't ignore that, I don't flame them but I can't really understand people who so easily accept it.

This is D.U. everyone here is here because they care and want to participate in the process. I would be amazed to discover any of us choosing to vote for Bush's successor as apposed to Senator Clinton in a presidential election, I know I couldn't. Ever.

Having said that I will point out that I have never advocated voting against an incumbent democrat in a general election, and might well take issue with others who do, but that is why we have primaries. I probably would vote against Clinton in a primary (of course it depends on who is actually running) and I can't think of a single thing wrong with trying to convince others to do the same...

I don't know who has been flaming you but telling others to leave D.U. over a disagreement of this nature is not "stimulating" it's inflammatory.

[Mr_Spock]

197. That's a reasonable position IMHO

I have no disagreement with you in your post generally. The O/P is inflammatory, but I thought it did a reasonable job at getting people to take notice and want to contribute. See, I'd rather people get mad at the Dem bashers and yell at them than have to read post after post bashing Hillary, Reed, Brazil (as if she has anything to do with anything), Bill C, Kerry, Gore etc, etc, etc... :shrug:

[Toots]

13. Would you cast a vote for Zell Miller?

I would not......

[SharonRB]

18. Okay, he doesn't count.

He's a Dem in name only. He may as well be a Republican and we'd never get his vote on important issues anyway.

[Pirate Smile]

26. She said if it meant the Democrats would take back control of the Senate.

Would you NOT if it was actually the difference between Republicans controlling the Senate and Democrats controlling the Senate - which would include being able to INVESTIGATE BushCo with subpoena power, set the agenda and pass bills, control all the committees, etc.?

The issue is CONTROL of Congress.

[xultar]

97. FUCKING BRILLIANT. EVERYONE READ THE ABOVE PLEASE!!!

THANK YOU!!! THANK YOU!!! THANK YOU!!! THANK YOU!!! THANK YOU!!!

[mountebank]

142. Except that Zell Miller would never vote for those issues.

Therefore Democrats would de facto *not* control the Senate on a wide variety of topics. This is the problem of DINO Dems. Like saying oh great, Democrats control the Senate - now we're going to see reform of corporate influence that is ruining America! Wrong. Half of Dems aggressively support the corporate agenda. This is why for me issues come before partisanship in most cases (I say in most b/c I did vote for Kerry even though I thought he was a pretty terrible candidate).

[-..__...]

178. Except that the party in control...

gets to appoint (vote on, actually), whom oversees the Senate and House.
Given that, the chair also has wide latitude in determining which bills will be heard and voted on. And IIRC, they can set certain rules on the debate.

The majority party also has privileges in determining whom will chair Congressional committees. Especially important with committees like the judiciary, appropriations and budget committees.

[Mr_Spock]

27. Seems like a straw man there

Retired Republican Zell Miller?

[xultar]

49. TO TAKE THE FUCKIN HOUSE BACK I WOULD!!!!! You'd rather rethugs

control the house cuz you're to pure to vote for Zell?

You may as well vote for the rethug then.

[LittleClarkie]

80. I'd write in a better Dem, meself

But that's just me.

[xultar]

196. And if they lose by that one vote. Ohhhh that would be shitty wouldn't it

[LittleClarkie]

215. Hey man, I'm with you mostly

I ain't voting for Zell, is all.

I mean, look at him. Could YOU vote for that?

[Old and In the Way]

81. Sure! No problem.

If that's the choice between a Republican and Democrat in the general election, it's a no brainer. The name of the game is taking back Congress. That doesn't mean every Democrat will reflect my opinion on politics and issues. That's called representitive democracy. I'll happily go along with electing Zell if that helps secure a majority in Congress.

[rox63]

14. Amen, xultar!

I can't stand the leftier-than-thou crowd, who won't support a Dem over a rethug.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

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

[Pirate Smile]

22. You honestly think a Hillary Clinton Administration would be the same as a

Frist Administration? Do you also think we would be in the same place right now if Gore was president? Do you REALLY believe that?

[xultar]

82. Apparently. Dems who'd rather hand things over to Frist by dissing

Hillary make me fucking SICK!

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

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

[Pirate Smile]

225. I think it would be a huge difference - as big a difference as between

Gore and Bush.

People made the exact same point about Gore and Bush - they're the same - NO, they aren't and Clinton and Frist aren't the same either.

There are big differences.

Do you think there was a big difference between how Bush and Bill Clinton ran things? I do. There would certainly be AS big a difference between Frist and Clinton.

[Mr_Spock]

28. What Democrats would you vote for?

What number of Democrats have the best interest of greyhound1966 in mind?

[Greyhound]

124. I think Kucinich(?) would make a real difference, or Dean would have

or Nader (I know he's not a dem) or anyone that will stand up to the corporate masters that have stolen our birthright by distracting us with trinkets. IMO :kick:

[Mr_Spock]

208. I went to Dean rallies myself and liked him. Kucinich is great but

he looks like a Romulan. Dean won't be running for anything anytime soon. Like it or not there is more to winning a political election than being right on all the issues. I'd personally like to see Nader offed for taking just enough votes away from Gore - JMHO though - I see Nader as just as much of an opportunist as Bill C was ever accused of being. Like I said, JMHO.

[karynnj]

30. So, if you and people similar to you

all vote third party and Frist wins a narrow election, how would you feel? Hillary, and all mentioned likely Presidential Democratic nominees, are considerably better than Frist and the other Republicans. I do not have the trust in Hillary that I have for Kerry. But I would still prefer her to Frist.

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

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

[xultar]

52. blah, blah, blah FUCKIN BLAH. Then don't fuckin whine about 2k and 2k4

I don't wanna hear the shit. Stolen elections...I don't wanna hear you whining.

[nadinbrzezinski]

110. Oh the elections were stolen

you just ahve to do the math,. Gore WON in 200 and Kerry won in 2004... did I mention the stolen Georgia file?

Now tell me, what exactly have the Dmeocrats, outside of my heroes in the black caucus done about this?

(oh and waxman too, but he is not the round the mill democrat)

I mean the leadership, what have they done? And telling me we are the minority is not a good excuse at this point.

This is why many are plain out fed up, and when you look at the pattern, we are fed up with the DLC.

[Greyhound]

139. And why they keep losing! why is that so hard to understand?

I'm sure the elections were fraudulent, but it was the dems that ran such awful campaigns and mediocre candidates that it was close enough for the repugs to take it.

[xultar]

238. A-FUCKIN-GREED

[xultar]

234. DLC - DLC - DLC - DLC-- Oh the big bad DLC. Give me a break.

[Greyhound]

130. you'll never hear me whine about 2K4. I blame the dems for that fiasco.n/t

[xultar]

236. That is some true shit. No truer shit was ever said. YOU ARE RIGHT

about that.

How a Vet can lose to a chickenhawk. WTF

[Seansky]

16. i voted dem all way down the list, but I am a bit

dissapointed that more dem politicians haven't stood up to all the corruption...

[karynnj]

53. I agree and that is in part of why I prefer Kerry to evryone else.

He's been in political office for over 22 years and, much to the dismay of the Boston papers, he seems incorruptable. In Contra drug and BCCI, he fought against government corruption - knowing there was no political advantage to it and lots of political risk. Given the corruption that has developed over the last 50 years or so, Kerry is unique in knowing where the corruption is and how to fight it.

All the same, the Republican administrations went way beyond the Democrats in corruption. (In fact this would be so if all Bush did was to "fix" the intelligence to attack Iraq and Reagan/ BushI let cocaine into this contry to fund the contras.)

[xultar]

54. Well at least your're voting Dem. A Dem who doesn't vote DEM can't

fuck complain about BUSH. That is all I gotta say.

DEMS aren't perfect. They are humans too. But JESUS ain't runnin so we gotta go with the DEM. If and when Greens can do something then maybe but that is 50 years down the road.

[Pirate Smile]

79. "But JESUS ain't runnin so we gotta go with the DEM." I love that,

xultar. I think I'll put it in my sig line. :)

[xultar]

85. Put a way PS! What is with these purity tests. The US is DYING

and they are issuing purity tests. WTF! Things are getting drastic.

After we get the house and senate and take the presidency then we can afford to do some creative voting. BUT NOT UNTIL THEN.

[Greyhound]

244. Because they did such a good job before? n/t

[Mr_Spock]

89. Jesus isn't running?

Damn. Now what :(

[xultar]

219. Naw baby...didn't you get the memo. I love it Jesus was-is a hippie.

When will the evangelicals get that point.

[Mr_Spock]

224. Yeah, my favorite hippie too

The evangelicals do not WANT to get that point - that is the problem :D

[SharonRB]

17. You tell 'em xultar

We need to take back the House and the Senate in '06 even if people have to hold their noses to vote for Democrats they don't like. Not voting or voting for Republicans or even voting for third parties just won't do. It's imperative we take back power!

[rateyes]

20. I will "hold my nose" and vote for Hillary...

if she wins the nomination...but, I wouldn't pull a damned lever for Zell Miller for all the tea in China. Why? Because, 1, he now claims to be pro-life, 2. Even if he won as a democrat, (which, in GA, he would--the Repigs love the guy) he would vote with the Republicans. I voted for him once, after moving to GA, before pulling the crap he pulled---and, he turned around and gave his own money to republican candidates for office in GA--or, rather, probably the money he "stole" when he left office as GA governor. Zell is a pig.

[xultar]

59. I held my nose for Gore. I can't stand him. I knew he was better than *

that is all that counted.

[rateyes]

310. Yeah, but Zell Miller?

No damned way...nope, wouldn't do it---exactly the same as voting for a Repig--and, I don't vote for Repigs. A skunk by any other name still stinks.

[redherring]

21. I would most definitely vote for her

Simply because she's a woman.

[demigoddess]

23. amen, my rule of thumb these days is to vote dem if it is between

republican and democrat , vote democrat
If it is between democrat and democrat, I vote for the woman if at all possible.
If it is between republican and republican , I don't vote for that position. I hate to vote for people who run unopposed or without declaring what party they are in.

[clovis29]

24. Homer Simpson: " Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos"

It was funny, but like all humor, it was sadly apt.

[Just Me]

29. Since it's the Republican party in charge, they should get the lashing.

Believe me, I totally get your frustration. The persistent, out-of-control Dem-bashing is so devisive that the Republican party must be partying at such behavior.

When are we going to focus our energies on the corrupt party in charge?

:shrug:

[Mr_Spock]

33. It's the divisiveness that really gets me

It tears us apart as a community when people here lash out at every opportunity - rarely offering an alternative or even providing constructive criticism. How does this strengthen our ability to remove the republicans from power? I just don't get it. Some people care so much about their own issues that they can't even see how they are hurting so many here at DU with their violent outbursts. It really sucks if you ask me.

[xultar]

42. I wanna smack them. Then I realize that they are probably freepers

and I realize that maybe they'll eventually get banned so why tire myself out.

[Mr_Spock]

50. There are people here with thousands of posts who are tearing us apart

on a daily basis. Since we can't call them Freepers, we feel compelled to take them on. Thus wasting time that could have been spent coming up with something constructive to do to wrestle power from the Nazipublicans. Are we our own worst enemy?

[xultar]

38. I'm sayin. You'd think we were fuckin up the country and the economy

and not counting the dead in NOLA.

[Just Me]

84. REAL grown-ups understand that give-n-take is part of life.

Whereas, absolute perfectionism is NOT life.

Of course, as you alluded earlier, there are those who INTENTIONALLY divide rather than unite. I don't just believe it, I know it 'cause I've witnessed it.

This isn't about disagreeing about a position or perspective, which is INEVITABLE among people of varying beliefs and backgrounds.

This is about unifying against a cabal that is prepared to exploit ALL OF US.

This is about setting aside petty bickering and bitching in order to gather our forces and defeat a clear and identifiable group of power-mongers in charge of this country and tearing down our nation's advances while destroying foreign nations,...all for profit and power.

[Andromeda]

31. Hear, hear!

I've been wondering that myself. They should just go off somewhere and form their own party 'cause I'm getting sick of people dissing Democrats too.

I'm not talking about legitimate criticism; I'm talking about one-issue self-professed geniuses who don't have any vision beyond their noses. They are disruptive and annoying and it's hard to ignore all the time.

It's depressing when I hear "I'm not voting at all if my guy isn't nominated." Or "I'm writing in a third candidate." Or "I hate so-and -so because he/she voted the wrong way.

Get a freakin' clue! You have to learn to be realistic and work with the system or you're going to be perpetually disappointed.

Sure, I've been disappointed in our party. They've been weak and ineffectual at moments when we really needed strong leadership but pissing and moaning about how this one or that one voted on some bill is not only self-defeating and destructive---it's demoralizing.

We need to be patient. Look back at history and how events have changed our country. It helps put things in perspective.

[Mr_Spock]

36. Hear hear!!!

"I'm talking about one-issue self-professed geniuses who don't have any vision beyond their noses."

Man, did you say a mouthful there - couldn't have said it better myself.

[Andromeda]

56. Thank you...

:)

[Dr Fate]

39. I'm voting straight DEM- but don't tell me who I can & can't question.

Thanks in advance for understanding.

Doc

[xultar]

64. Nope question all you want. That's not what I'm a sayin.

[Dr Fate]

109. I thought you indicated that other than Zell, all critiques are "bashing"

I'm often accused of "bashing" when I complain that the "strategy" of going along with Bush has never worked.

Same thing happens when I point out that most DEMs are doing a poor job of getting on TV shows and high-lighting important issues or Bush scandals.

I'm glad I'm "allowed" to still do that without being considered a "basher"-so thanks again.

Doc

[xultar]

152. nope. I'm just talking about the Harry Ried is worse than a Rethug

that type o shit.

[Dr Fate]

195. Harry Reid is better than any Republican.

Even though he is anti-choice, voted for the war and the Bankruptcy bill.

He is better than Republicans, but could work on distinguishing himself from them on Privacy, Foreign policy and domestic economics.

[Mr_Spock]

217. Perfect!!

Realizing a Democratic politians relative value to the Dems and constructively criticizing him too!!! Imagine if we all did this is a coordinated way - the politicians would have to listen!

[marbuc]

40. From site rules:

"Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office."

I completely agree with the OP, I am tired of the Dem bashing on this site; there is a difference between that and constructive criticism. Hillary would not be my first choice, but I would vote for her over the Republican or third party candidate. We need to stop the madness, and voting third party is merely a concession to the repubs.

[Der Blaue Engel]

67. "there is a difference between that and constructive criticism"

Exactly my point in a thread I started earlier today. I think we all know bashing when we see it, including those doing the bashing...even if they want to call it something else.

[LittleClarkie]

41. I vote for Democrats

I am a Democrat.

However, Hillary isn't our only Democrat. And some of us aren't convinced she can take back shit.

Too early in the season for a snit fit, innit?

[welshTerrier2]

43. i'm glad you FUCKING asked ...

just as you are sickened by those who don't agree with your views, so are many of us sickened by those who continue to put Party ahead of issues ...

you think that if Democrats just had control, everything would be both fine and dandy ... many of us don't believe that ... we don't want to elect Democrats if they don't represent our views ... and we don't want to elect anyone who isn't willing to listen, negotiate and find common ground ...

you think you can just whine about all those leftie sellouts and that will help?

wake up, my friend ... your objective (i.e. unity) is right; your method of achieving it is NOT going to happen ... instead of whining about those who will never again "just go along", why not call for an intra-party conference ... why not call for a reform of our party processes ... why not call for a real meeting of the minds ...

but you don't really want unity at all, do you? all you're insisting on is blind obedience to the power elite in the Party ...

unity takes work, my friend ... your rantings won't achieve it ...

oh, and i owe you an answer to your question: "If you don't wanna vote for democrats then why bother being here?"

i have numerous reasons for being here but perhaps foremost among them is to lobby for change in the Party ... if we don't change, we will continue to fail as a Party ...

[1932]

90. The second Hillary, or any D., is nominated, I'll be behind the most

liberal person running who has a chance of winning. If that's the Democrat, we'll all be happy.

Up to that point (the nomination), I'll be advocating for the most liberal person who has even the remotest chance of winning.

And I'll make my arguments at all stages based on facts and on reasonable opinions.

[Greyhound]

277. Well said. Just trying to help. n/t

[titoresque]

45. I'd like to vote for a democrat .....sadly though

my vote won't count because the current Dem's in leadership are not
demanding a paper trail! They should be shouting it from the rooftops! They should give a shit!
This should be our main focus, without real elections...forget the rest!

[Der Blaue Engel]

47. Anyone who thinks there's "no difference"

can't read.

In fact, I don't believe it when someone says they think there's no difference between, say, Hillary and Frist. That's an unconscionable thing to say, and I have to assume they have some other agenda that makes them say it.

[G_j]

48. never did appreciate being 'should' upon

in general, I would love to see the day when people dump the word "bash" and explain what they mean in a clearer fashion.

[xultar]

62. People who treat Dems worse than they treat rethugs. That's what

I mean.

Better

[G_j]

72. that will do

you must admit the word "bash" is overused here, without people taking the time to explain just what it means to them. Catch-all phrases with nebulous meaning are generally not contructive in good communication.

[xultar]

91. You're right bash is overused but some can't understand complex

concepts like this.

[LittleClarkie]

93. Yep, sometimes a "criticism" is a bash. Sometimes a "bash" is a criticism.

Some folks have real trouble telling the difference.

[noiretextatique]

147. what difference does it make...really?

if it is a bash or a criticism? is either likely to change the minds of those committed to a particular candidate? not likely.

[LittleClarkie]

160. It comes down to the reaction, I suppose

You bash somebody's candidate, and they will come out to defend. And invariably the basher cries about how they're not allowed to criticize apparently. The defender is called a bot or somesuch. Much chest beating ensues. The problem being, a bash is much like a smear, and often has about as much connection to the truth as that.

A criticism is more reasoned. A criticism can be rebutted or discussed.

It's that half truths, the twisted facts and the downright gossip that gets me. It's like somebody drew a conclusion, and set down roots right there.

I don't need to change someone's mind. I just expect our leaders to be treated fairly. That includes Dean and Clark and, yes, Kerry, or anyone else who is being maligned unfairly.

[noiretextatique]

186. all candidates deserve criticism, if they've earned it

since none are above criticism simply because they are deemed "leaders." but i agree it's not too much to ask that the criticism be fair, especially if someone wants to be heard. i think gowing a thicker skin and ignoring folks would serve the more partisan DU members well. this debate remins me of the christian/atheist debates here. it seems some folks take the criticism of the religious right as criticism of the religious, and of course some folks aren't exactly fair in the criticism. however, it's not like the religious right is not a problem in this country, so i am always struck by those who take offense rather than comment on the problem.
i am one of those people who believes the democratic party is not on the right course, as evidenced by the losses of last two elections, and the party's response to those losses. my criticism (and perhaps, cynicism) is more about strategy than personalities.

[AlCzervik]

51. I'll vote for the dem but if it's Biden or Byah i'll be holding my nose

while i do it.

[xultar]

60. We all have to sacrifice.

[AlCzervik]

66. very true, i'll be there, hell i live in California, it feels like i'm

always at the polls.

[xultar]

86. Then you have practice. The rest of these yahoos here think they

can vote with the Rethugs.

[nadinbrzezinski]

198. Oh in cali we have lots of practice, thanks to the rethugs

now to your comment about sacrifice, I'd compare notes with you... and why I am so anti Bush and so anti DLC... care to compare notes?

I am not sure you'd like that.

Now the criticisms of the party ARE VALID and the party is takng its base for granted, they don't correct much of the problems, other problems will develop... and I am sure you have conveniently forgotten that Shumeer (yes will mention names) said to C'SPAN something similar to waht you just did, mostly in a different tone... we don't care for our fringe, and guess what he meant us... progresives.

If this was Erich Frum we would get angry, but that IS frum... now a US Senator, they are taking the base for granted.

[G_j]

87. whatever that means

but pardon me if I don't warm up to people telling me I "have" to do what they think is right. We all do make sacrifices in this life for sure. Whatever those sacrifices are is our business and responsibility alone.

[xultar]

92. Nope and I don't expect you to. But we are DEMS and people are

serving the right by purging on purity here.

[G_j]

125. purging?

aren't purging and disagreeing on something a little different?

Are you saying people are trying to silence you?

[xultar]

154. Nope nor I try to silence...You haven't heard all the purging talk

where have you been?

[G_j]

176. haven't been around

all that much lately, but I suspect things are not that different than they have been in the past.
The primaries were especially rough. We survived.

[noiretextatique]

164. too early for that...wait for the primaries

elections always bring out the censors here.

[noiretextatique]

57. disenfranchisement caused the 2000 "loss" for sure

and likely contributed to the 2004 "loss." it's great that you are venting your frustration, but what is your solution other than a name change? are you suggesting that everyone here shoud think like you? on a discussion board, people discuss, and since this not an official democratic party site...:shrug: what's your problem with discussion? surely if people post factual errors, they will be corrected.

[Rex]

61. To learn the truth so you can vote for a Dem.

It's fun to hook a lurking freeper and watch them become a liberal as they read the truth. Priceless. I really enjoy it.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

63. I'm an anti-war Democrat who'll be voting Green in 2006.

I've been a Democrat for over 40 years. I feel NO "loyalty" to the party or any particular candidate they may run. I'm an Anarchist first, Democrat second.

"Party Loyalty" is for slaves.

[Obiepup]

68. Good point

I'm going to think long and hard about supporting Dems who voted to give that warmongering arsehole the keys to attack Iraq.

If they were dumb enough to do that, why should we keep reelecting them?

[xultar]

76. Great. Then you're a Green too. Go to greenundeground.com....

don't come here bashing democrats.

[noiretextatique]

106. you should ask skinner if he agrees with you

and while you're at it, ask him if he's willing to return the donations given to DU by all the people you think should leave. thanks.

[xultar]

69. Then you're a GREEN! So don't come to DU bashing Dems.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

115. Were you elected to your post as censor? Or, did you assume it?

If your content to vote for anyone with a (D) next to their names without a whimper, that's your right. You want to scream at people who think that the likes of Hillary are mushy centritst, feel free. If you're willing to silently overlook it when your heroes are corrupt, or weak, or cowardly, or sell out, and willing to send soldiers to kill and die for no reason...perhaps you should consider running for office.

[Just Me]

146. Oh, stop spinning. She's sayin' if we are unwilling to sacrifice,....

,...just enough to UNITE AND REMOVE THIS FUCKING REGIME,...none of our "principles" will have any impact upon this country or the American people.

WE HAVE TO GET RID OF THOSE IN POWER,...FIRST,...AS A UNITED PRIORITY!!!

If you're honest with yourself, you damn well know that putting Democrats in charge is a huge leap in the other direction,...a direction where we will at least have a CHANCE of advancing our humanitarian causes.

I can't fucking stand being stuck in the mud because my personal principles get in the way of a plan to actualize those principles. Been there, done that, doesn't work.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

173. Tell it to the Dem politicians who vote with the repugs.

And, see what that gets you. You want to move this country to left? Vote your principles rather than for politicians who count on your votes despite what they do.

I've "been there, done that", by voting for sleazy, sell-out, politicians just because they have a (D) after their names and aren't "as bad as" the repugs. That doesn't work either. We still get stuck with lousy, corrupt, egomaniacal politicians who blow with the political winds to protect their sorry asses and their precious seats.

The way to fight fascism is to fight it, not go along with the enablers who support it.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

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

[LittleClarkie]

I can never leave folks on there for long

My curiousity gets the better of me.

[xultar]

251. It is like peaking @ a car accident. I can't do it.

[MazeRat7]

75. Thanks for saving me the typing. *smile

[xultar]

77. Oh, you're on the list too.

[G_j]

107. I don't have anyone on mine n/t

[xultar]

239. I'd just cleaned it and lord and behold the ones on it are back on it

again within a month.

[Individualist]

105. Ditto

[Mr_Spock]

100. Uggh

The uglyness of DU rears it's head once again.

[xultar]

129. And people were mad @ Schumer for saying that we have Liberals

who behave like wingnuts. :rofl:

[Mr_Spock]

221. lol

Now don't say that too loud, somebody might not get the humor in it :rofl:

[xultar]

240. Man, DU is so lackin in the humor thing. Can Liberals laugh?

that is my next thread.

[Tomee450]

153. "Hillary's a sell-out. I've got a problem with sell-outs."

My sentiments exactly. I am tired of Democrats who shift to the right then expect other democrats to vote for them. I am very disappointed in Hillary Clinton and if she continues moving rightward, it will be difficult for me to vote for her if she runs for president. I still won't vote Republican, though.

[xultar]

187. Again, if Hillary wins the Primary as a DEM and you don't vote for her

it would be helping the Rethuglicans. Why do you think the REthuglicans gave money to the Greens?

It is about getting control of the senate, house and the presidency.

Most important the house and senate. That is where the investigations into the administration start.

[MazeRat7]

70. Sorry you are sick... but I an NOT one of the sheep.

You would actually vote for Lieberman or Miller ? Wow...

MZr7

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

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

[MazeRat7]

83. If it means going against my "principals"... then yes.

Its not complex, its called integrity. Besides, things will change when they are meant to change, certainly I will try to be a catalyst for that change but not at the expense of my personal convictions.

Sorry, I have this problem with "thinking for myself".... *sigh

MZr7

[nadinbrzezinski]

99. what you don't follow the maze?

:-)

I am with you, for me no more DLCers, period.

The DLC is not there for the people, but for the corpos, I will not advnce that policy by enambling it.

and to the OP... you realize that I expect this kind of a threat at FR, don't you?

[Just Me]

117. Threat.

In what way?

She is making a point.

We are not going to remove the cancer of this regime unless we unite to remove them.

Once they are removed, we may be on the path to the principles we seek to realize.

The division and infighting ENABLES a common enemy.

Life demands sacrifice.

[xultar]

131. Lots of white people are afraid of black people. They grab their purses

when I cross the street. Shit like that. It's a black thing. I'm used to it.

[Just Me]

165. You lost me there. 8~(

I'm,...uh,..."white" (a single, white, just above poverty, Mama). x( I just want to unite, as a member of one race,...the human race,...against those who clearly have no conscience about exploiting any of us who have less than a multi-million/billion estate.

[xultar]

170. I was sorta responding 2 the post you were responding to...kinda like

whispering to a friend...something obnoxious...

[sepia_steel]

218. "Lots of white people are afraid of black people."

You know that's not what that poster meant. That is fucking tasteless of you.

[Mr_Spock]

230. There you go - talking that common sense stuff again!

It has become so tiring arguing with people who would destroy the Democratic party for not being liberal enough whilst empowering the most dangerous element to have ever seized power in our nations history. I have to admit (and I try to be an optimist mostly) I am a bit worried about our future. I hope it's just because I am so close to where the sausage is being made :rofl:

[xultar]

241. Sausage making is for the maker, not the eater. Just like politiks

is for the politicians not the lil people who like shit to be so pure that they purge themselves in the process because they weren't as perfect as the perfection they were perfecting.

[MazeRat7]

119. Wow somebody finally got it. My "sig" is sarcasm, only 1000+ posts later

Thanks for noticing. *big smile.

MZr7

[xultar]

126. YOu're so cute. Take a complex concept and make it simple DLC is the Devil

you should write a book. :rofl:

[nadinbrzezinski]

180. As a movement yes they are a problem

with far more influence than they should have...

And I could write a book comparing the modern Democratic Party to their counterparts in 1876, 1880 and 1884... all the way to 1888... and what it took for them to get it.

You may be interested in that book... the third way is not new.

[Mr_Spock]

235. I don't want the book. I want a removal of Republicans from power

Then I will consider reading your book on where the DLC Dems are headed - deal?

[xultar]

246. FUCKING BRILLIANT. EVERYONE READ THE ABOVE PLEASE!!!

[MazeRat7]

270. So do I, but we don't always get what we want...

and to finish the lyrical quote..."but if you try, you get what you need". So the pukes in power is what we "needed" to mobilize us. Now getting them out of power is another something different. It will happen for sure, the question is when. When will enough be enough for Joe six-pack ? We have had our fill of this crap, but how much more can the average Jane take before they become as rabid as we are ? Answer that, and you will have a good indicator or political tide change.

MZr7

[Mr_Spock]

293. You know though - if we Dems really stick together and "Joe six-pack"

...loses enough faith in his so-called leaders, we could take back many seats on that phenomenon alone. Now don't get me wrong, I am already seeing the movement of a lot of the average Joe voters away from the Repukes - at least they are not supporting them vocally any more. They will never be as rabid as we are, but they know a sinking ship when they see one - and some people just HATE to lose. :D

[Just Me]

104. Without tactics to remove the cabal, your principles will never be,...

,...actuated except in your mind.

We HAVE to get the Republicans out of power because they toe-the-line to the neoconster-backed Bushco Empire.

Apply your principles. REMOVE the cancer as first priority. Then, you actually have more opportunity to actuate all your other principles towards human progression.

[xultar]

248. Yes kill the cancer first. Do the facelift after.

[Mr_Spock]

243. "thinking for myself".... is good, defeating the Republicans is essential

You can wait for "things will change when they are meant to change" - most of us cannot survive much more of this onslaught. It's about more than just you. Do you agree?

[xultar]

247. Damit, will you quit it with the logic. I can't get to the other posts.

:crazy:

[Mr_Spock]

252. I'm glad we're working together here...

I feel like a few of us are in the trenches trying to instill a little "defeating the enemy is the most important thing" logic into the discussion here - it's kinda fun :D

[xultar]

263. It is kinda fun. I do get some strange pleasure being in the trenches.

But alas I feel defeated cuz so few get the whole thing. I don't understand why they don't get it.

[Mr_Spock]

103. Yeah, let's keep up the infightin

The republicans love it :D

[Ksec]

88. You can please some of the people some of the time

But youll never please spoiled assholes..

[xultar]

94. Now that is a siggy line!

:spray:

[Raiden]

95. Yellow dog here

<=============

[natrat]

96. you all crack me up

There is something profoundly creepy with the voting record and statements of some of these fuckers. Harry reid, donna brazil,and on and on. They suck more than republicans because at least you know the republicans for what they are.Just by virtue of the lack of a major outcry re voting reform ought to be enough to tell you something is up. Creepy motherfuckers that have been bought or scared into compliance. As Ted Kenedy said 75 % of the democrats and 95% of the republicans are corrupt. To blindly support some of these politicians without regard to there positions is bankrupt.

[xultar]

108. Well if they are worse than then you should vote Republican.

You wanna vote for the best right.

This makes me think you are a freeper because we all know controlling the house and senate is important to investigating the Bush Administration. So if you'd rather vote Republican than vote for Harry Reid then something stinks.

Donna Brazil is about as important as the pimple on my ass. Why you care about her astounds me. Who gives a fuck about her? Why bring her up she ain't doin or worth shit. So if you are basing your shit on that then again...something stinks.

[Mr_Spock]

121. Yeah, what's the deal with that huh?

Something ain't right there. Do you think some people don't know that this is a site started mostly to support Democrats?

[nadinbrzezinski]

122. what is stinks is that the leadership

has yet to make any public waves on voting and a real voting reform

And this is one of the main criticismms of the DLC, (as well as their voting record.. *cough Nafta\CAFTA, IWR (even if that one is understandable), bankrupcy, et al* the only ones out there FIGHTING for you and me is the Black Caucus and some of the DEMS OUT Of ldeadership possitions.

Wake up and smell the coffe, many people have had it, and this is nothing about purity of mind, it has to do with what the hell is going on? The questions that people have been asking are valid, even if you don't like them... very valid.

[natrat]

141. i would never vote repub,,,but my point is alot of these dems are

indistinguishable and are merely the voice of a very small corporate elite. There is nothing i would rather see than a populist leader in the white house and a congress that reflects the people. I just think that, given the behavior of dems,supporting them without hard scrutiny will lead to yet more heartbreak.

[Mr_Spock]

112. Wow, this kind of attitude will help us win back the Congress in 2006

Not.

[xultar]

118. ....possible .... alert. That is what they do. Wake the kids get them

excited disenfranchised and they vote green and we lose.

Standard MO.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

287. There are some very progressive Dems running for Congress

My own Congresscritter is a long-termer and essentially a good guy, so I'll have no trouble voting for him, but in another part of Minnesota where there's an open seat, the Dem Establishment is putting its weight behind a DINO and dissing the progressive who is trying for the seat.

That's the kind of think we're angry about.

Criticizing Republicanites is a given, and I've done a lot of that since I joined here in the spring of 2001. But I am increasingly disappointed in the mainstream Dems, and I will not vote for any of the DLCers in the Minnesota caucuses. What a bunch of wimpy appeasers they are!

[Mr_Spock]

298. Defnitely don't support DINO's in the primaries if you don't like 'em!

Nobody really likes a DINO. But if the DINO wins the primary, I hope we can resist giving the opposition inside dirt by tearing them apart here. A LOT of Repukes troll this site for dirt...

[GreenArrow]

98. Joe Lieberman ROCKS!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[xultar]

150. Get off the latte. You'll never get to sleep.

[dogday]

102. So Let's all be like the Republicans and ask no

questions of our leaders, only follow what they tell us to, and always give life and liberty for the party. Is that the kind of Democracy you want here? Think about it for a minute and you will realize our diversity makes us great and through it we all learn lessons from each other.

Yes it does not look good when we call our own people out, but hey sometimes you got to ask what is going on. Some ask in a nice way, some a not so nice way, but either way we allow it because that is who we are.

Please also don't forget we will have many Democratic Candidates to choose from and many think trying to put a woman in the White House at this juncture would be not be our best bet.

[xultar]

113. That's not what I fuckin said. Read it again...people here who would

rather not vote for our DEM candidates are handing things to the Rethugs.

We have people here who think Hillary is on par with Frist.

IF it was Hillary up against Frist and they don't vote then they deserve what they get.

[GreenArrow]

132. it it were Hilary up against Frist

and they vote, they'll still deserve what they get.

[dogday]

133. I posted a very nice post and you

show your ignorance by yelling at me. to be honest I don't care who screams at who as long as it is not me so back off....

[xultar]

140. I'm sorrry. I'll take out my screaming. I'll admit I was wrong to scream

backing off...

[xultar]

144. BTW...just cuz I said fucking doesn't mean I was screaming...I say

fuckin like
Absofuckinlutely
I'mfuckin hungry...

So don't take that as a scream.

[nadinbrzezinski]

135. No she is not on a part with Frist

but she will carry forth a VERY CONSERVATIVE economic agenda still pushing for globatlization, she believes in it.

Granted she will try to do somethign about the deficit, as she does not believe in drowing the gov'ment in the bathtub, but for the unemployed workers who just saw their good jobs leave, does it matter?

[sepia_steel]

114. I wouldn't vote for Hillary UNLESS

UNLESS!!!! She won the primary. But she won't win the Primary, and I don't WANT to have to vote for a repug-lite. It's not about Clinton hate, I loved Bill Clinton, and it is not a woman thing - I don't like HER. There are better choices. YOU write her in if that's how much you love her - don't tell the rest of us who it's okay to prefer. Do not sit there and do the same thing you accuse us of doing - BASHING!!!

WE just plain do not like her. If I wanted to vote for a Republican, then MAYBE I'd vote for her. But I don't want to.

You can deal with that or not deal with it, I don't care.

You're not being so democratic yourself, for rejecting people over their CHOICES. This is complete asshattery.

[xultar]

158. Hey I agree cuz I'm a Clark fan. But if she won the primary...you'd have

to beat me with a stick to keep me outta the booth.

Hell for any Dem I'd vote on my hands and knees!

[bee]

269. best post in this entire thread. thank you. n/t

[spuddonna]

120. If it meant we'd get Congress back...

If we could get control of the House and Senate with the vote, and the DLC ran an actual donkey, I'd vote and campaign for that jackass faster than you can say "HEE HAW"!

[xultar]

136. That's the spirit baby! Ohhh I could just KISS U!!! BUT...

if it was a RETHUG and you didn't like the DEM so much...what would you do?

[Selatius]

123. A Democrat must earn my vote; it is not an entitlement

Hillary Clinton's economic policies are not what the working people of America wants. You can argue it all day long, but telling the steel mill workers out in Pennsylvania that it's good that the factory is now in China isn't going to help them put food on the fucking table or pay the damn bills.

And who the fuck are you to decide who gets to post here? It's up to each and every individual to register and post. It's a free country, and people will do what they choose to regardless of what you think.

People will always sling mud, but I'm not here for that. I'm here for debate on substance, and her economic policies are something of substance, something I disagree with. This is why I do not believe she would be a good candidate.

Am I going to insult Hillary for her positions? No, that's not my game, but I am going to criticize her and fight for somebody else who I do agree with.

[xultar]

134. I agree. BUT IF IT IS A DEM AND A THUG...and you don't vote DEM

you're enabling the Rethugs. Just think of the REthugs giving money to the Greens.

Truth hurts. :hurts: That's what I'm sayin.

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

143. Deleted message

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

[xultar]

149. OH my god...I'm using Hillary as an example...Must I name them all?

HC is an EXAMPLE
HC is an EXAMPLE
HC is an EXAMPLE
HC is an EXAMPLE

[sepia_steel]

159. You still make the assumption that people would vote rethug if they

don't care for the Dem candidate.

It is still offensive and illogical.
It is still offensive and illogical.
It is still offensive and illogical.
It is still offensive and illogical.
It is still offensive and illogical.

[xultar]

167. You haven't seen some of the post I have...that is why I think they

are freepers.

[sepia_steel]

175. For all you know,

I read every post every day. Stop with the assumptions, CHRIST.

Disagreement is not grounds to call someone a Freeper. People have a right to express disappointement in their leadership, and yes, to express who they will and will not vote for. You don't have to like it, but you also don't need to make incindiary posts toward those people to express that you don't like it.

[xultar]

184. OK you have seen all the posts I have. I can't type specifically about

you in reference to all occasions. We use generalities in our conversations because we are generally interested in the same thing.

BTW I'm not talking abou CRITICISM...I'm saying if we have a DEM candidate running against a RETHUG.... an established ticket.

IF someone-not you...doesn't support the DEM they are supporting the rethugs.

THAT is what I said.

You want me to post to you specifically to you in all accounts in all situations? What are you nuts? NO I'm being specific with the nuts comment. (That is just in case there was any question.) :rofl:

[sepia_steel]

249. Jeebus.

"IF someone-not you...doesn't support the DEM they are supporting the rethugs."

Well no shit. The problem with your post is that you seem to know a lot of people are doing that when I haven't seen a single one say that they'd EVER do that. Personally, I'd vote for Hillary or whoever if I HAD TO, but if were between someone like Frist adn Zell Miller, I'd be very tempted not to vote at all. Voting for someone like that is NOT effective for democratic cause. That's lose-lose. I feel that Clinton is repug lite and I can't blame people who feel strongly enought to sit that one out. NOBODY here has said, "Nah, I'd rather vote for the Republican."

[Pirate Smile]

281. Me too. It wasn't an endorsement of her for the nomination. No way.

The issue was a Dem v. a Repub.

HC was an example.

[Selatius]

166. No, that's not the case with me

In the last election, I voted for Kerry, and I must say I voted for him begrudgingly. I live in Mississippi, a safe state. I could have voted for who the fuck I want, and I was sorely tempted to vote for a third party because of Kerry's free trade economic policies. Why do I have the luxury of voting for who I want? Because of that damnable Electoral College.

So for you to say that it is a binary dichotomy oversimplifies it. It's the Electoral College. The only reason why we live in a two-party duopoly is because of the winner-take-all, first-past-the-post election system we have in place augmented by the EC.

I enable no one except my principles, and I'll be damned if I vote to cut off my arm to save my foot.

If it came down to an election between Jeb Bush and Hillary in 2008, I'm not going to vote for either one of them. My views on economic issues make me far left, so I wouldn't be missed by you and the rest of the peanut gallery who loves to call me a fringe nutjob.

[kster]

155. I'd vote for Hillary or any dem, so

long as they step forward real soon to make sure that my vote gets counted. If they are still allowing these vote stealing machines in 2006, the Dem's and the honest Repugs shouldn't expect that people are gonna waste their time by voting.

[existentialist]

156. For the foreseeable future

I anticipate voting for almost every Democrat that I can. This would include Hillary Clinton if she were nominated.

This does not mean that I believe that she would be the best nominee either from the standpoint of winning, or from the standpoint of attempting to fix things if this present Republican disaster can be brought to an end.

I believe neither of those things. At this point I am favoring Wesley Clark, from both standpoints, but 2008 (if we can survive until then) remains a long way off.

I believe that an open debate here as to who the best candidate might be is appropriate. I don't blame fellow DUers for being upset with Hillary Clinton. I am myself. I am similarly upset with my Democratic Senator and Democratic Representative for not standing up to the Republican tyranny. Surely trying to prod these Democratic officeholders to take a responsible stand is also appropriate here.

[natrat]

157. i'm always wondering if it's all just become a scam like

everything else in America. You know make em think they actually have a choice with 2 competing parties.

[xultar]

163. Ahhh why throw that in. I can't say you're wrong. But then how would

you ever know anything @ any point. So we should all drink the kool-aid then.

[sepia_steel]

168. You said

"If you don't wanna vote for democrats then why bother being here?"

The problem is that many of our Dems have betrayed us. We DO want to vote for Dems. They owe it to us to live up to Democratic principles.

[xultar]

174. I can't say I disagree. But we are here to further dem candidates.

If some are going to further rethugs and greens then they need to take it outta here.

If there is no way a person would support a DEM. Including Lieberman then why post here. Yes Lieberman is an ass but he's still a DEM. IF he's up for his seatand running as a DEM against a rethug then I gotta go for the guy. We have to retain and gain seats in the SENATE.

[sepia_steel]

181. This question has been answered already.

And that is because this is a Democratic, big-tent discussion board. Vote your conscience and leave others alone to do the same. I don't see a lot of people here that I would call 'uneducated'. i trust my fellow progressives to do what they must even if I may not agree.

[applegrove]

172. I agree. Look what voting for Nader got us in 2000. This all could

have been avoided.

[xultar]

177. FUCKING BRILLIANT. EVERYONE READ THE ABOVE PLEASE!!!

THANK YOU!!!!

[sepia_steel]

185. On the other hand

I don't trust the 2-party machine. I don't want to one day be forced to choose between Evil and More Evil. Some people already feel like they had to do that in 2004 (I love Kerry personally). I do not think Bush actually won the election, and I think other parties deserve votes if they have supporters. We will always be limited in our choices if we ask people to vote for Dems if they want to vote for 3rd parties.

[xultar]

194. OH my GOD when we get a third party that can do what we need

knock yourself out. We don't have that yet. SO why sweat it. Deal with the monster you see. Not with the monster you wish you had.

[sepia_steel]

228. don't wish for any monsters

people here can vote for the progressive candidate of their choice, and i'm not going to yell at them for voting on principle. If that's not the Dem of the election, so be it. For some people, policy ranks higher than party.

[applegrove]

205. Don't you think Dems are more likely to implement laws on voter

transparency and to police political donations? They have done that in the past. Who do you think is going to do it? The GOP?

We need to be real. Nobody has ever won elections without a "big tent".

[mzmolly]

288. I wouldn't ask anyone to vote for Dems who want's to vote 3rd party

if that person is comfortable with the consequences of such an action. ie. Republican rule and all that comes with it: war for profit,increasing poverty, increased crime, increased unempolyment, gutting educational funding, supreme court nominees, environmental policies etc.

[G_j]

200. you are aware

(of course you are!) that not everybody agrees with that summary of events?

No, I am not going to go into it for the millionth time, but can't you at least accept that there are other intelligent and decent people who have come to different conclusions after examining the events of 2000?

[applegrove]

207. Are you saying that if all Nader votes went to Gore -that there would

have even been a recount?

[G_j]

223. I have no desire to get into that, as I said

I just said that there are some very smart people who have come to different conclusions.

[applegrove]

262. If you don't want to discuss fine. But it isn't particularly fair to state

you disagree but you will not say why or how.

[Hello_Kitty]

183. I was thinking along those lines today too

Splitting the liberal vote to "punish" the Dems was Nader's strategy in 2000 and is the reason the country is in this horrible mess today!

Let's get these bastards kicked out of the House and Senate in '06 and then worry about the proper lib credentials of our Democrats.

[sepia_steel]

189. LikeI said,

I will vote for a DEM I don't like, only if I *HAVE* to. I will not vote for a Rethug.

[xultar]

192. That's all I'm sayin. Why was everyone getting all up @ arms?

[sepia_steel]

222. Take a look at your origianl post

and the way you have been speaking to people. I haven't seen a single post here by anyone saying that they would EVER vote for a Republican, yet you carry on about it all thru this thread. That is the generalizatin that you have made, and you know it, and you KNOW that that is why poeple aren't clamouring to give you high fives.

[LittleClarkie]

227. Um, you're getting what you're giving

Karmic boomerang, baby.

[xultar]

190. FUCKING BRILLIANT. EVERYONE READ THE ABOVE PLEASE!!!

[noiretextatique]

193. democrats created nader

nader didn't "split the liberal vote"...democrats did. the DLC still hasn't gotten that message, but i'm surprised that so many DUers haven't either. nader filled a void created by triangulation and co-optation, but he didn't create that void.

[xultar]

199. The Rethuglicans FUNDED him. Money is where the power is silly.

[noiretextatique]

211. silly...what's IDIOTIC is the fact that nader

got less votes in florida than democrats who voted for bush, and less than 2% nationally (how's that for POWER?), and some of you are STILL whining about him as "the cause" of bush, inc's coup. as a black person too, i can tell you that what is still pissing me off about the democratic party is its COWARDICE in addressing the REAL problem in florida, you know, the DISENFRANCHISEMENT. keep ignoring the big, fat pink elephant in the living room all you want, and keep focusing on the fly on its ass instead. that's a REAL winning strategy :eyes:

[xultar]

212. Now I agree with you about that. But it may have affected the stay @ home

disenfranchised.

Complex concepts...Think BIG pictue.

[noiretextatique]

216. here's a big picture for you: New Orleans

if we have to take anymore for this team...it can kiss my black ass.

[nadinbrzezinski]

274. I agree wiht yuo

as a White I wish some of our so called leaders had half of a single ball of ANY in the Black Caucus, well except Boxer, she showed her pair.

But she did this in 2004, this should have happened in 2000

[nadinbrzezinski]

209. Correct and what is more

if Nader did not exist, the coup of 2000 would have happened anyway. People need to place their blame in the correct place, the felonious five who should have never even heard the case.

[noiretextatique]

213. too many don't want to believe that

because they still believe in the system, against all reason, logic, and common sense.

[Hello_Kitty]

233. Perhaps but Nader was PART of their strategy

And he eagerly played along, happy to be a "spoiler". He stated on many occasions that he felt there was no difference between the 2 parties and that things had to get much worse before they got better. And several thousand voters in Florida agreed with him. Enough to make the vote close enough for * to steal and get away with it. Would it have turned out the same without Nader? Quite likely but why are so many here on DU playing that same game again that's only going to benefit Republicans! Yes, we need to ensure fair, clean elections. And yes some (okay a lot) of the Democrats suck. But we have a 2 party system here. And one of the parties is really, really, really BAD for this country. And we all know which one that is. So why do people want to throw votes to them? Shit, at least make them go through the effort of stealing them!

[noiretextatique]

265. "would have turned out the same way without nader? quite likely."

what else is there to talk about? really? nader might have helped them steal the election, but katherine harris, jeb bush and the supreme 5 DID help steal the election. there's a clear difference for you.

nader said: before the american people would wake up to the fact that their government is controlled by corporations, things would have to get worse. that there is little difference between corporate whore republicans and corporate whore democrats shouldn't be a big shock to even the most partisan of democrats. as far as i can see, nader was right on the money because most americans are still in a deep sleep.

there are democrats who are supporting the bush regime, like the ones who continue to vote for draconian pro-corporate legislation, e.g., the bankrupicy bill. my senator, dianne feinstein will NOT be getting my vote...i don't care if she's running against dracula...because she hasn't earned it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

276. what is the difference: Dracula or Dianne

dracula is a little more obvious as he sucks me dry

;-)

[Hello_Kitty]

284. sElection may have turned out the same

But the "Nader effect" would not have been a convenient canard available to obscure the theft in the minds of the public. Nader may have been right about the similarity in corporate whorish-ness of both parties but I'm sorry, I seriously don't think we would have had 9-11, the Iraq war, or the disastrous response to hurricane Katrina among other things had Al Gore taken his rightful place in the White House. That's the problem with the tough love philosophy, when you think that people will "wake up" when things get worse. There's no limit to how much worse things can get.

[H2O Man]

201. Is it ever acceptable

to you for democrats to vote other than straight democrat? For example, for a Green Party candidate? And should people who feel very strongly anti-war be obligated to vote for a democrat who supports the Bush policy in Iraq? Should they consider donating money to a pro-war democrat?

Those questions are being asked sincerely. Thank you for your consideration.

[H2O Man]

237. Well, I suppose

if no one else will talk to me, I can talk to myself. A few quick thoughts: {1} Isn't it odd to argue about Senator Clinton for president right now? Isn't she running for the senate, against a fairly helpless opponent? Being a NYS resident, I'm under the impression she is. {2} Why would I consider donating a penny to any candidate who is advocating a continued American intervention in Iraq? {3} Might it be better to concentrate efforts on the 2006 elections, rather than getting worked up about speculation about 2008? Taking care of business now will create better opportunities for us in future elections.

[Just Me]

253. I'll talk to you, my friend.

(1) I believe her point was about uniting to remove the present regime. (2) Don't donate to those advocating continued American intervention BUT continue to oppose the regime that marketed and bought that war. (3) Concentrating our efforts, on the here and now, and each and every day to rid ourselves of the present power-mongers in charge should be our priority.

:hug:

[H2O Man]

273. Okay ....

Now, in the movie Thunderheart, there is a character played by John T., who is being hunted by the FBI. He is in an old Water Man's trailor, talking to the central figure in the movie. And he talks about the difference between {1} the reality of power; and {2} the illusion of power.

For sake of clarity, we are all opposed to Bush, in all his manifest forms, being re-elected in 2008. The question is what type of government do we want, and are we willing to work for. Would electing Senator Clinton be real power? An illusion of power for some? Is there any reason to accept on face value that it is more important to remove the really bad guys first, then the kind of bad guys? Based on what? And what are the lessons of Mao approaching the village of 100 citizens?

[Just Me]

283. Hillary Clinton.

I thought we weren't going to go there,...BUT, okay.

Hillary Clinton: what she does to remain "inside" in order to make a difference versus what she would do should she be the first female POTUS are COMPLETELY different matters. She is pro-American, pro-equality, pro-democracy.

Moreover, add the possibility of a Democratic House OR Senate to the service of the first female POTUS who has the realm of experience of Hillary Clinton,...and, frankly, I can imagine a more positive, impactful power upon humanity.

Hillary Clinton simply fails to fall within the scope of "bad guys". She has optimized her position as a woman, and succeeded to advance pro-humanitarian goals (especially with respect to children's interests) in spite of nearly insurmountable odds. Remove those "odds" and severely limiting opposition, and I believe she would be the most progressive President EVER TO SERVE THE U.S.A.

That's just my opinion.

[Mr_Spock]

257. I'm not sure how solid Dem support for the war is.

I think that they are being pragmatic because they cannot possibly force this cabal to change course in Iraq anyway and there are logical arguments that can be made for the "finish the job" argument (that I am very leary of). Should we seize power as a party and then end this thing? I'm not sure there is an answer that is both politically savvy and the absolute right thing to do - as much as I support Cindy and the anti-war movement. Do my arguments make any sense to you? I'm not going to comment on Hillary except to say I don't completely see the need to pillory Hillary! :rofl:

[H2O Man]

279. I don't think

that it is possible to "seize power" and then end the war. My understanding of power is that which comes from the Latin root of the word, which is "posse" -- meaning possessing the ability. In a country where about 65 to 70% of the people oppose the war, one seizes power by leading that opposition. I respect that others can think very differently, and be as sincere in their thinking as I am in mine.

I like Senator Clinton. I've met her twice, not that that means anything. But I am no longer going to donate a penny to candidates who do not oppose the war in terms that I find worth supporting. And Senator Clinton doesn't meet the requirements.

[Mr_Spock]

285. Part of me thinks we already do have the "posse" needed to stop the war...

I am in a bit of a quandary here as to when the Democrats should make their move. I would say relatively soon - as in within 6 months. It need to be done in a very precise way so that we don't lose the momentum that we have just by letting * be himself. Don't you think that this is a high-risk game of poker we are playing here? Would it be worth it to stop the war and lose seats in '06? When is the best time to make our move(s) (ie stop the war, really tear Bush down, demand more control in Congress due to Republican corruption) - are the cartoons of the Dems standing around while the elephant trips telling, or do the Dems know something we don't?

[H2O Man]

292. "Would it be worth it to

stop the war and lose seats in '06?" While I do not think that is possible, for the sake of discussion, let's agree that it is. If it is, then it begs the obvious question: Is it worth it to prolong the war, knowing that it will result in the deaths of many more human beings, in order to (possibly) increase the number of democrats elected to office?

I do not think it can be seen as poker. It is a war that kills human beings, and puts our national security at an increased risk. There came a point in the course of the Vietnam War when democrats recognized that LBJ had lost contact with reality. Of course, that means he lost something Bush never had. But the questions about Iraq today are exactly the same as those asked about Vietnam back then. I can only say for myself, but I'm happy that people like Eugene McCarthy and RFK told the truth. HHH thought he'd seize power, then end the war. He fooled himself.

[MoonRiver]

202. I'm sickened by people who think they can dictate, or guilt trip,

what I think and do. I will probably vote for whomever the DNC arranges to nominate. My enthusiasm and level of work/commitment will be highly dependent on how closely that person reflects my most cherished principles. Get used to it.

[xultar]

210. Awww silly it is just a discussion board. You're cute.

[sepia_steel]

231. Hey, you were the one

Throwing out accusation and telling people to turn in their shit.

[LittleClarkie]

280. Indeed, to spew and not expect spewage in return

doesn't quite make sense.

[mzmolly]

206. ABR and proud.

Anyone who doesn't know there's a real big difference after the last 4 years should not only turn in their DU ID, but their voter registration card.

;)

[xultar]

214. FUCKING BRILLIANT. EVERYONE READ THE ABOVE PLEASE!!!

[mzmolly]

289. You are far too kind.

:hi:

[madeline_con]

220. I won't vote for her, nor will I turn in shit! n/t

[xultar]

229. Well that's good. We wouldn't want you "...turn in shit!" That could get

dangerous.

[sepia_steel]

232. What a waste of time

You make forceful, disgusting claims and then you snark at people instead of giving them an actual reply.

[xultar]

256. I do stand up comedy...sue me

[sepia_steel]

261. There's no excuse

for trying to start an 'intelligent' conversation and then talking down to people. Not even stand-up comedy. And you're not being funny.

[xultar]

286. .

:rofl:

[xultar]

258. OK so if she is the nominee and you don't vote for her you don't have

to turn in shit..

Feel better?

[CrazyForKucinich]

242. Far too often lately Democrats are just Republicans in Democrats clothing

Get over the name titles and actually look at what they stand for.

Party politics is a joke.

[xultar]

250. OMFG... welp i can't disagree but lets then just get rid of the real thugs

first

Then lets get rid of the fake thugs.

If we spend time getting rid of the fake thugs the real thugs are gonna be so entrenched then we'll never get over.

[noiretextatique]

255. bush's approval ratings are at an all-time low

delay just got indicted, and there is a lot of dissension within the republican party. even some republicans are tiring of bush, so let's hope the DLC doesn't manage to bungle another election with its idiotic strategy of dismissing the base, and alienating liberal voters.

[Circle Six]

245. Totally Agree

I agree to the fullest. Hillary is our best bet to get our views forward, and again, anyone is better than what the GOP can throw out.

Hillary may just have the balls that other Democrats may not have to tackle whatever the Repubs throw out.

[xultar]

254. And it isn't just about Hillary. ANY Dem candidate after they are on

the ticket require our support. If we don't support them we are handing the shit over to the thugs.

We gotta get the house and senate to investigate this adminstration.

[emulatorloo]

259. part one: throw the rethugs out. part two: then we can get all picky

Seems like a simple plan. . .

:kick: :dem: :kick:

[TechBear_Seattle]

260. Give me a Dem who DESERVES my vote, and it will be theirs

Don't just assume that my vote belongs to Dems just because they are slightly less evil on the average than the Repugs. A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.

[emulatorloo]

266. I don't see any dem nominating Roberts or Harriet what'her'name

or putting a Brownie in charge of FEMA.

Besides - OP is talking about getting a majority in house and senate so we can actually investigate the crimes of GWB. . .

[TechBear_Seattle]

I see elected Dems who assert with their actions that I am less than human

And less than an American.

I am an atheist. I CAN NOT AND WILL NOT support a candidate for public office who refuses to challenge the nitwits claiming that I have no place in American society, much less a candidate with a voting record and list of public statements asserting that the Ten Commandments belong in every courthouse and that "under God" should remain in the Pledge.

I am Gay. I CAN NOT AND WILL NOT support a candidate for public office who refuses to challenge the bigots calling me a threat to American society and the American family, much less a candidate with a voting record and list of public statements in support of the "Defense" of Marriage Act and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and against one of my basic civil rights as a human being.

I ask only for a candidate that actively supports my personhood, my full citizenship and my right to serve my country openly and honorably. There have been very few such Democrats running in the last dozen years or so. Don't you DARE expect me to settle for anything less.

[sendero]

267. There is a 99% chance that I will vote..

... a straight ticket Dem ballot.

However, I have an opinion and I feel it is as worthy as most of the opinions around here.

And that opinion is this: until we nominate someone we need to have a debate. The debate is necessary to help us all select a person who 1) has a reasonable chance of being elected and 2) will govern in a way that is at least acceptable to most of us.

I have my opinions as to who that might be, and you have yours. I resent, really resent, people trying to characterize my opinion as to who would make a good candidate and president as some kind of "disunity". FUCK THAT STUPID-ASS SPIN.

I want to WIN IN 2008 and I have as good an idea as most people what it takes to win. So, I will continue to boost those folks who I think could win the presidency and make a good president, and I will dis those who I feel otherwise about. And my dissent in this matter is every bit as "patriotic" to the Democratic party as an anti-war protester is to America.

[xultar]

291. Disunity prior to. I don't give a shit. After the ticket is established

are you voting DEM, Green or Rethug or staying home.

Keep in mind not voting, voting green, and voting rethug is basically the same.

[sendero]

296. I said..

... 99% chance of straight Dem. I leave the 1% because never say never, nothing in life is certain. If I say 100%, I have to do it even if Count Dracula is our candidate :)

[xultar]

305. Dracula vs Bush. Easy Count Drac

[Cats Against Frist]

271. Sadly, I have to agree

As a libertarian, it almost makes me want to wretch to vote for the Corporate pigs. However, my other concerns lead me to "pull the lever" for the Dems, every time. To me, the idea of the alternative being much worse is too much to take. Sure, there's something to be said for not playing "harm reduction" and letting the GOP drive the whole country off the cliff -- and I think about it, sometimes, and casting my vote for some other party -- but I haven't, yet.

[pitohui]

272. agree w. yr rant 1000 percent

plenty of ppl shit on john breaux, i don't notice them taking the time to shit on his GOP replacement, the god-awful david vitter tho

it is discouraging

[Lydia Leftcoast]

278. Oh come on, xultar

In my experience, Greens and Socialists really joined in with the mainstream Dems to try to defeat the Bushboy. They were out there door-knocking and writing articles in their publications saying that they had to swallow their ideological reservations and vote for Kerry just to get rid of the Great Pretender.

But I want Dems to act like Dems, not be ashamed of being Dems, and to put their actions where their mouths are.

I'm tired of Dems who kiss Republican ass, and I reserve the right to say so. This isn't North Korea. We are allowed to criticize people on our own side for not living up to their own professed ideals.

[xultar]

290. OK...so you're saying that you won't vote for a Dem on any ticket if

you think they kiss republican ass.

That is we have a dem and a rethug in a race. You think the Dem kisses rethug ass.

you'll stay home or vote for the rethgug...either of which helps the rethug.

I just wanna clarify

[Lydia Leftcoast]

297. No, I never said that

I'll vote for my Dem Congressman, who's fine, and for whoever the Dems nominate for Senate (because Minnesota Republicans are just plain looney), and DURING THE CAUCUSES I will vote for the most left candidate, as I did last time.

I firmly believe that the caucuses are the rank-and-file's only chance to express their true opinion, and in the caucus, I urged my neighbors to ignore the admonishment of a local establishment type that a vote for anyone other than Kerry was "wasted."

I WILL vote for the Dem candidate in the general election, but with a greater or lesser degree of enthusiasm.

And I'm not as sanguine as you are about sunlight breaking through the clouds if the Dems. If we simply elect a bunch of DINOs, we'll just have a "kinder, gentler corporatism" that will involve driving the country off a cliff at 30mph instead of at the current 60mph.

In the meantime, I want the Dems to prove that they're really Dems. I don't buy this nonsense about them going along with Republican initiatives just because they're in the minority and can't do anything anyway.

How is the public supposed to come to view the Dems favorably if they don't speak up and state their views and damn the consequences?

WE know that the Dems and Republicans are different. How is the public supposed to know if their only knowledge is the right wing talk shows and the DINOs who appear on the talk shows?

[depakid]

294. How else you're going to hold DINO's accountable

for their repeated effirts to undermine the party and all that it once stood for?

They're the main reason that the country has come to the place it is- NOT the Republicans. Had the Dems remained true to their traditional principles, the Republicans would still be the minority party. As it is, the Dems have become irrelevant- and even seasoned policy wonks don't know what they stand for anymore, I sure don't.

I've seen too many Dems (including their so called "leader," Harry Reid) vote for legislation and promote policies that are inimical to what they once stood for (the bankruptcy bill being a prime example- the enery bill being another).

Fact is, I will NEVER vote for my congressman, David Wu again. I'll vote Republican before I vote for him. Why? Because it's not in the long term interest of the party to have weasles and sell outs in office who vote for things like the Medicare scam (he was pretty much a deciding vote on that one) or the bankruptcy bill.

More than that- I'm going to urge everyone I know to vote against him as well. It would be nice if the Dems got it together and found themselves a primary challenger in the race- and the same holds true in other races around the country (the Connecticut Senate race being one of them).

Bottom line is that until the Dems put their own house in order, until they start standing up for traditional Democratic values gaain and (God forbid) show a little political courage and fortitude- they're going to remain irrelevant- and they're going to keep losing elections- just like they have for the past 11 years.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

300. I agree with you about David Wu

I knew him slightly before he ran for Congress, and I was happy to vote for him when I lived in Portland, but he's been a major disappointment. I think the suburban high tech and Nike types have gotten to him.

[TechBear_Seattle]

301. Very well stated n/t

[Mandate My Ass]

295. I'm sickened by politicians, sucking down my tax dollars, who think just

because they have a "D" after their name they deserve my unquestioning vote, the one infinitesimal piece of power which I can only wield every four years or so. And this browbeating and condescending lecturing from Dem politicians and fellows Democrats to fall into line is getting pretty effing tedious too.

You want my vote? Earn it.

[roguevalley]

299. I didn't much care for Kerry but I voted for him. I have been a dem

for 52 years and I wasn't aware that we have to take a what? Like-the- candidate-test before we can be considered a good dem? People have opinions and this is a meeting ground for opinions, both for and against. That is called the free exchange of ideas. I don't like Hillary since she became a senator because she is playing IN MY OPINION out of both sides of her mouth.

No one I have read says they won't vote but they have the right to bitch and complain about the party now and the candidates. Who said that Hillary is the presumptive front runner? I hate that shit.

I have already and will again if that is the way things go, vote for someone I can't stand because they are dems and I will never and never have ever voted for a repug. Ever. AND, I have never missed a vote since I got the vote when I was eighteen. We were the first group to be allowed to vote at eighteen and I never miss. Ever.

I don't understand why free exercise of opinion pisses some people off.

[smartvoter]

302. Don't start making sense here. It's all or nothing with each of us with

our own personal "all" to boot.

[mhr]

303. Hillary Supported Bush And The War Will Not Get My Vote

eom

[Autonomy]

304. I've come to the perspective that

it's not the dissent here on DU that's a problem; it's the Rovian mischaracterizations that are troubling. Rule of thumb: when someone mentions "the DLC" on DU, they're usually creating a straw man to burn the whole Democratic Party.

Watch the slippery ones who juxtapose the party and the DLC in the same manner Bushco did with Bin Laden and Saddam. They're up to no good.

[trackfan]

307. A-fucking-MEN!

You understand politics and the way it works. If we have purges for the sake of purity, we'll never get anywhere.

[Darranar]

308. What does winning matter if nothing is won? n/t

[Autonomy]

309. Who was the last person to go from the Senate directly to the White House?

I believe it was Kennedy. Since then we've had presidents come from:

VP: Johnson, Nixon (with a break), Ford, Bush I
Governors: Carter, Reagan (with a break), Clinton, Bush II

No Congresspersons.

The reason? Laws and sausage. Neither are pretty to watch being made. The compromise necessary in being a Senator will always alienate EVERYONE at some point. Anyone with a hint of ideological purism will find something on which to reject a sitting Congressperson. Governors are not on a national stage and get to be the bosses in their little demesnes, so their hands are usually a littler cleaner than those who legislate by committee.

It's just too easy to reject a candidate because one doesn't like so-and-so for his or her vote on such-and-such. It's also too simplisitic to buy into a saint-and-savior cult of a candidate who has no record on anything, like Clark (not that I dislike him).

[radio4progressives]

311. I thought the DU site was to strategize in taking back our country...

and to strategize for honest, representative democracy as well as advancing the cause of real civil rights and equal justice.

I thought the DU site was to engage in intelligent, thoughtful discussion on how best to move forward from out of the heap of corruption, fascism, false platitudes, false dichotemies, and straw men rhetoric propping up the status quo.

It never occurred to me that the DU site was strictly about blind loyalty to "THE PARTY" line.

If that's the main or sole purpose and mission of this site - then it will be no better than the freeptard site.

This shouldn't be about building a culture of Clinton sycophants - they are just as much a part of the problem we are faced with in 2005 as the monsters that are occupying the wh now.

They set the table for the Repukes to waltz on in and do all the evil dasdardly crap they've been doing for the past five years, but for some reason you don't want to know about it - you don't want to LEARN THE HISTORY - that laid the foundation for the Rise of the Fourth REICH.

The Clintons' are as much a part of it as the Bushies are. And by the way, haven't you noticed that Hillary still refuses to call for end to this evil war we're engaged in?

Kerry hasn't called for the end of this war either.

This is no small matter.

[Moderator]

312. Locked.

Let's put this one to bed for now. Thanks.