"DU Oldies" those who've been around the bend here since beginning and

[KoKo]

just after. What are you thinking these days about all of this? I'm seeing the culmination of all our suspicions when we came here believing that Gore/2000 was some horrible misappropriation of power of our Government and that we thought: "yeah...Clinton did have some problems..but it was a "Witch Hunt" against the man by RW people funded my some guy named "Mellon-Scaife."

I, personally thought that was it. If we had a chance to start early we could make sure that "Selection 2000" would never happen again because we would never allow another Democratic Candidate to be trashed and abused by the RW Media and we would shove "Mellon-Scaife's" face in the s**t he piled on American Taxpayers and Clinton/Gore with his BOGUS "STARR Chamber Investigation."

Now...I feel that I had "NO" Idea how influencial the Print and Television Media had become and how deep the tentacles of the RW Fundies flowed through the power centers of the US and through PNAC/BFEE..the whole world.

What are your thoughts (if any of you are here) about what's going on with this current Election Cycle. I'm desperate for some perspective..because my feelings are that "we've been here before," and although we thought we could "slay the dragon" it's tougher than we knew. :shrug:

[jpgray]

1. We're too bitterly divided at this point

Hopefully whoever the nominee is, we can at least call in some vociferous complaints while we post our "I told you so." :D

[kentuck]

2. The media is part of the "dragon"...

moreso than we imagined before, I think. We have been hesitant to criticize the media, as a Party. I think we need to do that. As I've stated before, I think it is the nature of the beast (the media) to become defensive and to navel gaze when they are criticized or attacked. The right-wing did that in the '80's and '90's and have been very successful. They have gotten the media in their corner, by and large. The media pretends that is the "natural" place for them to be, defending the status quo from the interests of the people, on things such as healthcare, jobs, etc... We need to start criticizing them from our Party levels. I think that would be a start.

I think the media, along with the Repubs, are trying to influence who the Democrats pick as our nominee and they are using the "electability" issue as the main conduit to sway the minds of Democratic voters.

[KoKo]

4. Yes...."Electability" that seems to be the key word. Maybe we "over-

reacted."

[Jacobin]

3. The media now is sadly completely controlled by the neo-cons

There are degrees among the alphabet networks, but the cumulative effect is a constant barrage of "republican good" "democrat bad"...its non stop and it infiltrates the minds of all americans who are not constantly vigilant to look behind the propaganda. Too few have the time, inclination or desire to look behind the curtains to see who is controlling their lives and this country.

Kerry will be a slap down for George Bush*, and the script of the media is pushing the whole charade that way.

This is going to be a 46 state landslide. I wish more than I can say that this won't happen. Wishing for a different outcome and being realistic are two different things.

Several in my family are already making plans to leave this country. Two have already done so. They are afraid that if we wait, it will be too late.

I mourn for my country. I think its lost

[jpgray]

5. Come on, national polls make it 49%-46% with a Kerry win

If what you say above is true, any candidate we pick will lose.

[JitterbugPerfume]

6. I have been here a long long time

Many good people come and go . DU will survive the divisions .We are living in stressful times

[KoKo]

7. Yes, Jitterbug, but did you think it would all work out like this?

I think a "spirit" will survive in those of us who came here early and DU has "morphed."

My post was really about...did we think it would get this bad? I thought we could change it in three years.....I didn't know it would be this bad, at the time. I've learned a lot from good folks here as we've shared all the ups and downs and more downs than ups.

But, it appears much worse than I thought as this goes back beyond Clinton, it seems. :hi: You were here when I started "lurking." There were maybe 20 folks here. Posts used to stay up for almost a week. Unbelievable isn't it...the growth.

[JitterbugPerfume]

8. No

I never really thought in my heart that it would get this bad The media is beyond redemption (I sometimes think) I remember the Nixon years, but I swear I do not remember feeling this desolate ,even then

[JCMach1]

12. Scary even

I experienced 2002 as a candidate and personally got to be on the receiving end of the vast right-wing conspiracy.

It does exist. And yes, some Democrats work for repugs.

[Desertrose]

32. for us oldies who remember...yeah...this place has changed

in so many ways...

but the fighting has merely shifted focus ...its kind of sad...at the beginning I felt I'd found so many kindred souls here ...and that together we could accomplish so much...and now...well, there is much less "together" and DU doesn't feel like the safe and progressive liberal hangout it once was.....

Too bad...I think this is the dems biggest fault...we can't agree long enough to focus & fight the things we need to fight.....(which is not each other!)

But I have made some dear dear friends here over the years

:loveya: :grouphug: :loveya:

DR

[Old and In the Way]

10. Fear not Jacobin!

Plenty of time to rally around Ralph! :-)

[Jacobin]

31. How did Ralph get in the thread?

So, in order to get a candidate who does not support preemptive invasions to steal oil, we have to go green?

That's why this all appears hopeless to me. No mainstream candidate will get nominated who won't be the leader of a rogue nation

[kodi]

9. what i think? that gore was correct to step aside. this new gang is good

also, the messages of the democrats are getting out there.

its in large part due to the internet and its denizen's rapid response to media whoredom. i think the press is being pressed to become more objective.

the bete noir of the democrats and liberals in general are the millionaire/billionaire/industry supported "think tanks" and "policy centers" that have produced the Right's game plan and rhetorical necessities to engage effectively against democrats.

there is a rising understanding on the Left that they must do likewise against their ideological foes. gone is the day left-liberal ideas can win out by simply stating the facts, because the Right has so effectively controlled the imagery and language of the social debates.

i am hopeful that the Left and democrats in general are moving with their own game plan and rhetoric to engage the Right on a more equal footing.

the affect of the democratic primaries has been to force the candidates to practice their message, its rhetoric and its delivery. regardless of who wins the nomination, there will be gold mines of useful and well tested rhetorical devices to employ against bush and the GOP.

i want the democratic party candidate to win. i think it can be done by a combination of presenting a vision of America, and an appeal to the traditional American value of fair play for everyone.

while i think all of the candidates have used such rhetoric in general, also, i think that john edwards has hit on the right rhetoric and style to garner more votes come november 2004 than any other democrat running.

this country is about to be condemned to a bleak future if bush is re-elected and garners a filibuster-proof senate, so i am hoping the guy who i think will get the most votes come november is the democratic nominee.

ABB for me.

[CivilRightsNow]

41. Thank God someone gets it.

the bete noir of the democrats and liberals in general are the millionaire/billionaire/industry supported "think tanks" and "policy centers" that have produced the Right's game plan and rhetorical necessities to engage effectively against democrats.


while i think all of the candidates have used such rhetoric in general, also, i think that john edwards has hit on the right rhetoric and style to garner more votes come november 2004 than any other democrat running.

I was undecided till I realized that very simple principle. I honestly feel that Clark is a jump into the abyss. The party will shift so far to the right that we lose even if we win. The principles that this party must embrace are a clear message, a message of hope.. a message of equality.. of the american dream. Not military industrial power and good tactical knoweledge and oxford degrees.. sitting on corporate boards, not to mention the right wing think tanks..

Kerry is a close second for me. He doesnt bring the charisma that this nation needs tho.. but he is hokey and he appeals to the older responsible generation. He also did some amazingly honorable things like, protest the war after serving and helped bring down October Sunrise and the Iran Contra fiasco. He has done alot behind the scenes for this country.. even being married into the wealth that he has. I figure that young soldier protesting the vietnam war is still in there somewhere, and that gives me hope.

Dean...well, I dont think he would lead this party to a better place, but he could possibly delay the inevitable, depending upon the people he puts in place around him. I have no huge problems with Dean, but he seems simply average. Much smarter then Bush, of course.


In anycase, this is a pivotal election.

Ive been a lurker for awhile now, I tend to stay active in real life more then on the boards.. but, I am amazed at what is happening. It scares the hell out of me.

[AP]

11. My feeling is RW media was convincing everyone to vote for Dean because

they knew he'd never make it through the GE, and if he did, at least he was a guy who wanted to be liked byt the Cato Inst and he didn't seem interested in using the tax code to make the middle class better off, and he was willing to shift money to Enron too.

I feel like the Democratic Party is on the verge of dodging a big bullet with this Dean thing. I, personally, will consider it a triumph over the right wing media if he drops out before the end.

I know that there are good DU'ers who believe the opposite.

[drfemoe]

14. "I know that there are good DU'ers who believe the opposite."

ty . Absolutely.

[Piperay]

13. Much much worse than

I ever thought. I thought that the RW rethugs were at the beginning of their master plan but from what I see, they are really almost at the successful end of it. :cry:

[trumad]

15. LOL...Here's my thread from yesterday

It didn't catch on but it's how I feel going into election 2004..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=186880&mesg_id=186880

Were in far better shape because of the Internet.

[Rebellious Republican]

17. First, its good to see some of the old names still around!

I have to concur that the control of the media is stronger than I originally thought, I also have to agree with trumad! The Iowa caucus proved that the media does not totally control our minds. It showed that people are not listening to the hype. If they had been listening to the hype I think we can all agree that the outcome would have been different. I also believe that more and more people are turning to the internet for thier sources of information. Most americans are realizing that television has become nothing more than a coporate marketing tool, blasting us with one continously long commercial 24/7. It is for these reasons that I still hold out hope for our future. So keep the faith and keep fighting the good fight. As I always say "Power thru the People" or is that "Power thru the Peep Hole". In either case, it still works!

:kick:

[waldenx]

16. I have transcended apathy

And have come to realize the media probably saved Dean's life by destroying him politically. Now it is just a game.
Kerry v Bush means no change, no hope, no peace.

[Lexingtonian]

18. Hmmm

I'm not sure I qualify entirely for this one. Got here in the early summer of 2001 after seeing the DU URL on a banner in a newspaper photo of some political rally.

Hearing enough out of Henry Hyde and the like during 1998/99 convinced me that Scaife was not even an important figure overall. It was all about elderly white men wanting to feel dominant and he was only the one of that ilk who most openly wanted to be a gang leader. And with a press corps and media whose major figures and editors are all middle aged or elderly white men from Middle America, whose news audience is also relatively elderly and white, the Right has not had a difficult time appealing to their personal RW bias and getting it out on the airwaves and into the newspapers.

This election cycle....our Party is working through all its problems/pathologies of the past three decades, during which liberals had some power but kept getting squelched by reactionary majorities. It's been a phase of politics as therapy, necessary in its own right and yet dangerous as the deadlines approach.

First we had Joe Biden, a Democrat well suited for the Nixon era, give up during exploratory phases last July. Bob Graham, a Democrat reminiscent of the Carter good government effort days, gave up in early October. Carol Moseley-Braun and Dick Gephardt bailed out this month, running on themes that seem to me nationally poignant around 1980-84. Dennis Kucinich's and Al Sharpton's political heydays were in mid/late 80s. Joe Lieberman's politics seem centered, as Al Gore's has seemed to me, on the zeitgeist of perhaps 1986-90.

At the moment the Big Four are making their cases as the most relevant in interesting fashions. Clark works best as he can off Clinton's 1992 post-Arkansas and 1996 national campaigns. Edwards works strongly off his own 1998 North Carolina campaign.

Dean has fused several things: as the 'positive' message he reworked his late '90s Vermont campaigns, the 'negative' message is very evidently taken from lessons in Gore's 2000 run and Bill Bradley's challenge to it, and the voter empowerment imputation part from Bush's 2000 (and 2002) campaigning. (Iowa has taught him to seemingly ditch most of the latter two parts.)

Kerry has taken a bunch of different pieces from his campaigns in '84, '90, and '96. His problem as nominal frontrunner in early 2003 was that his 2002 reelection was essentially unopposed and so didn't require much that could be called a campaign at all. There has also been a good look at Gore's 2000 campaign, evidently- the immediate media counterstrike tactics tell of it. And there is also a tacit element of Ted Kennedy's 1980 run, the old liberal confidence, in the mix. It's not pretty watching him work out the emotional and psychological terrain of 2003 and 2004, but if it's a painful experience it seems to be definite learning.

But the terrain is that "liberal" isn't as badly connotated a political term as it used to be. There is a social liberal majority in the country now. And a candidate with strong ties to the actual liberal power establishment- outside the Party, the social elites of the Northeast and parts of the West Coast- inspires confidence in proving himself as leader once in office to older voters. I think the Dean 'insurgency' ultimately strikes people as too weak a power structure to bet on during the low level warfare engaged upon in the Arab world and anarchic reactionary viciousness domestically.

[KoKo]

25. I'm still disappointed we couldn't have gotten "The Selection" overturned.

I always thought someone would find boxes of votes for Gore hidden in Florida, or that someone would be a "whistle blower" and verify that votes were stolen and miscounted. Maybe that the Repugs had tampered with the Military Absentee Ballots would be discovered. I've never gotten over the feeling that something more would "turn up" about Florida and that stolen election.

And, the anger I have over that never seems to go away. Maybe because what went on there was the first signal of the Corruption in America in our whole political system both Repugs and Democrats who were complicit with the media. Then the total influence of the media by the Repugs/Corporatists and then the Corporate Crime.

The 2000 Selection opened the door to all the horrors that had been hidden. I wish we could have accomplished more to expose what went on.

Maybe Move On. org's efforts, Take Back the Media and the Dean Grassroots campaign for small donations will prove to be a turning point for the Democratic Party to stand up and be proud once again.

I have to think that DU has spawned some good folks who will have a big voice in the New Media and in Dem Politics in the future.

But, right now..it can be discouraging sometimes. Worrying that we could have a repeat of 2000 with another stolen election, or that if one of our candidates does manage to get elected that nothing will be done about the Bush Rot which has taken over the country.

[soleft]

19. I saw Dennis Miller this am on Today Show, his show is going to be

a nonstop platform for Bush's re-election campaign.

[hatrack]

37. If anyone watches his show, it might matter

They won't, and it doesn't.

[cryofan]

20. Great Thread! THere are some excellent responses here.....n/t

[Iverson]

21. a thought or two

I think that DU-ers are ahead of the general population for critical inquiry. However, I am not optimistic.

This election cycle there is, finally, a gradual subsiding of Nader-bashing and a slow, painful shift of focus to the present and future.

There is insufficient attention to the probability of electoral fraud (again), although we seem to applaud Bev Harris' hard work without exception.

The famous Democratic (as well as left) circular firing squad has been working overtime, another lesson unlearned. Weirdly, it is most virulent between different centrist camps. However, the split between progressives and centrists also shows no sign of healing, with a net gain of about three people willing to engage that topic civilly.

DU seems to be joining the mainstream in defining the left into irrelevance. The compelling mantra of "ABB" seems to accompany a dismissal of any ideas whatsoever as constituting "purism," "naivete," and the other tired canards. Of course there are plenty of vocal progressives here, but the group character is changing.

In sum, we are better informed but tragically unfocused and ready to accomodate the very things we say we oppose.

[DemBones DemBones]

26. I agree that DU, as it is now, is defining the left into irrelevance,

yet the newer posters (and that includes a lot of people who've been here a year or two) are ferocious in their support for gay marriage and unrestricted abortion, with occasional support shown for PETA, or opposition to anyone who wears fur. And of course anti-war is THE hot-button issue, but people who'll support Dean, who supports continued occupation (i.e., war) won't support Kucinich because he "betrayed his principles" by forming a highly limited political alliance with Edwards, who (shame!) voted for IWR.

It seems that many DUers are now leftist only on the popular social issues (as mentioned above ), with less interest in economic issues or the social issues that don't affect them personally, like the problems of the elderly or rights for the disabled or rights for Native Americans. Or maybe the other issues are more fun to debate, or nobody realizes that the right wing doesn't care about the elderly, the disabled, or Native Americans one bit more than they care about gays, women, animal welfare, those who serve in the military, Iraqis, or anyone but themselves.

As far as changing the government, regaining our country, I'm not optimistic, either. I worry that too many people haven't noticed what's happening, being like the proverbial frog in water with the water temperature being raised so gradually the frog doesn't perceive change until it's too late, he's cooked.

And as far as DU goes, you said it well:

"In sum, we are better informed but tragically unfocused and ready to accomodate the very things we say we oppose."

[Armstead]

22. Mixed feelings..It's like a Roller Coaster

I sort of feel like these things are like riding a roller coaster. Ups and downs. Despair and hope.

I don't think the media has a political agenda. But I think they are so smug and insulated and arrogent and greedy that they are killing true political discourse by focusing on shallow "horse race" coverage.

They are aided and abetted by the twerps who are in charge of the Democratic Party.

The fact that the pundits and political power brokers are succeeding in putting a "safe" centrist candidate into the nomination is disheartening.

The Dean thing is a classic example of that, regardless of whether one supports him or not. He is basically a reasonable guy with moderate opinions, but who was also willing to talk about the bigger problems we face.

But the media (helped by his political opponents) turned his image into some irrational, insane ranting monster. Most of his "gaffes" were absolutely reasonable statements -- including television show from six years ago that someone dredged up, and used it to show as an example of a Dean "mistake."

The whole deal about the shouting speech was revolting, disgusting and made me want to throw up.

I also find it disgusting that they have made it seem that dennis Kucinich is not even running.

BUT on a more positive side, I think the people are reasserting themselves. The Internet and places like DU and the alternative left websites is helping get other views into the mix, and bringing people together.

DLC Jackasses will probably succeed in putting one of their annointed into the General Election. But they got a bigger fight than they expected. And The Centrists have been forced to listen to the grassroots, and address Big Issues they would have prefered to ignore.

So I guess in the short term I am disheartened. But I think in the longer term, positive things are happening.

[Iverson]

27. example?

"And The Centrists have been forced to listen to the grassroots, and address Big Issues they would have prefered to ignore."

I'd like to know what's on your mind with the claim above.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

23. I think fear is being transformed into blind anger

There are two kinds of anger: the kind of unconstructive rage that makes you punch holes in walls and the cold, quiet anger that makes you plot to make sure that your opponent doesn't take advantage of you again.

I'm seeing a lot of the "unconstructive rage" types on this forum. In the first year, it was the endless Green-Dem mutual bashing threads. Last summer it was the endless Dean-Clark mutual bashing threads, and now it's the endless Dean-Kerry mutual bashing threads.

There are no saints in this race. Every single candidate has a history and can be criticized on some point or other, and in the end, for a lot of voters, it comes down to vague personal impressions.

I support Kucinich for his positions on the issues and for his ability to stir a crowd (something I would not have believed if I hadn't seen him in person).

When it comes to my second choice, I find the remainder of the field more similar than different, compared to Kucinich. Yes, folks, if you look at Dean, Kerry, Clark, and Edwards, you will find that they agree on an awful lot. But I've noticed throughout my life and in various areas that the people who are similar fight over little quibbly points more than the people who are different fight over major issues.

Somebody would probably have to physically push me into the booth to vote for Lieberman and I have an involuntary but strong uneasy feeling about Dean, but if one of the unKucinichs wins the nomination, I will be disappointed, but I won't waste a lot of energy tearing him down.

[Armstead]

24. Unconstructive rage

Lydia,
You make a good point, but I think part of the problem with the situation is that it's paradoxically both so big yet so simple that sometimes rage is the only response.

I know you have that feeling about Dean, which is fine. However, I hope you will at least agree that he is not some ultra-liberal dragon, but rather a moderate who does not deserve the image the media and political pros have slapped on him.

The fact that he really is basically an ordinary politician with a somewhat more populist message makes the exagerations even more frustrating.

Kucinich is the one who most represents my own views too. I actually think his basic message is fairly mainstream too, and I find it depressing that he has been dismissed by the media as a flaky non-entity.

What's so frustratingly simple about this straightjacket is that the solution is not rocket science. If the media would just be a little more responsible and thoughtful in their coverage, if the Democrat Establishment would realize that peopel like Dean and Kucinich are not some exotic species then the whole process would be a lot bettr.

That's what occasionally puts me into a blind rage.

[Cleita]

28. Yeah, we weren't on the ball about the media trashing

but we sure are now and I hope we keep up the pressure on the media whores as well as try to get the truth out on alternative news sources like DU.

[Walt Starr]

29. To be perfectly honest

I believe a Washington insider will probably be nominated and we will suffer a crushing defeat in November.

Maybe I'm just a pessimist, but that's how the past three years have gone, ya know?

[Desertrose]

30. just posted a similar rant on another thread about this

I agree too that the tentacles go much deeper than I thought...man I hoped it wasn't true...but :shrug:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=185252&mesg_id=196153&page=

It won't be easy but I do believe enough people are wakingup to this and once that happens, they can no longer influence us and if we unite all these awakened folks...we can make a difference...

if I'm wrong, Beam me up Scotty.....

Peace
DR

[West Coast Democrat]

33. DUers take the media more seriously than the average voter

.... and for better or worse, we follow the "media whores" a lot more than the average American voter. We take everything more seriously than the average American voter...for example, it has taken DUers a lot longer to "move on" (if that is possible) after the 2000 Selection. In the same vein, I don't think the general electorate will be as bitter as DUers at their candiate(s) losing.

I believe Democrats will rally around the nominee, and make him stronger.

[KoKo]

34. I was too trusting of Government "Checks and Balances" and Supreme

Court, the print Media (I'd already figured out the Cable Media were whores but trusted the Print folks). I also thought our Democratic Party would Fight like hell after Florida.

I had no idea that the country was in love with the Limbaugh's/Falwell's they way it was. I thought "reasonable/thinking Americans would tune it out. How wrong I was.

[JCMach1]

35. This thread is almost a rollcall of LIFERS

:)

[KoKo]

44. ROFL, See my Post #43 where I try to name all the names and what they

have contributed. It's a short list, and not all are originals but some are close enough. You're there. :-)'s

[sangh0]

36. The current election cycle

shows just how much power the moneyed interests have accumulated, and how far they will got o protect their own interests.

[David Zephyr]

38. Nothing Really Has Changed, KoKo.

I posted the quotation given below from Jack London's "The Iron Heel" this weekend in another thread here at the DU regarding, as you say, "how influential the Print and Television Media had become and how deep the tentacles of the RW Fundies flowed through the power centers of the US."

The larger "news" organs in the United States have never been owned by poor people and working people, and therefore have always played the role of opinion making to the general population.

This is why I cautioned last week the jubilant supporters of the opponents of Howard Dean about rejoicing over Dean's being hammered by the collective media and that they did so "at their own peril for they would be next". And of course, we see it now happening.

Here's what Jack London said about the "news" media in the United States way back in 1908. Tell me if you think anything has changed since he wrote this. I think that you have just become more aware of who owns the media and how they, understandably, will always do what they perceive in their own best interests.

"Not a word that he uttered will see print. You have forgotten the editors. They draw their salaries for the policy they maintain. Their policy is to print nothing that is a vital menace to the established...The press of the United States? It is a parasitic growth that battens on the capitalist class. Its function is to serve the established by moulding public opinion, and right well it serves it." --- The Great Jack London, a Hero of David Zephyr

[KoKo]

40. Thank you for that very appropriate quote from London. Yes, I had seen

the clip before. It's good to see it again. And, while this is true, there was a time when certain elements of the Media, were progressive (left over from dabblings with Communism and then Socialism...some of the great thinker immigrants to America (many were jewsish immigrants or from other countries who knew the signs of oppression) who fought back against McCarthyism in the small ways they could, and actually tried to provide a balanced view in news and portrayal of the America they hoped to see..or did see in contrast to where they came from.

We are lacking the wonderful influence of those folks now. Those wonderful immigrants who were responsible for the golden age of television and then some of our local homegrown reporters who worked their way up from the streets of America as copy boys and then got reporter jobs after doing the local "grunt" work.

We have a new generation of media which employs a different crowd. All are college grads, many are Ivy League and most have no idea of any life different from what they grew up with. The Corporate whore media can still be "self made today" but it doesn't come out of any experience with oppression (the Kozlowski's and Lays and even poor maligned Martha) may have grown up less fortunate in background, but they were talented and lucky and they are well aware of that. They don't "owe any debt to anyone," and don't have a history of coming out of an oppressed situation in Europe or elsewhere. Their commitment is to themselves. These are the the "Me" people.

I think Jack London's America in 1908 was before the great immigrant wave. But, the Powers at that time were extremely oppressive coming off the "Gilded Age." So, since our time is a new "Gilded Age" his writing is prophetic for the 21st Century.

I think I grew up in the Golden Age, when other voices could be heard.

When a book like "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn" had a huge read even where I grew up in the South. I think I was fortunate to grow up with a memory of something better than we have today or in 1908 and so it hits me harder than some of you, who may be used to what we have now.

Your expectations were not as high, or as idealistic as mine. I remember when there were journalistic standards and schools who taught and cared about that. I am a prisoner of that brief moment in America post WWII where things like that mattered. It's just my perspective.

Sorry I don't have footnotes or links and have gone off on a rant. But, it was important that I said that. I didn't grow up in a cynical generation like what has followed. And, I understand how different it must be for those born in the 60's and after to remember the simple times some of us grew up in coming off WWII and having Depression Era Parents who had gone through that and then the depravations and sacrifice of a World War and when it all ended their children were somehow raised with a great sense of hope. Not all....but those I grew up with..We expected more of America and held her to higher standards than I think our children would.

:-)'s I could footnote and link..., as I said. But, I don't have the time and am too tired to make the effort. And, much is a personal view with my shading from observation.
s

[Samantha]

39. I was not here Day 1 but I found DU shortly thereafter

I hovered for some time, too timid to comment. I also had a paranoid fear the site was being monitored, and I was not sure what would happen if the conservative Justice Department decided we were too left-wing to be permitted to comment on the Election 2000 debacle on the Internet.

I want to share with you how I became an active participant and how that active participation has changed my life. One day I was reading a thread very complimentary about one of our Democratic leaders. I became more incensed the more I read because during the duration of the Election 2000 controversy, my cry was "where are they, where are they" meaning the Democratic leaders I thought should be rushing to Al Gore's defense. Reading some complimentary remarks about one in particular that day, I couldn't merely hover any longer. I jumped in and attacked that leader for his failure to speak out during the controversy. Immediately after I submitted my post, I was counterattacked by the person starting the thread. It stunned me. That was the day I learned to fight.

I have been a political junkie all my D.C. life. I have worked in jobs where I have interacted with politicians and lobbyists. It was my privilege to do a temporary stint at Meet The Press, working for the producer of the show. Although I have always held very strong political convictions, I have never been the type to speak out. I have done some creative writing.

Finding DU merged my political and writing interests. Blending these together and using them on an Internet website developed for me something I desperately needed to have: the ability to voice my political beliefs, take a political punch, and remain standing to continue to speak out. For that, I will forever be grateful for finding DU.

As far as your question, what do people see in this election cycle, I see dangerous parallels. At the time I began posting my thoughts on DU, I was simply outraged a presidential election could be decided by the Supreme Court and 51 million votes could be negated. I also had no idea during the course of ordinary elections how many votes are customary discarded until I started to review the process from start to finish as a result of the anomalies we discussed in the Florida process. From doing my homework on this subject, I learned something that I never had a goal line to learn: I learned how to steal an election. I learned so much about the loopholes in the process that I felt confident any ordinary American so inclined doing the same amount research could do the same thing. You don't have to be smart to steal an election, you don't have to have worked at CIA and helped throw elections all over the world, you simply have to know the maneuvers and have the determination to "bring the election in for a landing" in a manner you want it to conclude.

I see that same determination today as we face Election 2004. I believe some of the maneuvers prevalent last time are apparent now. Just to give an example, obviously Dean, definitely running a populist campaign and keeping himself apart from corporate contrbutions, is facing ridicule by the corporate press in the same manner as did Al Gore. Looking at the events of just this week, it has become apparent if we as a people are ever to take back our country, we must first take back our airwaves.

Beyond that, we as Dems must learn to fight. We must do it collectively. Although it is not the nature of a peace-loving group of people, we cannot look forward to peace in the world around us if we do not insist we first must have political peace through election fairness in this Country. We are supposed to be leading by example, and the election example of George W. Bush* is not the model we want to display to rest of the world.

Not an easy thing for someone like me to say, someone who took months to speak out on a like-minded website, but each of us has tools in our toolbag with which we can fight.

So that's my answer. I think the conservative radical right is just as determined to take this election as it was the last one. It has incorporated some innovative maneuvers, i.e., taking the Democratic governor out in California in order to control the machinery there -- and that's a real threat, along with electing a Republican governor in New York. The redistricting efforts we have seen only add to their arsenal of weapons to take out our candidates once again. It is imperative we ask ourselves each waking day between now and election day, what are we doing to fight?

I believe if the Republicans take the White House again in 2004, it will be decades until we have another chance to even begin to restore our Democratic principles. Things will become so bad, even worse than they are now, if you can imagine that, every waking minute will be living and breathing in a political nightmare. We must do whatever we can to restore our Country to what we had pre-Bush*. And when we hear that 911 changed everything, we must insist that is not true. Nothing, and I mean nothing, should be able to change the Democratic principle of counting all votes, and in that regard we must make sure that end is met.

I do not know what tools other DU'ers have in their toolbags, but starting tonight, each person could review what special talents they might have and be wiling to put to use to advance the Democratic cause. Additionally, we have some very creative thinkers here, and we should start to brainstorm about the mechanics we can utilize to offset the strategies the Rove smear machine will use. For instance, if it is true there is a file one inch thick on Bush*s desk containing material he can use to smear Kerry, we should do one of the things we do best, gather research material which can be used to adversely impact George Bush's candidacy. You could keep the file!

Let me give you an example. The suggestion has been made that shades of the Willie Horton ad might resurface if Kerry is the candidate inasmuch as he served as Dukakis' lieutenant governor. I am not a Kerry fan; but if Kerry is the candidate, I suggest for every dirty maneuver, we find a counter-maneuver to discredit Bush. For instance, if Rove says Willie Horton, we say Carla Faye Tucker. We dig up the interviews with Carla Faye Tucker and the mercy pleas submitted on her behalf by the Christians who had observed her transformation. We find the Talk Magazine interview published by Tucker Carlson, no less, and see what parts we can put out there to illustrate exactly how compassionate George Bush* can be when weighing the life and death decisions of born-again Texan inmates. We have to fight fire with fire.

I think we should be uniting despite our different preferences in candidates to see what we collectively can do to assist whatever candidate emerges from this process and work together to further that candidate's chances for success. If there's one thing we at DU have learned over the last three years, we failed to act when an election travesty was committed because we did not have it within ourselves the knowledge of what we should do to combat this kind of abomination. We now know some things we can do and we should start doing them now. Beyond that we should brainstorm to develop ideas about other things we should and can be doing and organize ourselves to do them. This is my suggestion. I would be very happy to read others' thoughts on this subject.

[CivilRightsNow]

42. Wow..

This post deserves a thread of it's own and alot of deep thought from alot of DUers.

This thread was amazing in it's entirety. It should be a battle cry on the front page.. some organization needs to come out of DU. But often it feels like just keeping up here is a full time job.

We need some project managers. Chiefs and Indians. Everyone get read to put on their hats.

1...2....3... Go save the world. :)

[KoKo]

43. Agree with your observations Samantha. All of what you say should be

done and I think our folks who spend time over at FR do it because they are countering the comments there with fact and arguing trying to make a difference. Then we have Stranger and Symbolman with "Take Back the Media," Pitt and Kephra with "Truth Out" and Martin Schrader with the Socialist Magazine he writes for (plus a few other DU'ers who write articles there) and we have JMach1 who ran in Florida who's now in Dubai, and Pete in NYC working for Kerry, and SoCal who calls into C-Span all the time refuting the Repugs, and so many other DU'ers who work in their ways by starting their own blogs and e-mailing the Cables, Networks and Magazines, and the folks who make up Pamphlets and put them in their libraries and other public places with facts about the Bush Lies. And RadFringe with "Digget the Mole" who kept our spirits up and then started Market Watch, and Ozy, and Maeve and the folks in the "Gun Dungeon," "I/P" and "Nader/Green" rooms where I didn't really go so only knew them in passing. Sterling and Ewing who did so much research 9/11 and kept us in TinFoilTruth. Dem Tex, who was active in the Wellstone Crash speculation threads with great pilot information. OMG..there is so much talent here on DU.....it just goes on and on.......


And I know I've not mentioned all the other folks here who work in small ways and large through Move On.org. and Bart Cop and Beach Buckeye with his radio show in Florida and his fellow DU'er Jan Michaelwho posts here and was active for months in getting donations to keep the show on the air. And, Hatrack who posted environmental articles everytime there was something we needed to focus on in those early days and the folks in the lounge like Matcom, Underpants, Cat and Zomby and Magic who provided all that fun for folks but also have posted and done work on their own, Nostramj with the cartoon carnival and MoPaul with his photoshop and there are so many, many of you, including Jitterbug, and Crew, and Great Aunt of Triplets, and Roxanne (DemActivist) b.Pilgrim, Tinoire, Tnoe,Terwilliger, Trof, Dirk, PiperRay, Irate Citizen, Old and in the Way, One Eighty, and so many others. Tigerlilly and Hedda Foil who monitored the Senate and House Hearings, and Comsymp and Gloria who provided the "Media Watch" for Buzzflash and here on DU. And, Samantha and Truth Out and Starpass who could keep us on our toes. Jacobin, and all the other's who posted on this thread and the others that will come to me after I post this.

I think if we can keep at it and in the next year do what you say, Samantha we have a chance. I just wish we could get help from our Congressional Democrats because we need HELP! We need recognition and more clout. But, in the end, it may just be that what we do in our small ways through independent efforts will jolt the comfortable system that our party has been used to.

Just my thought, and a nostalgic thanks to those above and all the others.....If anyone reads this and has more names please add them somewhere. I know I've missed important ones.

[Tatiana]

45. Money=Power=Votes=Presidency

I hope it's not the case, but sometimes I get that sinking feeling. I still remember, to this day, watching James Baker dispatched by the Bush Klan down to Florida and thinking... it's over.

Scalia chumming it up with Cheney, Bush's SOTU, Bush's war chest for his reelection. We outnumber them, but they move the pieces on the chessboard. They control the media: the cable news networks, the newspapers... Sometimes it seems so damn impossible. How do you defeat that?

But then I think about the energy Dean has brought back to the party. I think about how he wasn't afraid to tell the truth about Bush and how many more voices joined him. I think about the thousands upon thousands of volunteers and ordinary citizens like you and me who have gotten up off our asses to work for a Democratic candidate. I think about the collective anger we have, but the patient focus. We weren't prepared for such a major assault on our Constitution that time. We didn't think they would dare. We're wiser now and we know they would dare commit another theft if we let them.

So, I'm cautious, but I'm still hopeful. Call me a sucker, but I haven't been this energized since '92 when there was another Democratic candidate for President from "A Little Town Called Hope." No one thought he could unseat a wartime President either.

But he did.