For a site called "Democraic Underground" some never bash the GOP and spend the

[saracat]

majority of their posts bashing the Dems and saying how they "hate" the Democratic Party.I find this very odd. And it raises a lot of questions as to the motives of some.

[Clintonista2]

1. Maybe I'm wrong, but arent you one of the "I'll never vote for Hillary even if she's the nominee"

people?

[sailor65]

15. A lot of people, including myself,

consider Hillary to be more or less * with breasts.

She's not showing herself to have the correct letter next to her name.

And I've never been a fan of "Vote for A just because A isn't B."

So if you've correctly stated the OP's position, then I'll be right in the same boat with her. It will take a whole lot of internal coercion to check a box next to Hillary's name.

So I'll keep on doing the Kucinich Rain Dance and hope???

[pnwmom]

40. Then you're probably another one who has yet to check her

actual voting record, which puts her among the most progressive in the Senate -- more than 90% of the time at odds with the Bush position.

You remind me of Nader, who said Bush and Gore were Tweedledee and Tweedledum, that there was no difference between the parties. He fooled a lot of people in 2000, and he's still fooling some.

[saracat]

17. I am not a Hillary supporter but I will vote for her if she is the nominee.

I will not campaign for her or otherwise support her.That is what I have said.

[Pawel K]

2. As fucked up as the GOP is maybe these people realized that a lot of these dems are GOP-lite nt

[reprobate]

58. Hillary certainly is. Anyone seen the picture of her and her supporter - Murdock?

That ain't GOP lite, that's GOP Mainline.

There IS one thing that could change my mind about her. A pledge from her made on a bible that if elected she would cancel every executive order Bush made, support reinstating habeas corpus, stop the illegal wiretapping, and start investigations (real investigations this time) into 9/11, non-bid contracts and a bunch of other shit the the Bush Crime Empire has been involved in since George Walker and Prescott Bush were involved with the Nazi regime.

Of course, I won't hold my breath. Hillary Clinton is a wholly owned subsidiary of Corporate America, our masters. What the fuck is a Democrat doing having her picture taken with Murdock?

Sorry for the rant. I'm just mightily pissed that this candidate for the Democratic Party nomination is not a Democrat. And so few can see the facts. Once again our MSM fucks up the truth.

[madfloridian]

3. Our party today acted like Joe McCarthy.

.

[William769]

4. Pot meet kettle.

Please stop, your to much! :rofl:

[Clintonista2]

6. This topic was only made because of the latest Obama gaffe

"DONT ATTACK A FELLOW DEM (unless it's Hillary)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

[durrrty libby]

13. Obama gaffe? I missed it.

[Clintonista2]

18. Obama abstained from the senate vote to condemn moveon.org

[durrrty libby]

35. MSNBC just talked about that. They hinted that

he looks cowardly for skipping the vote, and that will be the headlines

[ellacott]

19. We shouldn't attack fellow Dems period

It's not right when it's done unfairly to Hillary either.

[saracat]

33. I agrre .But define attack.To use candidates positions and statements against them is not attacking

them as Democrats.

[durrrty libby]

42. Does calling them "shrill" fall under "using the candidates positions and statements

against them is not attacking'??? Just wondering?

BTW The thread you started complimenting Hillary???

I and others did not fall for that disingenuous load. :eyes:

[saracat]

43. Seems some real immaturity is being indicated her.Do you imply I must either totally "love " Hillary

or totally "hate her? Life is not so black and white, little one. Many of your posts are as intolerant as the far right. You do your candidate no service.

[durrrty libby]

46. Many of your posts are disingenuous, hypocritical and

childish name-calling.Can't imagine who they would "service"

[saracat]

48. And yours are just "silly".

[durrrty libby]

51. No..your childish name- calling would be that too

[saracat]

54. Shoo fly. Yawn!

[saracat]

52. And you do not answer the black and white love em or hate em position because that is exactly what

you imply.One must either love or hate Hillary.There can be no in betweens.To be in between for you is to be a hypocrite. How very sad.

[Tempest]

39. “To announce that there must be no criticism..."

“To announce that there must be no criticism of the president is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonous to the American public.”


Change president to Democrats and you come up with the same sentiment.


To claim we shouldn't attack Democrats even when they go against the principles of the party is dangerous and ludicrous.

[saracat]

50. I didn't announce there must not be criticism.Can some not read?

I am against Democratic Party bashing.I am NOT aginst criticism or debate of either the Democratic Party or candidates. Sheesh!

[Tempest]

68. You sure as hell did

We shouldn't attack fellow Dems period

Who do you think makes up the Democratic party? Unicorns?

[saracat]

71. That wasn't my post.I was the OP.

[saracat]

72. Opps.Sorry.I responded to a post intended for you! Mea Culpa!

[backscatter712]

60. Why not?

If Democrats are selling out our freedoms and perpetuating war, why shouldn't we attack them?

[saracat]

29. I never saw it. This was because of the anti-Kerry comments and the MoveOn Vote.

[Clintonista2]

30. The moveon vote WAS the gaffe

Obama abstained, because he knew it would hurt him politically to do the right thing.

[saracat]

32. I had no idea how he voted or if he voted.

[durrrty libby]

9. "She sounds shrill" "She looks terrible" "Blah Hate Blah"

Amazing .....ain't it? :eyes: :wow:

[saracat]

26. That was my opinion.That was not bashing of the Democratic Party. I have also "praised " Hillary

for looking good and performing well when I thought it was warrented but you can't credit me with that can you? It is apparently all or nothing with you.

[saracat]

23. Criticizing and Debating candidates is not Dem bashing.I stood up for Hillary against Dem bashing

just yesterday.We do not have to all vote in lockstep.She is NOT my candidate but this is not pot meet kettle because I do not support her candidacy!

[XemaSab]

5. The GOP is like a dead elephant: it's going to be there no matter how much we bitch.

The Democratic party is more like a stubborn donkey pulling a cart. Maybe yelling WILL get the point across. :P

[HardWorkingDem]

27. and the bad thing about a dead elephant is...

when it rots, it sure stinks a hell of a lot and it covers a lot of ground....

[YOY]

7. Damn Skippy Saracat.

Look! William-whats-his-face posted an arrogant statement followed by the ROLF smiley...didn't see that one comming.

[Mythsaje]

8. Sara...

We DID attack the GOP. By working together to elect a Democratic majority that's managed to squander its power and bow down to the Repugs just about every time it's come to it. The Repugs were a HELL of a lot more effective in the majority than we are. They're a more effective minority as well.

It sucks and people are pissed. :shrug:

[sailor65]

20. You're only ALMOST right

"Squander" implies some slower process in which actually they tried to serve us. In reality, they chucked it right down the well before the ink on the ballots was dry.

[HereSince1628]

10. With an approval rating of 11% for Congress you've got to be kidding.

This isn't about backing some freaking local HS sports team. THis isn't about showing some stupid loyalty because it's how you show that you belong to the "group."

You've been around plenty long enough to know that DU is used as a more or less public platform for the Democratic and Progressive Base to voice concerns and try out ideas.

If you want just political cheerleading you can find it on other sites.

[Tempest]

11. Read DU's mission statement and then get back to us

http://www.democraticunderground.com/about.html

It appears you really screwed the pooch in starting this thread.

[saracat]

31. Read it yourself"We welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives who will work

with us to achieve our shared goals." Where does that say "bash the Democratic Party so that it will not be able to acheive its goals" ?

Democratic Underground may not be officially affiliated with the Democratic Party but it does have certain rules geared to the protection of the Democratic Party such as the one not allowing support of a candidate from another party or an Independent to be supported aginst a seated Dem.

[Tempest]

36. Democrats OF ALL STRIPES

Which includes Democrats who will criticize the party when it goes astray.

If you want a web site full of mindless bots, try FreeRepublic.


I suppose you're now going to defend the 21 Democrats who voted in favor of condemning MoveOn's Petraeus ad. The 21 Democrats voted against free speech.

[hfojvt]

45. you condemn their votes, they condemn the ad

How is either one an abridgement of free speech? Did the Senate vote propose some kind of sanction? No. It is just empty political posturing to cover butts with a military worshipping media and public. :patriot: Rah! Rah! Troops! Go! Fight! Win! :patriot:

[Tempest]

70. Remember McCarthy?

Remember what his witch hunt did in terms of free speech?

[saracat]

47. Actually it wasn't a Move On Vote and it included the swiftbaoting of Kerry and the Cleleand attack

adds but no one seems to care about those!

[Tempest]

69. BULLFUCKINGSHIT!!!!!!

Here's the text of the amendment:

To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces.


You don't even fucking know what they were voting on.

Jesus Christ!

[saracat]

73. And what is this then Of course it is the Democratic Amendement do of little intererst!

CNN.Com "The Democrats on Thursday failed to pass their resolution. It included a condemnation of the "unwarranted personal attack" on Petraeus, but also condemned "personal attacks" that happened in 2002 against then-Democratic Sen. Max Cleland of Georgia and attacks in 2004 against Sen. John Kerry. The vote was 51-46, but 60 votes were needed to proceed.

The Democrats' amendment was sponsored by Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer of California.

[Carrieyazel]

12. Yes, you're correct, but as Dems we need to realize that derailing Hillary

is what we must do. She is an awful nominee who will lead us down to defeat next year. As soon as we get a nominee that can win (not Hillary) we can have a spirited debate about the present and future of the party (without the uncertainty) and bash the Rethuglican Party and their detestable nominee.

[durrrty libby]

21. Dream on. Her approval numbers are approaching 50%.

She will get the nom and win the election.


p.s."we" ??? hahaha

[saracat]

28. This is NOT about Hillary!

[durrrty libby]

34. She's a Dem and she gets bashed.

You may not want her to count, but too fucking bad...She Does Count

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[Carrieyazel]

38. Her disapproval numbers also approach 50%. That kind of candidate cannot win any general election.

[saracat]

44. This post is NOT about Hillary!

[durrrty libby]

53. I know. It's about capitalizing words.

[saracat]

55. Perfect example of "silly" !

You really have nothing to say do you?

[durrrty libby]

63. You are the silly one if you believe putting a word in all caps makes it more

believable.

[saracat]

66. No .It makes it "louder"Shoo fly.You really do have nothing to say.

[durrrty libby]

57. Here you go. Chew on some of these numbers for awhile

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29_presidential_primaries%2C_2008

[sniffa]

14. agreed

i aLways try to raise my neighbors' kids, before my own.

[Nite Owl]

16. A lot of it is anger

These are the people we worked for, gave money to etc. If they won't listen who will? I'm angry that they are such a bunch of wimps, very angry, this isn't what I worked toward. Keeping up the support in light of what they have been doing, the leadership or lack of it, is not what I feel a real Democrat should be doing.

[LoZoccolo]

22. I'm breaking my self-imposed exile to state how I'd run DU.

Rule #1 would be if anyone advocated a third-party or even threatened not to vote in the general election, they would be instantly and permanently banned, plus I would post their personal information so that other message boards could get rid of them too.

Rule #2 would be if they said anything about how they "hate" the Democrats or spread the big green lie they would be banned for six months, and if they complain about their beating somewhere else on the Internet the punishments of rule #1 would apply.

Rule #3 would be that it would cost $10 a month to be on the message board, but if you are the first to give information that leads to prosecutions under rule #1 and rule #2, you get a "good citizen discount" of a free month for each person prosecuted.

The board I would run might be very small, and might even go broke, and certainly would be a topic amongst those who whine like dogs that they are entitled to hijack everyone else's attention without respecting the responsibility of doing so, but it would be a jewel to those who appreciate it's purpose. And that purpose is victory and common sense!

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

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

[LoZoccolo]

64. "We have the right to demand that the politicians..."

Sure but you wouldn't have a right to be on LoZoccolo Underground. Because it would be mine!

[backscatter712]

65. We're not on LoZoccolo Underground.

Of course, we're not on Backscatter Underground, either...

So that makes it Skinner's call.

[Forkboy]

74. LOL

I missed you.

[FrenchieCat]

24. Assigning doubts on motives is a waste of time, as motives are as diverse as

the DUer that have them.

I think you do a great job promoting the candidate your support, and getting into threads of those candidates you don't for your two cents.

I suspect that during this primary season, your motive is to persuade in one way or another that your candidate is the one that folks should vote for (if not, it should be).....and that's probably the only motive you need to concern yourself with.

The vote result will tell all......and all of the various motives involved during the primaries will count for virtually nothing come the general election. Mark my word.

[Milo_Bloom]

25. YAAAAAAWN!

Preaching to the choir is kinda pointless. So sitting around here and "bashing the bush administration" is little more than mental masturbation. We all agree they suck.

So what we need to work on here is the FUTURE direction of the party/country, not wasting our effort convincing one another that bush sucks.

[sampsonblk]

41. We'd be bored if we talked about what we agree on-nt

[ljm2002]

49. I have never said that I "hate the Democratic party"...

...nor indicated that I would not vote for a Democrat in the election.

However, I can and will criticize my party when they cave in to the likes of the rabid right wing festering sores on the body politic who should be SQUASHED like the bugs they are, not pandered to.

Sorry if that upsets you.

[saracat]

56. That does not upset me.Criticism is fine. Bashing is another.

[Dr Fate]

61. I thought the same thing when DLCers & "centrists" were supporting Joe Lieberman (I-3rd party)

And attacking the DEM base fo opposing Bush's war, or for wanting impeachment, etc,etc.

Let's not leave out the Right wing of the big tent in this one either.

[beaconess]

62. THANK YOU! This place is becoming absolutely sickening - it looks like Freeperville!

[saracat]

67. Thank You.