!!! GO KERRY !!!

[AmyStrange]

I mean look at the man.

He's the guy. If anyone looked more presidential. I haven't seen him or her.

I hope he picks Edwards as his VP.

I really hope he picks him for sure.

Can you imagine being VP to Kerry!!!! Oh my Goddess, I go wobbly in the knees just thinking about it.

!!! GO KERRY !!!

[jpgray]

1. I liked the old AmyStrange better, I think.

I'll take a Dean supporter over a satirizing Kerry supporter any day. :hi:

[AmyStrange]

2. I'd take the old DU over me anyday too (n/t)

if you want to save the planet vote kerry

[jpgray]

3. Criticism *is* still allowed, despite people claiming the contrary

And at this point outright attacks are still allowed. The primaries aren't over yet. Once we have a nominee, criticism is still allowed, but you are not allowed to work to defeat the nominee in the forum. That's if I understand the rules.

[AmyStrange]

15. don't worry my friend...

Sincere Sarcasm will always be allowed in the DU.

The DU owners should worry though about what the decisions made today will do to the DU after January of 2005. Maybe after Kerry is elected they will shut down. Wasn't getting Bush out of office the whole reason for starting the DU. What if the unthinkable happens and Bush is voted in for another four years? How will that change the DU. Who will us Kerry promoters blame for that?

[jpgray]

16. People will blame it on whatever suits their agenda--like always

Non-Kerry folks will say 'I told you so', and Kerry folks will say something to the effect of 'You didn't support him enough!', or 'The press/BBV got him.'

What rankles more is the tit-for-tat stuff concerning the primary fights. Extreme comments and nastiness breed more of the same here, and it has affected supporters of every candidate. But that any group should feel wholly unwelcome or voiceless violates what I think DU should be. Fortunately that's not yet the case, but there are people who will make your stay unpleasant depending on your views.

[AmyStrange]

22. You speak the truth...

and I miss the respectful anymosity of old. Did I spell that right? It's gone for good though. Maybe they should rename it DNCUnderground.com

[Wonk]

4. He sure has excellent taste in ties, doesn't he?

Very Presidential.
http://www.counterpunch.org/donnelly02092004.html

[jpgray]

7. This article plays very loose with the facts

The article claims to have looked at Kerry's whole legislative career, insisting:

Save yourself the website search, here's a synopsis:

Yet it omits key votes where Kerry made the right choice, and often a courageous choice, such as denouncing DOMA, his leadership role on emissions standards, Kyoto, etc. These deserve a place in any synopsis.

Then there's this little sidestepping of the facts:

The multimillionaire John Kerry, who rails against "special interests" on the campaign trail, got more special interest PAC money than any other senator this last six years!

Does Mr. Donnelly refer to the WP article, which used only sums from identified lobbyists as special interest money? Donnelly doesn't tell us. Do you know, Wonk? Moreover, since Kerry didn't take PAC money for any of his Senate races, these must be funds for the presidential campaign, not for his senate campaign. Why does Donnelly neglect to mention this? Since he doesn't provide his facts, we are left to guess. If we are to compare how much money a presidential campaign takes in to the campaigns of senators, of course it will be more than a senator's, and in every category. To compare Kerry's fundraising as a presidential candidate to a senator's fundraising is ridiculous, but Donnelly doesn't seem to mind taking his readers for morons. He leaves out this distinction in the hope that his reader's will interpret it incorrectly, and thus cast Kerry in a bad light by wholesale ignorance of important distinctions. Further, his basis for the claim is totally unknown, since he gives none of the facts he is working off of in making these statements.

The rest of the article goes on to describe how, being rich, Kerry is somehow bad or can't work for ordinary people. This argument is laughable on its face.

I'm surprised Counterpunch would publish this tripe, and I'm even more surprised a long-time DUer would be taken in by it. :(

[Wonk]

28. To some extent, yes, but I notice one you chose not to address.

Kerry/Citigroup/Enron
http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/contrib.asp?ID=N00000245&Cycle=2004

[WitchWay]

30. This certainly is laughable

Yeah - they are playing loose with the facts! How dare they suggest just because someone is filthy multimillionaire rich means they are Bad and can't work for Ordinary People.

Rich multimillionaires NEVER make money off cheap labor, environmental destruction, agribusiness pollution, or any other can't of rampant corporatism. Jeez.

[AmyStrange]

12. wait a minute

is that a rabbit?

[Wonk]

17. Yes, my current avatar is a rabbit

(Oolong was his name) with a waffle on his head.


http://www.syberpunk.com/cgi-bin/index.pl?page=oolong

[jpgray]

21. I like Oolong tea and I dislike our system.

But I don't see how an article that wholesale distorts or ignores the facts is worthwhile, whichever candidate is being discussed and however bad the system is.

[AmyStrange]

23. I agree

I don't like any article that distorts and/ or ignores the facts either.

[foo_bar]

20. excellent oolong the pancake-bunny avatar

:thumbsup:

[Dr Fate]

5. GO BUSH!!!! GO NADER!!!!! FUCK KERRY!!!!

There- Now am I a "real Liberal"?

[RichM]

6. Can someone please inform me whether this is sarcasm?

It is, isn't it?

[jpgray]

8. It is. The AmyStrange I knew was a dedicated Dean supporter (nt)

[AmyStrange]

11. and I always will be...

and thanx for your kind words jp

[AmyStrange]

9. RichM

how can you not like Kerry? He is the electable one after all. It's his destiny.

Or, you can think for yourself and decide for yourself.

I don't recommend it though.

Sarcasm works for me the best.

?Or does it?

[sandnsea]

18. No, it doesn't n/t

[AmyStrange]

24. Thanx for your opinion.

I enjoyed it tremendously

(EDITED: my tremedously bad spelling)

[sandnsea]

25. Objective opinions

Always good to have them!

[AmyStrange]

27. So what brings you slumming over to my thread (n/t)

[sandnsea]

31. Slumming?

There's no slumming at DU.

[corporatewhore]

10. his hairscreams "electable"

[AmyStrange]

13. do you have a picture...

of that taco bell dog?

[genius]

14. Good job on the death penalty.

Though when I think of terrorists, I think of us.

[AmyStrange]

19. which one specifically...

I can't remember one fry party to the next.

When you say us do you mean the U.S. or us (me and you)?

I personally don't think "us" are terrorist.

although I do agree with your basic "terrorist" analysis. Not many people get that. Are you a student of Chomsky,

Dave

[digno dave]

26. He had on his Presidential Rouge tonight!!! NT

aa

[Dookus]

29. we get your point already...

how many sarcastic threads do you need to start?

[Piperay]

32. Bah

:argh: