We Actually Can Overcome

[H2O Man]

I am sorry to see people who are upset, indignate, and outraged because some individuals have endorsed Senator Clinton, or others endorsed Senator Obama; or because one newspaper endorsed one, and another paper endorsed the other; or that one group endorsed Hillary, or another endorsed Barack.

In real life, the only time two people think just alike is when only one is thinking. I've never agreed 100% with any person, much less a politician. I belong to a number of groups that have, from time to time, taken a position or engaged in an action that I do not support. (I don't agree with myself sometimes, and that isn't a joke.)

During this primary season, I've read where DUers question the integrity of good and decent people, including Robert Kennedy, Jr., Joseph Wilson, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards, and even Caroline Kennedy. It would be nice if I could convince myself that it were only disruptors trying to cause divisions. But it's not: I've seen a number of the people that I have come to have great respect for acting in the most curious ways.

Our responsibilities as citizens in a democracy -- and we can return this nation to a Constitutional democracy -- require that we read, watch, and listen to many sources of information. We need to discuss the important topics with others, including those we agree with, and those we disagree with. Then it is our responsibility to evaluate things for ourselves, and then go forward from there. Let the Bill of Rights be our guide book.

Part of the reality of life in a democratic state is that others will disagree with us. Some will disagree with us frequently, others infrequently. Part of democratic movements involves people who have agreements on the majority of important issues banding together. That is what elections are all about.

If you are really interested in returning this nation to a Constitutional democracy, you need to be able to deal with the simple fact that other good people will disagree with you, even on issues that you think are both important and that have clearly defined answers. It's okay. Surely, if we all held the exact same ideas and beliefs, the gene pool of thought would be too limited, and we would risk the mutations that led to the republican party.

Go for a walk, do some yoga, listen to Bob Marley or the Beatles, or read some of Martin Luther King, Jr. or Gandhi's writings. Things are good now. We are going to have to take 20 years to repair the damage that not only the Bush-Cheney administration has done, but the other accumulated corporate and environmental destruction from several generations.

[calteacherguy]

1. K&R.

We need to be reminded of this every now and then.

[Uben]

3. You don't understand, my friend

When I donate my hard earned money to an organization that backs democrats, I expect that money to be used to support the nominee of my party, not a specific candidate in the primary. When I donated (and I have for years to MoveOn), MoveOn did not endorse candidates in the primaries. Now, they are using the funds I wanted designated for the nominee to back the opponent of the one I am for in the primary! Big, big difference!

I doesn't have a thing to do with chillin out. They broke a trust I had in them to use my funds for the purposes intended.

[calteacherguy]

4. I wasn't even thinking of MoveOn when I read and responded to the OP. nt

[Uben]

7. My response

...was in the wrong place. My apologies. I was responding to the OP, and to just one specific part of his post. I enjoy your posts, Calteacherguy. We may not have the same candidates for the primary, but we are both dems, and I agree with most of what you post. Keep up the good work!


Uben

[H2O Man]

8. Then I shall respond.

I do understand. We simply disagree. There is no problem in disagreeing: it does not make one of us right and the other wrong. But saying that I do not understand is an error.

[Uben]

9. Well, you may be right

....but for the life of me, I can't imagine you would send money to an organization that would use your funds to back the opponent of your candidate. You would do that? If so, then yes, we disagree.

Peace!

[H2O Man]

13. I like both

Clinton and Obama, and so that isn't an issue for me. I will say that I think of MoveOn as independent of the democratic party, so I was surprised that they did the poll that led to the endorsement. And I did not think the ad about the General was particularly good.

I do think that MoveOn plays an important role in the free speech movement, something that old-timers like myself tend to see as important -- even if I do not endorse everything they say. A while back, someone I know asked me if I would consider submitting a few ideas for ads to them, because years ago, I had done some pretty good progressive work in this area, though well before the internet existed. But that's not important to me to try to do .... it's up to this younger generation. Do I support them? Absolutely. I donate money, and I respond to many of their e-mails.

I am not telling anyone that they should donate to MoveOn if they don't want to. If you don't, that's your choice, not mine. But I do think that my OP remains equally valid, if you agree with it, or donate to MoveOn, or not.

Also, I am aware that at a time when the republicans have attacked MoveOn with increasing frequency, that some of the histrionic "I've been betrayed!" responses to the endorsement are suspect.

Peace to you.

[rosesaylavee]

2. Another good one.

Thanks for posting.

K & R

[NastyRiffraff]

5. Thank you for an excellent reminder, H2O Man

I think that in our passion for our candidates, we often forget the big picture, and that others running are good and decent people, even if we don't agree with them on some, or even many issues. In the case of those of us whose candidates have bowed out, there's deep disappointment, even anger, and that's natural. But it's no reason to treat the ones who are left and their supporters as if they were (gasp!) Republicans.

At their core, all of our Democratic candidates, those who are left and those who have bowed out, deeply care for democratic (with a small d) principles, and will fight hard for the country we all love. And yes, it's important that a Democrat be elected; too much is at stake to engage internally in the kind of fighting that we'll surely face in the general election.

I reserve the right to express outrage against McCain, Romney, or Hucklebee, though!

[JeffR]

6. 5th rec here!

:thumbsup:

[demo dutch]

10. As long as we capture the WH , I'll be happy!

[robbedvoter]

11. Everyone is free to endorse whomever they want. But not against their donors

to use their money against theoir candidate. That's what's wrong. They should have stayed clear of primaries

[EffieBlack]

12. Unions do it all the time . . .

[maddezmom]

14. K&R

[Tatiana]

15. It's hard to pick a #1 issue. But if I had to pick one...

it would be transparency in government.

I tend to think if the people knew what was going on, they'd "handle their business," so to speak. The problem is, the media doesn't report what is really going on; the OVP thumbs its nose at the rule of law and the judicial system - they refuse to tell anyone what they are doing and with whom.

If the President is making national security decision and hasn't read his/her PDBs, I WANT TO KNOW. (This would make it easier to impeach an incompetent officeholder, too.)

[CreekDog]

16. Yes, but if it lasts for longer than 4 hours call your physician

:dunce:

[H2O Man]

17. Humor is good.

Multiple orgasms are better. Makes it difficult to be in a grumpy mood.