A rant on JK trashing. I'm backing the trashers against a wall from now on

[blm]

and demanding proof from them.

I posted it in a thread where Kerry was once again treated like a mistake instead of a leader and every other guy is treated as if they are BEACONS of honest leadership who always stood and fought.



37. And let's ignore the ONE guy who submitted an actual Iraq withdrawal plan,

and the ONE guy who actually CRAFTED and SUBMITTED the Clean Money, Clean Elections bill for public financing of campaigns, and the ONE GUY who investigated and exposed more government corruption than any other lawmaker in modern history, the ONE guy whose efforts helped END three wars, and the ONE guy who wrote the book WARNING this nation about the growing strength of global terrorism and its funding by international financiers, and the ONE guy with the best ACTUAL environmental RECORD of any top lawmaker.

What bugs me is that every one wants to nitpick, but, there isn't a lawmaker alive who has effected this nation more positively over the last 35 years than John Kerry has, and you dismiss it as if the facts are just INCONVENIENT to your own analysis.

Kerry is ALL OF THE BEST DEMS ROLLED TOGETHER and you all just can't stand it and won't admit it. And THAT is why I get outraged - the deliberate ignoring of the FACTS in your efforts to push those with FAR LESSER records on issues many of you claim to be most important to you.

LOVE your own guy using ONLY The facts about him, INSTEAD of dumping on a great leader by using FALSE CHARGES against him - because THAT is when I will jump in and CORRECT The record. If you don't want that to happen, then STICK TO THE FACTS.

If you want to say your guy is best on the environment, then PROVE IT using the FACTS of the record.

If you want to say your guy would be best on Iraq, then PROVE IT by posting his Iraq withdrawal plan.

If you want to say your guy is the most honest, then put up the legislation he submitted to take money out of politics.

If you want to say that your guy is the best fighter, then put up the real battles he chose to have during their time in office.

See how EASY it is to HAVE real discussions or to AVOID having serious discussions using ONLY the facts?

[ProSense]

1. I agree, and

they should be pushing every achievement of the person they support.

[blm]

4. That would be fine with me, but they MAKE SUPERLATIVES UP that have no

basis in reality and when they use JK to compare their choice, it opens the floodgates of truth, and I don't care how unpopular it makes me, I am not going to allow LIES to go uncountered.

[politicasista]

2. You go blm!

:yourock:

[beachmom]

3. Fantastic rant, BLM!!

All JK said was "tell the truth", you know. And that's what we all have to do; that's why it's a labor of love for us to defend Sen. Kerry -- because it's EASY when all the facts line up.

[saltpoint]

5. I'm finding that gross exaggeration is a useful tool. When I bump into

somebody bashing Senator Kerry, as far as I'm concerned, they're bashing my loyalty to Senator Kerry, too. He doesn't exist for me except as a public servant. But as a public servant, he is part my senator also, as all U.S. Senators have a sort of national profile.

I loved George McGovern, but Kerry is more to my liking. I honor Jimmy Carter, especially the post-presidency work, but Kerry is more to my liking. Hardly anybody can enliven a room of people, especially a multicultural room of people, like Bill Clinton, but Kerry is more to my liking.

I thought the Kerry-Edwards ticket was the best of my lifetime. Still too young to appreciate John Kennedy, although in retrospect, the best damn senators come from Massachusetts!

The gut in me wants to track Kerrybashers down and kick their flippant asses from here to Hong Kong.

Since that's a tactical impossibility, I often post on Kerrybashing threads that John Kerry upsets ME, too, because he and Teresa were seen siphoning gas from the car in the driveway over the weekend, or that he was complicit in the disappearance of the Lindbergh baby, etc. Their presumed objections to him are mocked by something seen as "equally distorted," and it muffles the criticism.

Which is not to say that I still wouldn't enjoy kicking their asses from here to Hong Kong.

[karynnj]

6. I loved your posts on yesterday's nonsense.

[saltpoint]

7. Hi, karynnj. Yeah, that one was kind of wild.

I will say that I exchanged PMs with the OP and we reached an accord. Black smoke was still roiling out of my ears and she and I cybertalked a while and emerged as co-Democrats against the common GOP enemy.

I don't appreciate the attacks on Kerry in general, though, and others have been far harsher than yesterdays. Also the recent attacks on John Edwards, especially by Mary Cheney, seem untoward.

One of a handful of Democrats is going to be our nominee. We have to stick by our Dems.

[karynnj]

9. I was surprised at the nastiness of the Edwards

won't impeach Bush thread. I was surprised that Mary Cheney expressed her anti- Edwards comments with far more animous and intensity than the ones towatds Kerry. She did repeat some RW nonsense on Kerry - that she was surprised a Senator had noting better to do than comment on her comments. But she seemed more offended by Edwards. Maybe because her dad and she were there or maybe she did appreciate on some level that Kerry made a very gracious comment on gays. (She didn't have to concede that she was neither outed or offended by anything Kerry said - just that he was using it politically. Which compared to things the campaign she was with did to Kerry seems pretty innocuous.)

[blm]

10. Mary Cheney is a political hack from head to toe - and that is ALL she is.

.

[ginnyinWI]

8. Well put!

That's the biggest beef I have with people on DU: they think that to be loyal to one Dem, they have to hate all the others. And the more powerful the Dem the more they must be attacked. It's divisive and hurts the party.(This assumes, of course, that some are trolls and only posing as fans of another Dem.)

Why can't they just know and promote their own Dems and accept that other Dems are also worth keeping around? They know this in the Senate and the House. You can't do anything alone. If they try it (i.e. Feingold announcing a censure of Bush on a talk show) they get disappointing results.

There is a place for criticism (I just criticized my own Senator after all), but on the action's merits, and with civility. It should be in the vein of something I would tell my kids when they were little: "I love you, but I don't love what you did, and here's why..."

There's too much team mentality around here. But we're on the same team! It's like someone loving the pitcher of a baseball team but continually dissing the team's star hitter.

[rockymountaindem]

11. Problem is that a lot of bashers don't have their own guy

This is especially true when we're dealing with anti-establishment types to the left of Noam Chomsky. They just like to bash and there's no way to confront them because they are like ideological guerilla fighters. They don't have a base of operations like a political party, and their views are simply reactionary and as such they don't have an actual platform we can debate over. As far as the bash Kerry; vote Clark/Feingold/Edwards/Clinton/Kucinich people go your plan is a good one, but I fear it's only applicable to about half the bashers.

[blm]

13. It still goes - they can still put up all those they DO support and

list all their real life fights and accomplishments.

If they can't - then that's a problem for them, isn't it?

[rockymountaindem]

14. Good point n/t

[emulatorloo]

12. thanks blm - hey all, isn't their a "Kerry Reseach" thread or something?

Some very angry poster is claiming Kerry is not involved in Ohio recount lawsuits and I damn sure know he is. Yet it is difficult for me to find info w google about it.