25 years as a Democrat, and it all boils down to a single SCOTUS nominee

[Walt Starr]

I've been a Democrat for about a quarter century. I've campaigned, donated, and even run for office during that time.

All of it boils down to a single SCOTUS nominee. Alito is the reason I've been a Democrat all these years. I knew an Alito-like nominee would come before the Senate at some point during my lifetime and voted straight Democratic ballots during this time to do my part to insure that any Alito-like nominee would be rejected, at least by enough Senators to keep such an evil man from ever being seated on the court via a filibuster.

Was my devotion to the party worth it?

We'll know soon enough...

[Atman]

1. You need to let the democratic "leaders" know.

All of us do. I agree with you...it is as if everything I've ever believed about this country has been flushed down the toilet. Thrown away for a few lousy votes and some cake. I am so, so disappointed in the democrats. I'm just sick to my stomach. God bless Ted Kennedy for at least trying. The rest of the lot can piss up a rope, for all I care.

[AspenRose]

213. It's depressing.

And he could conceivably be on the court for the next 30 years.

I think of what my parents endured in the 50s, 60s and 70s....

then I look at my nearly one year old son...

and I want to cry.

What was it all for? And what are we in for next? (that's rhetorical)

*heavy sigh* :-(

[stevedeshazer]

2. I think we're screwed, Walt.

I think Alito will get at least 62 votes. :(

[Hissyspit]

6. I think we were screwed five years ago.

So, America, do you get the Supreme Court you deserve?

[Tesha]

28. Not yet, not even with Alito. :-( (NT)

[Hissyspit]

33. Then why are you telling us to get used to disappointment?

:7

[Tesha]

48. I was answering this question...

I was answering this question:

> So, America, do you get the Supreme Court you deserve?

My answer:

> No, not yet, not even with Scalito.

Based on their votes over the years, most of America still
deserves far, far worse, and will probably get it over time.

Tesha

[Hissyspit]

54. Oh, o.k. Gotcha. :-)

I forgot I put that comment in there!

Anyway, I love The Princes Bride, too. Read the book before the movie came out.

[long_green]

19. If my Democratic Senator votes for Alito

I'm going to let her have it. Mary Landrieu, by the way. Oops, did I say "if?" I meant "when."

[malaise]

35. Is that why the Retuhgs are threatening her

will that recall vote.

[long_green]

40. I've not heard of any serious effort to recall Landrieu

Are you thinking of Kathleen Blanco? I've seen some bumper stickers about that. Landrieu is up for reelection in Nov of '08. Don't really see the reason for recalling her. Now that I think of it, Blanco's term ends before 2008. Not much point in recalling her either.

[malaise]

65. My bad

A serious case of brain overload.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=116912#117210

[dogday]

52. The Republicans again have set the stage for these

hearings. They have put the word out, the Democrats are mean partisan people who crucified Alito and mad his wife cry. Smell That? Smells like Rove to me!!!!

[blm]

3. In those 25 years, their biggest mistake was not noticing the GOP cronies

were buying up control of the broadcast media.

That is directly related to the GOP takeover of the country and the way Americans are being led into a fascism they never saw coming.

[jasmeel]

64. I agree. It was so behind the scenes that it would be hard to have

known about it unless you were tuned into that issue.

[SharonAnn]

272. Baloney! I was suspicious immediately when Reagan was for it.

Anybody who didn't know that deregulation would lead to consolidation and that consolidation would lead to corporate (Republican) control, wasn't paying attention.

You didn't have to be a rocket scientist or an economist to see how that would play out.

It's like the deregulation of cable TV pricing in the late 1990's. People ssaid, "Oh, cable prices are OK, we don't need regulation to be continued." Well, immediately after price regulation was dropped cable prices rose andhave been rising ever since.

Why did they think the low and steady cable prices existed? It was becasue they were regulated!

Sometimes I think we (the American public) deserve what we get. I don't deserve it, but I doing all I can to prevent bad things from happening. Unfortunately, until we're the majority we have to suffer the consequences of the majority votes.

[MadHound]

4. I hear ya Walt, and in the same boat that you are

It was against my better judgement that I stayed with the Democratic party through the '04 election cycle, but I did.

But now these so-called leaders of ours are going to piss it all away, and betray this country into fascism.

Hello Greens! They may not have the power now, but at least they know how to fight.

[Walt Starr]

7. I'm with you

This is my line in the sand:

____________________________

This far and no further. This is the straw. If they allow Alito in without a filibuster and the Repukes going nuke, I'm done.

[hogwyld]

134. This better be the Dems Stalingrad

If not here, where? If not now, when? Either they get a backbone, or I'm gone! (Dem for 24 years). At least the Greens still have their conscience!

[Selatius]

201. Well, if it's Stalingrad we're in, we're in desperate shape

You'd think we could stop them long before they got that far, but oh well.

[kath]

170. me too, Walt - if they can't FINALLY develop a fokkin' spine on this one,

I'm done.

We need a PEOPLE'S Party. Enough of the corporatism bullshit.

[Hissyspit]

5. Well said. This is the MAIN reason (among hundreds) Americans

shouldn't have allowed George W. Bush to be elected president, and amazingly, Americans and the media ignored the probability five years ago that Shrub would get to remake the court into an extremist right-wing dominated court. It was not on the radar at all during the 2000 election run-up and, to this day, that amazes me.

[Walt Starr]

12. I could accept Alito getting in if the Dems put up a fight

and by "a fight" I mean a filibuster.

force the Repukes to go nuke. I can accept losing under the terms that the Repukes changed rules in mid game.

But rolling over and playing dead I will not accept. If that happens, I will become every bit as Anti-Democratic as I am currently Anti-Republican.

[Hissyspit]

14. We need Bush to be forced to nominate a more moderate candidate

He would have to deal with backlash from the Right, but he is at low-ebb in popularity, so I think it can be done.

[Atman]

22. BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT HIS POPULARITY!

You MUST come to that realization. Popularity only matters if the elections are legitimate. Otherwise, who cares what his poll numbers are? He's counting his own votes.

[Hissyspit]

30. I do realize that. I meant that the American public can be seen as

supportive of an effort to force withdrawal of the nomination a la harriet Miers, thus the Democrats can have some leeway against the Republicans who might resist such an attempt. There are plenty of Republican Senators who DO care about their popularity. Apologies for not making that clearer. My writing skills suck lately.

[robbedvoter]

55. Ding!Ding!Ding! I have this embroidered on a pillow (actually sig line):

"You really have to wonder what kind of bloated house-bound moron could think slumping polls and plummeting approval ratings would worry a gang of fanatics who stole two elections in a row, invaded a country they knew couldn’t defend itself, and gave a male hustler White House security clearance."

[zanne]

46. Same here.

Thirty-two years of organizing, campaigning and donating to the Democratic party will end with a whimper if they don't put up a fight and represent their constituents. If I have to feel ostracized in my own country, I'll do it Green.

[JVS]

231. yeah. Fight and lose, but by all means fight! What can they gain by..

doing nothing? Why? The party has no power now, but if they never take a stand and lead they'll never get any power back.

[Burning Water]

94. It might not

have been on the main-street, blue collar worker's radar, but it was a definite issue for the RW. That's how they managed to turn out enough votes to steal the GD election.

[Maggie_May]

You said it all

We long time Democrats new it would come down to the judges. Thats why I truly think the Republicans stole cheated and did what ever they had to to win elections. I do believe this is it I am not worried about the abortion issue even that it is important. But I know what this all about big money more executive power.

[Neecy]

8. I feel your pain

I too have been a life-long Democrat and that isn't because I like their logo or their color schemes but because I believe in certain principles.

Alas, my voice and my concerns are now written off because I'm no longer a citizen but an 'activist'. That's how they ignore us - call us 'activists' and dismiss our concerns like we're some kind of crackpots.

This nomination is my test of this party as well.

[Gregorian]

9. This isn't good enough.

I continue to go back to a previous post of yours. SHUT IT DOWN! Why are we continuing with Bush's agenda? We know he is a fraud. We know the elections were both stolen. We know he has committed high crimes. Many.

Forget Alito. Shut this government down. Stop any further destruction until these criminals are removed.

Edit- I know there's no provision to do this. And I know the repubs would use it every chance, if there were. But there must be a way to stop an administration which is committing high crimes. Pre-impeachment.

[sui generis]

10. right behind you Walt

If a candidate has this much evidence behind his unsuitability for the job, including broken recusal vows, a track record of irrationally upholding the "rights" of corporate entities at the expense of human entities, and the desire to install a presidential dictatorship with virtually unlimited power, and we do NOTHING to block him, then I'm ready to cash it in.

They don't deserve to be in power if they don't have better clarity of purpose and willingness to stand up to this debauchery in a meaningful and memorable way.

I'm sorry, but Kennedy bellyaching about "timeframes" as a criteria for recusal was tangential and muddled.

If you want to establish criteria for the question, it is whether criteria such as financial "involvement" with a company is enough, not the timeframe of involvement. It should be to re-establish the government adage that the mere appearance of impropriety, legal or not, is impropriety.

I would have made the statement that being a shareholder for ANY period of time is grounds for recusal, not within 3 years of a stock purchase.

Furthermore, going for the throat Kennedy should have asked Alito what criteria HE used in making the decision not to recuse himself, and whether he had published that criteria or simply capriciously decided to take the case, and if criteria wasn't involved, why did he decide his involvement on the case couldn't have been foregone.

[rusty_parts2001]

11. Is It Worth it?

Yes. Even if Scalito is confirmed, a Democratic majority in Congress or your state legislature can undo alot of damage, and a Democratic President certainly can. Keep in mind that much of the caseload of the Court (both Supreme Court and federal appellate courts) is generated by the right wing agenda (i.e. Terri Schiavo, Texas gerrymandering, tort "reform", union busting, employment cases, and a whole host of other polarizing issues they promote through Congress and the state legislatures. Every Democrat elected whittles away at their power. Keep contributing to good Democrats that are willing to put their name on the ballot.

[Walt Starr]

13. I just don't see it that way

If they give in on Alito without a fight, I will consider there to no longer be any difference between the parties that matters to me.

[timber84]

99. Do you not believe that the balance of power will shift?

Surely you don't believe this. Alito is not going to be the last SC justice appointed. They are lifetime appointments but everyone dies at some point.

[Walt Starr]

110. If tehy don't filibuster, I don't believe a balance of power will ever shi

even if the Democrats take control.

[FredUptoHere]

18. a Democratic President??? how's that ever going to happen again?

does the name Diebold mean anything to you?

i honestly don't think that these guys would be pulling all the shit that they are if they thought that they could/would ever be out of power again.

[Atman]

20. Once Scalito is in, rigged machines will be the law of the land.

"Taking it to the Supreme Court" will be a meaningless exercise, no different than taking it to the BFEE themselves.

[bvar22]

58. The LAST Democratic President (and Congress)

didn't Roll Back any of the damage done to LABOR and the Working Class under Reagan.
They didn't even try.
Wasn't even on the Radar.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans,
family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."--- Senator Paul Wellstone

In EVERY case, "Barriers to Trade" and "Restrictions on Corporations" were created to protect something valuable!

The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[Walt Starr]

59. Give that DUer a CEEEGAR!

Yup, there is never any rolling back of the damage the right does, or at least not since Roosevelt was president.

[princehal]

15. I dunno

They will do what they can I hope, but we will loose.

I have to say it.

Thank's Ralph.

[Walt Starr]

16. If they roll over, Ralph was right

Sorry, but there it is. IF the Democrats do not filibuster Alito, Ralph was right all along.

[Atman]

17. Ouch. Scary thought.

I think I'd actually vote for the bastard if the election were today! Shudder the thought.

[Walt Starr]

24. It's taken me some time

So much has added up. so many straws on the camel's back. so many times of being on the brink of leaving the party and then thinking, "where would I go?"

There's no more room for straws on teh camel's back. I've never been as pissed as I am right now.

[malaise]

36. Ralph has usually been right n/t

[timber84]

101. Who's Ralph?

[info being]

107. Ralph Nader is always right. Too bad it doesn't do any good.

[Leopolds Ghost]

227. The sad thing is that if Ralph had kept his peace in 2000

Then the Dems would not have needed to filibuster Alito... but the tragic thing is even if Gore had won (and it was not the same Gore, but more generally it was a Gore with less autonomy and influence within the party whose every move towards genuine populism was countered from within by folks like Donna Brazile) then the same New Democratic handlers would be in power still, looking for ways to royally f*** up, continue the Reagan revolution, and generally be blamed for every misfortune that happened ANYHOW during the Bush administration (for which Bush was not directly responeible for causing.)

Would we be better off? At present, yes... but would we have a better FUTURE ahead of us, if the Clintonites had presided over 9-11 and Katrina (assuming they did not have the perspicacity to prevent it, I am not denying they would not have f**ed up the aftermath as badly)?
I dunno... sometimes major setbacks are necessary to prevent a long, slow decline into social and political regression.

Then again, Nader was not about that, he wasn't seriously trying to solve that, and his third party approach was ultimately every bit as unworkable and counterproductive as trying to cooperate and share power with the New Democrats within the system.

The only two options I see are massive peaceful revolt (like in Ukraine) or a major popular revolt within the Democratic party (which the New Dems will be sure to say "oh no, there goes the 2006 elections because we are not all united, now is the time to be more like the Republicans when so many of them are doubting their party!")

[prolesunited]

21. I thought you already left the party

You've made so many similar announcements. Do they realize yet that the whole political climate in this country rests on whether their actions meet with your approval?

[Walt Starr]

31. So now I don't have the right to leave a party I've devoted time, money,

and effort to because you don't like it?

:eyes:

[asthmaticeog]

44. The boy who cried "wolf" had every right to cry "wolf," Walt.

The point is, the sheer number of times you've threatened to leave the Democratic Party over some percieved slight has become a bit of a running DU joke. Who, may I ask, was ever supposed to care?

[Walt Starr]

47. Here's my promise

There will be no Opus post. There will be no "I'm now an Independent" post.

All that will happen is the cloture vote will be taken, and there will never again be a post from Walt Starr on DU because Walt Starr can never again support any Democratic candidate.

[prolesunited]

51. Fine

I'll be sure and bookmark this.

[Walt Starr]

53. Looks like I'll never know.

Based upon how these hearings are going.

:shrug:

[lostnfound]

70. I think that's throwing babies out with bathwater.

What, if there's not 39 Democrats to stop this, and there's only 35, or 30, etc., you won't want to support those 35 or 30 anymore? Does the idea that there might be a handful of bad applies take away from the goodness of the ones that aren't rotten?

You wouldn't vote for Senator Boxer, even, for example?

IMO, each person stands on their own merits.

[Walt Starr]

74. No Democrats ever again

As far as I'm concerned, if there's no filibuster, there's not a whit of difference between the parties that matters to me any more.

I'll vote third party or leave the race blamnk with no vote.

[lostnfound]

234. Who are your heroes, politically speaking? Would you abandon them,

simply because others who CLAIM to be of the same party aren't on the right track?

I will stand on the side of John Conyers and Barbara Boxer, and won't abandon them just because of the (fill-in-the-blank) DINO's who might happen to ruin it for all of us.

Because such heroes are always something bigger and more deserving of my loyalty than anything as ephemeral as the overall sum of a party's parts.

If your best friend were running as a Democrat, would you not vote for them just because of the (fill-in-the-blank) DINO's who didn't stand up for what the party as a whole stands for? It's hard to understand that.

I don't disagree with your anger. But place it precisely where it belongs -- with the Republicans AND with the specific DINO's who have betrayed us.

[AntiCoup2K4]

108. The point is simply this....

There is NO excuse, NONE for anyone who calls themselves a "Democrat" to confirm this bastard. But you know that the usual suspects, the Nelsons, the Landrieus, etc are salivating over it already. And Hillary will probably buy some DLC horseshit about how it will help her "centrist image" if she votes for the clown.

I'd prefer another scenario. Picture a Democratic side in rock solid opposition to this fucking piece of Nazi shit appointee. Now picture a handful of Republicans who KNOW what this pig will bring to the court, and who aren't comfortable with that themselves. Yes I'm talking the usual handful of Moderate Republicans. But if every Democrat did their job, then a handful of Republicans might just cross over.

Am I dreaming? At this point what the fuck is there left to do otherwise?

As far as leaving the Party goes.... Only a damn fool would believe that there IS a party to leave if they allow this travesty to happen.

[Matariki]

177. i hope that won't be true

i enjoy your posts. even if you redirect your energy and contributions to the Green party. in fact i'm in agreement with you on this whole thread. i too will direct my energy and contributions there if the Dems roll over on this one. It will be a long uphill battle (for the green party), but it will be a battle with heart.

[Leopolds Ghost]

230. Is this the same Walt who I remember

arguing with the folks who felt it should be acceptable to defend Nader
on DU? The die-hard yellow-dawg Walt? I was one of the "anyone should
have the right to run" folks... Is this the same Walt who did all that
good work on the medals controversy?

Geez, things must be really bad. How did it come to this?

Where is the Starr and the Walter? Where is the horn that was blowing?
They have passed, like wind in the meadow... like rain on the mountain.
The days have gone down in the West Texas...over the hills into shadow.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

90. HA!

:thumbsup:

[radio4progressives]

92. You consider the rolling over on this confirmation a "perceived slight"?

perhaps also consider this confirmation mereley something that Dems just need to "get over"?

and do you think that Walt's voice is too singular or representative of too few to require a certain degree of respect?

[asthmaticeog]

97. No, I don't - denying Alito is critically important.

But this DU member has for YEARS now been making specious threats to leave the party over matters that range in import from crucial to utterly trivial. And has for YEARS been saying that if something doesn't go the way he'd like it, he'd never support another Dem again. I'm just curious if and when it'll ever stick. Because it's been fucking OLD for a long time. If a DUer wants respect for his voice, a bit of constancy isn't much to ask.

[radio4progressives]

125. Thank you for the clarification

I'm not in the position to speak to the history on DU, except with regard to my own experience, which didn't really begin in earnest until sometime following the shut down of the Kerry forum and the horrible elections outcome.

as a further explanation underpinning concerns expressed in the post that you are responding to: there have been a number of members who (as I perceive it) apparently expect people to 'just shut up and fall in line' with regard to policy positions the party has taken which many of us believe with clear certainty, has been at the minimum, very wrong headed and very antithetical to the traditional core values of the party and so it has been difficult to understand why often the mean spirited and caustic reactions to raising those issues. I'm not pointing to you specifically, I'm referring to other members who do not seem to be active in this thread (at this juncture).

[asthmaticeog]

167. No, I'm totally with you.

I assume you're talking about the "Support the DLC or else" brigades? I can't stand that; I try not to get sucked into those discussions because I'll sometimes lose my cool and start flaming, after which I have to wonder who's the bigger fool.

[katinmn]

95. Actually, when Walt made the call previously, the Dems stuck together

They have done that on rare, important occasions.
It can be done.

So there.

[asthmaticeog]

104. And I certainly hope they stick together on this.

My post was made not in reference to the Alito confirmation hearings, but to a specific DUer about his laughable self-importance, his "pump and dump" tendency to anoint certain politicians as messiahs and then trash them as traitors within days, and his constant threatening to leave the party. I have grave doubts that the Senate Democrats are collectively trembling over the potential loss of the vote of one tiresome internet crank.

[katinmn]

109. Well, they ought to be trembling over the loss of millions

of us that they have been jerking around for years.

I'm pretty cranky myself.

We want them to do what they were elected to do.

[Walt Starr]

117. And the SCOTUS possibilities always kept me in the rank and file

of the party.

Tell me, how can it get any worse than Alito?

[asthmaticeog]

157. I don't think it can get much worse than Alito.

But I didn't post about Alito. I posted about you. A playmate who incessantly threatens to take his ball and go home quickly grows tiresome. And that's just an analogue, Walt, so don't go accusing me of trivializing these hearings by comparing them to "play."

[katinmn]

216. You guys should get your own logo!

Quite a clique you have here on DU.

[asthmaticeog]

219. .

:boring:

[Susang]

120. Precisely

What's next? If you don't wear a tweed suit to the Alito hearings, I'll never vote for a Democrat again?

It's patently ridiculous to expect politicians to act precisely as you wish them to EVERY SINGLE TIME! Certain DUers haven't seemed to realize this yet.

[katinmn]

131. That is an attempt to minimize the importance of equality, justice,

liberty, and free speech by comparing them to an item of clothing.

[prolesunited]

136. No, this is an attempt to minimize the rantings

of a single DUer trying to gin up support to take a bunch of people with him. I know Sue personally. She's a stalwart proponent of equality, justice, liberty and free speech.

[Susang]

149. You've completely missed my point

I compared nothing to an item of clothing and minimized nobody's free speech, equality or justice and challenge you to prove that I did. That assertion is insulting and just plain wrong.

[foo_bar]

151. you weren't here during the primaries

Any candidate who does not denounce this specific ad (not the NRA one, but the bin Laden one) will lose my vote should they be nominated. I will make no compromises on this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=900962&mesg_id=901203

You may not be saying it, but I am
Nobody But Dean.

If the Democrats can't see what they've done to themselves, fine. I will not support them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=139860&mesg_id=140620

"Hopeully, though, a third party effort will gain steam over the next four years. If ya see one gaining steam, let me know. I'll jump on board!"
http://www.peopleforchange.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=14310&mode=linear

[Susang]

158. Thanks foo_bar

For proving I'm not insane. ;-)

[asthmaticeog]

169. Wellllll...

at least not as far as THIS thread is concerned. :evilgrin:

[Susang]

174. You keep quiet

I am officially trying to stifle your free speech.

[asthmaticeog]

181. Come see the violence inherent in the system!

Help, help, I'm being repressed!

[Susang]

186. You betcha!

:thumbsup:

[RandomKoolzip]

188. Ouch!

I knew I wasn't just imagining those.

[kath]

172. when was the last time the dems stuck together - this is a serious

question, since I really can't remember.

[prolesunited]

49. You should read a little closer. I never said any such thing.

Leave any time you want. But after your umpteenth post to do so over the past few years, I just thought you already had left. It kind of reminds me of the threads where people are announcing they are leaving DU just to have others beg them to stay.

[Walt Starr]

50. Read Post #47 n/.t

[Apollo11]

23. Unite and take back America!

To those people who are saying the answer is to vote Green: I say never misunderestimate the importance of a Presidential election.

Remember in 2000 it was the Greens and Nader who were saying: ain't no difference between Bush and Gore.

If you want to see the difference: look at who Bush is nominating to the Supreme Court. Then ask yourself: "Who would Gore have nominated?"

Nader's candidacy is sometimes cited as one of the reasons why Bush was able to "win" in 2000. But I'm not blaming the Greens because there is so much evidence that electoral fraud in Florida was widespread, and many 1000s of ballots which should have been counted for Gore were never included in the count. Nevertheless - Gore needed every vote he could get in 2000.

Gore will make a major speech in DC on Monday 16th. Let's see what he has to say.

In Gore We Trust
www.algore-08.com
http://algore2008.net/
:)

[Walt Starr]

26. You know, I've always come back to that in the past when these asswipes

have pissed me off.

No more. If they do not filibuster alito, the only conclusion I can come to is that NAder was right!

[Tesha]

25. As Westley/the masked man said to Inigo Montoya (Mandy Patinkin)...

As Westley/the masked man said to Inigo Montoya (Mandy Patinkin)
in The Princess Bride:

"Get used to disappointment."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093779/quotes

Tesha

[Walt Starr]

27. I've been disappointed adn disappointed and disappointed and

disappointed for long enough.

I will brook no more disappointement. Either the Democrats fight, or Nader was right!

[MuseRider]

34. Point well made,

Nader just may have been right. At 52 years of age I find it one of the most agonizing decisions I have ever made but it has suddenly become very clear to me that if they do not fillibuster then there is no reason to support them because they do not any longer represent my most basic demands of a party and that is to keep democracy safe from fascists like these. If they don't see this they are either stupid or complacent or at the worst complicit.

[Walt Starr]

37. I know about the agonizing part of it

I've been close a few times in the past and been so pissed off when they don the pink tutus, but always ended up back at the point where I wondered where else I could go.

The answer struck me with Alito's non-answer answers. Do the same thing. If there's no third choice on the ballot, simply leave that race blank. It was like being struck by lighting.

[MuseRider]

38. I have watched you

go through all of that here and always been just a tad bit behind you but we always came to the same conclusions. At this point there really will not be any reason to even worry about it. If he gets in I think it is over anyway so why bother? Well, from all these years I think I know that you will still be out there fighting even though there is little hope and I will be as well but we may have to find different paths than the ones that are currently letting us down. My heart will break if they don't at least try to stop this.

[yodermon]

43. My God Walt,

you're waxing poetic!

Can you at least give us your assurance that you won't stop posting here?

[Walt Starr]

45. Actually, I will stop posting here

DU rules require support for Democrats. If tehre is no filibuster, I could never again support any Democrat for any position.

[yodermon]

86. Well, Walt,

I reject that.
Your voice is too valuable, even if I have disagreed with it at times.

Here's how it goes down.

If the Dems roll over and fail to filibuster, I respectfully ask that you CONTINUE to post at DU, stating your opinions on the matter, and risk a tombstone in the process. I trust you see the parallel.

Force DU to go nuclear on you.

If the Dems don't go down fighting, you had damn well better.

(melodrama aside, I don't think you'd get tombstoned, bcz half of DU would have to go with you)

[timber84]

96. I did not know that Walt.

[radio4progressives]

103. Walt , DU Rules Does not Exclude "Others" ... One can be a Progressive

and not affiliated with any party, or 'progressive independent' - (which is not a party) - also, DU does not exlude Greens, if you should choose to officially "register" as Green for instance.

[Walt Starr]

111. But DU does exclude those who cannot support Democratic candidates

which would be the case for me if there is no filibuster.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. I've been a Dem since 1965 and my nose is worn out.

The "not as bad" party has moved to the "nearly as bad" party. I'm now voting issues rather than party.

[Greyhound]

62. I think that pretty much sums it up. n/t

[durablend]

32. K&N for the truth

I hear ya! There comes a point where you have to say "enough is enough" and this is it for me as well. No way in hell I'd vote for a Repuke, but I'm not going to vote for a bunch of doormats either.

[LoZoccolo]

124. I for this waste of my time.

:hi: :nuke:

[lonestarnot]

39. I hope to hell it was!

[underpants]

41. McScrewed or not stick with it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2363058

[Walt Starr]

42. I've stuck with it and stuck with it and stuck with it.

Came close to leaving many times in the past five years, but still ended up sticking with it.

It all comes donw to one cloture vote for me.

[MuseRider]

61. You know what?

I just read the post from underpants (:hug: underpants). There are still some Dems worth supporting and fighting for. Not many but a few who have never been a part of what we are witnessing now. I may register as something else but I will not discontinue my support for them. As long as they are fighting I can too but the rest of them, well they can take their little memberships and their little D(whatever)C cards and have themselves a good old time.

Walt, you are steadfast and faithful but sometimes you just can't go where the rest are going. Sometimes we just gotta move on.

[katinmn]

148. I feel the same way. I'll support Boxer and Conyers

Kucinich, and others who have consistently voted for OUR interests, not the way the lobbyists told them to.

Too often the Dems gave the Repugs free rein to fuck things up. They, too, must be held accountable.

[ginnyinWI]

56. I think we'll see a party line vote in committee

Even more centrist Dems like Kohl seem to have objections. If the Dems go into open warfare on this, it will be worse-- it will only throw the public's sympathies to Alito and they will stop listening to any more Dem objections.

It may be that Alito gets through. The public has been so thoroughly scared and brainwashed that the Repubs in the Senate still feel totally secure voting for the president's guy. Only a change to majority party status will give the Dems any kind of real power. For now, they can only raise objections and get on record as opposing him.

But I'm sure that day is coming! In times of crisis, a president is usually allowed to grab power, and does. But then there is a pushback. And this president's pushback is overdue, and coming--be sure of that! We'll come back to a more constitutional government, although it might take a few more years. Their power to scare the public into submission will only last just so long, and not longer.

[Walt Starr]

57. Now is the time for pushback

If not now, when?

If not Alito, who?

This is the line in the sand...


__________________________________



This far and no further. The Democrats fight or Nader was right.

[Tace]

60. Walt -- Maybe I'm Some Kind Of Outlaw Around Here...

But I've been a contributor to DU for more than three years now, not because I'm a Democrat -- because I'm not, I'm an Independent -- but because I believe in American Democracy. I believe that transcends support for any political party. If that means I'm breaking DU rules and leads to my being tombstoned, then fuck it.

[Walt Starr]

63. Do you support Democratic candidates for office?

If you do, you are within the bounds of the DU rules.

There's the difference, I think.

[Tace]

68. Sure -- In Fact, I've Never Voted Republican

I just vote for the Anarchists, Communists, Socialists, Greens and Pot Party candidates, too. : )

On edit: Oh, and Democrats, of course.

[Walt Starr]

69. I've never voted for a Republican and have voted for nothing but

Democrats.

If there is not filibuster, I'll never be able to vote for another Democrat again.

[Susang]

66. I didn't realize that Thursday

Was "Walt Starr threatens to leave the party yet again" day. Had I known, I would have dressed for the occasion! :party:

[Walt Starr]

67. Read post #47 n/t

[Susang]

73. Oh, I read it

Doesn't mean I believe it'll happen.

[Walt Starr]

75. You don't have to believe it

That's your prerogative.

[Susang]

84. History supports my post

You have made this claim several timse before. Why should anyone belive that this time different than the last?

[katinmn]

100. See post #95

[Susang]

143. What exactly are you trying to say, anyway?

That post makes little to no sense to me in the context of my post. I'll reproduce it below, since you didn't feel the need to:

"Actually, when Walt made the call previously, the Dems stuck together
They have done that on rare, important occasions.
It can be done.

So there."

What call? And so what? :shrug:

[katinmn]

159. You mentioned past history

I shed some light on it for ya.

[Susang]

165. No, you didn't

No light at all.

[katinmn]

166. You're very annoying!

:rofl:

[Susang]

178. I do my humble best

O8)

[Dr Fate]

80. Jeeze Walt- dont leave me here alone with all these apologists!!!

Can you at least stay in the lounge???

;)

These are our times, whether we like them or not. Is giving up really the answer?

[Walt Starr]

119. At this point, I don't even know if I'll ever cast another ballot!

As far as I see it, this thing is pretty much over and there will be nothing anybody can do.

[Dr Fate]

72. Suure- Walt and "his kind" are the "real problem"- right?

As opposed to Democrats who cant seem to oppose facism & racism.

Let's laugh at these silly "Democrats" who insist congress-critters that the they helped get elected oppose facism & racism.

[Susang]

76. Sure, that's exactly what I said

Not.

[Dr Fate]

77. No- it's exactly what I said and will keep saying. n/t

n/t

[Susang]

79. I'm not sure what you're saying

Are you?

[Dr Fate]

82. I'm saying that making fun of this concerned Democrat turns me off.

Concerned Democrats are not the problem- its the congress people who dont adress those concerns.

If anyone is subject to jokes, it's them, not Walt.

[Susang]

88. Concerned Democrats don't quit the party

And threaten to vote republican or say that "Nader was right" if the Democrats don't do what they personally think is what should be done.

I don't make fun of serious concerned Democrats.

[katinmn]

98. Which orifice did you pull this from?

"And threaten to vote republican or say that "Nader was right"

:silly:

[prolesunited]

122. Umm... Walt himself said Nader was right

in this very thread. And although he didn't say outright he would vote GOP, not voting Dem takes away a vote from our party, so the end result is one less vote for the Dems.

[Walt Starr]

127. Incorrect quote

I said that if the Democrats do not filibuster, Nader was right.

But don't let a thing like facts get in the way of a rant.

And basically, I'd be going from not voting for Republicans to not voting for Republicans AND Democrats.

[hogwyld]

154. If enought people vote their consience...

And vote neither Dem or Puke, but for a 3rd party, we can have real change. It's time to end the Demican/Republicrat monopoly, and vote independent!

[Susang]

130. This thread and the DU archives

These are all Walt Starr quotes.

He says in this thread that if the Dems don't filibuster, then "Nader was right". In an old thread where Walt was angry with the party, he threatened to vote Republican after the 2004 election. He subsequently changed his mind after about a day in each instance.

There's history here, I'm not just pulling this out of my ass, but thanks for that lovely image.

[Dr Fate]

113. Concerned Democrats insist that facist appointees be fillibustered.

Democrats who apologize or make excuses when we continue to hand everything over to Bush- is this a form of giving up? What is that, exactly?

Anyway- I DO agree with you that quiting the party is not the answer.

[Susang]

156. I do not agree with handing everything over to Bush

Or making excuses. My comments are directed at the actions of one Democrat, I have not made any comments about anything other than his actions. Why people keep putting words in my mouth is completely baffling to me.

I do not know what the answer is, I just know that melodramatically quitting every time things don't go exactly the way you want it is not the one I'm looking for. If that's the one you want to get behind, then peace be with you.

[Dr Fate]

162. I agree with you.

If only because my breaking point has not been met.

I wont quit my party activism if there is no fillibuster- but it sure will make it that much harder to pick up the pom-poms again.

[Susang]

163. And I agree with you

I can't say I'd be happy, but I can't give up. I don't see a viable alternative, at least not at this juncture. Perhaps in the future.

[Walt Starr]

116. Concerned Democrats always realized that the SCOTUS was why

you stay.

So what's to stick around for any more after Alito?

[prolesunited]

128. Perhaps we should send them this thread then

and that will sway their vote. :shrug:

[Walt Starr]

132. Not likely

Looks like Feinstein has made up her mind not to filibuster, so in essence, this thread has probably become my Opus.

[Matariki]

180. i didn't see any threats to vote republican?

and the issue at stake isn't what one person wants personally, you trivialize this issue by saying that. it is possibly a very, very grave moment at stake for all of us.

and we *should* all expect our elected party leaders to stand against the utter corruption unfolding in plain sight, and which Alito's confirmation will only further seal. Otherwise what are those leaders worth to us? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING - imo.

[Susang]

187. I'm trivializing this issue?

Hardly.

I consider this thread a prime example of something that trivializes the issue. Overwrought, melodramatic handwringing instead of thoughtful discussion and commentary and action.

[Matariki]

203. self delete

this is a useless, flame bating thread.

[Susang]

226. Finally, you see the light!

It only took buckets of blood and a kazillion posts. :eyes:

[Fovea]

71. Was it the Helms Amendment?

That was a watershed event for me. I went from being just a casual radical to a full blown fire breather.

It was when I started thinking that all religions, not just Wicca, like Jessie wanted, should lose their tax exempt status.

[nomaco-10]

78. It's always been about SCOTUS for me.....

that's why I was one of the "hold your nose and grab a bucket brigade" in 2004. I knew there would be SCOTUS appointments and I also knew the appointments made would be the most dangerous and damaging in this nation's history. The devastation his appointment will bring to the court will hover over this country like a plague for years to come. This confirmation will set up the most oppressive judicial system this country has ever seen. If anybody would have told me I'd be living in a fascist theocracy run by a dictator, I would have laughed at them and told them they were crazy. What a difference six years makes.

Alito's nomination will be confirmed and yes, Walt we're screwed.

[Nutmegger]

81. I hear you Walt

I'm am utterly disappointed in the party. You see how the Rethugs are so united in pushing their agenda through no matter what. Where are the Dems when it comes to universal health care??? As far as I'm concerned, if the Rethugs can steamroll the nasty bankruptcy bill / CAFTA through, the Democrats can do the same. I want results! This Alito will be the true test for me.

[ContraBass Black]

83. Did we just become a joke again?

How did this happen?

[katinmn]

85. The sad thing is, we aren't sure if the Dems will reject Alito

If they don't, will we being seeing a Walt Starr thread saying: I'm going Green!

:rofl:

If so, I don't want to miss it.

edit: I didn't read the middle posts first. Maybe we'll be seeing you over at PI.

:*

[Matariki]

182. what's PI? n/t

[MadisonProgressive]

87. Apologies to CSN&Y

Samuel, is a very very very bad man
With a two-faced lying facade
He's even kind of odd
He's everything the nation doesn't need
He's a...@#$@%

I'll light the fire, if you'll throw his body on the pire that we'll burn - today-ay-ay...

[rucky]

89. So if we're hoping they shut it down, when should we start getting worrie

that they will confirm this nutjob?

[bleedingheart]

91. I just called the DNC and told them if they don't filibuster they had

better stop calling me for donations.

I am just about fed up with this happy horseshit...and I am a democratic committee woman. I might as well register Green if the Dems keep capitulating.

[Burning Water]

93. There will be more than

a single nominee. If Alito is rejected, what is to keep * from nominating an even more right-wing fascist? How many times can the Dems got to the filibuster well before it runs dry and the American people start to see them as obstructionist? Because you know they will overlook the bigger issues and concentrate on the fact that a willful 'minority' party is obstructing the system.

But not to worry, there's always the nuclear option to save us from ourselves. 'Cause I think it is going to be used. The country is too divided, and both sides are going for a win.m Wish I felt better about it all.

[Nutmegger]

102. The nuclear option will be deployed

I have no doubt about that. The question is if the American public will tolerate this? Or will they continue to go about their daily lives?

[Darkhawk32]

105. Unfortunately, the latter. n/t

[Burning Water]

123. They haven't gotten upset

about 3 stolen elections, an unjust and unnecessary war, torture of innocent civilians, 100s of 1000s of Iraqis killed, the hatred and disgust that the whole world feels for the USA, the fact that terrorism still occurs daily around the world, the unchecked spread of AIDS, the massive crises of global warming, the fact that one party controls our government which is acting in a Nazi-like manner, the hundreds of lies, the corruption and bribery, etc, etc, etc.

They're not upset about all that, and the illegal and unconstitutional crushing of a filibuster is going to get them upset??? Not on the planet I live on.

[seabeyond]

106. boils down to? you have had so many boils down to

this. by gosh the dems had better do THIS or i am done. lots of your threads starts with THIS. seems to me what you mostly promote is anger at dems, forget all the repugs do, go after the dems, at all cost

i am not even talking about this whole scj to do we are experiencing. it just seems like another event for you to yell they either,..... or i walk. who's with me

[Walt Starr]

115. The potential for an Alito-like nominee always pulled me back

And if an Alito gets in, there's no longer a reason to stay. I've always stayed because it could get worse if I didn't.

That's no longer the case if Alito gets in.

[seabeyond]

121. you are right of course walt. fuck hungry children, old sick people

being taken care of, resolving world issue in other ways besides war

it is all about this.

i beg you pardon. this is a real argument on your part that you wnat me to take seriously?

[Walt Starr]

135. I don't see the Dems in Congress giving a shit about hungry children

old sick people, and they certainly want to fight wars.

Where's teh fucking difference?

[seabeyond]

140. hence my example of your attitude and just how unrealistic it is

you dont see a difference? you dont see dems fighting for the hungry?

then you didnt listen to kerry edwards

you spouted true blue nadar rhetoric

the repugs LIKE people like you walt. you are their friend

you have consistently been in the position democrats are bad. and to use this board with that position makes me question you motivation. there is not a single thing the democrats can do right for you as you clearly show in your response to my post


you agitate

[Walt Starr]

142. Yeah, teh Republicans really like somebody who votes straight

Democratic ballots in every election for a quarter century.

:eyes:

I'm just fed up, and I am finally GIVING UP! I'm not buying the bullshit either party is selling any more.

[seabeyond]

146. well, i will have to just find at least one more, to take your place

i think i have a handful more that are willing. too important to too many for me to give up. not a chance in hell. but you gotta go, go. if you dont see a difference between the two parties than maybe you should

[LoZoccolo]

112. Walt Starr: a story of capitulation

NBD: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=166233#166460

NBDOC: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=173767

MNBD: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=168294#169334

ABB: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=83648

And before anyone thinks this is a forbidden personal attack, please keep in mind that the original post is all about the original poster's opinion, and a threat which relies on a certain amount of crebility which I am calling into question. In other words, don't bother us with what you've done or what you're gonna do if you don't want the replies to be about you.

[Atman]

129. Please don't make this about Walt

I'm not crazy about the guy, and I've butt heads with him in the past. So what? This type of diversion (yours) is why we keep losing our focus. Walt makes very valid points, but you spend your time researching Walt instead of fighting the fight. I personally don't give a flying fruitbat what Walt said previously. I chalk up some of it, a large part of it, to his passion. I've sworn off CNN on this board once or twice, but it still seems to come on the teevee in my house with way too much regularity. We all get hot, especially in times like this. But think for a moment; where Walt is actually supposed to go? The "Democratic" party is really the only game right now. There aren't many alternatives that actually have any weight to throw around. So Walt might have spoken with a bit of hyperbole, maybe this time he even means it, that he's really quitting "The Party." But he's probably similar to a lot of us, in that our membership in "The Party" is limited to the (D) next to our names on the local Voter Registration roles.

So re-focus your energy on overthrowing the regime who would take away your rights, and not a DU poster who is simply frustrated and fed up with a party who no longer seems to offer us any representation whatsover. In the end, which do you think will be recorded in the history books?

[LoZoccolo]

138. Walt made this about Walt.

In addition to simply expressing disapproval, he made it about what he's going to do about it. That sort of threat rests on a credibility to follow through on it which I am demonstrating he does not have.

As far as focusing my time, I'm actually helping focus theirs by showing that it is useless giving attention to someone who does this sort of thing.

[Matariki]

184. sorry, no

one "you've said this before" would have been enough. NOT digging through past posts, etc.

it comes across as a personal vendetta of a handful of people, and it's a waste of time.

There is a valid point to the OP - whether the democratic party - as a whole - is serving our interests. And if not, what can we do to reform it, or what are the better options.

[AgadorSparticus]

218. I second that it comes off as a personal vendetta by a handful of

people. Really quite sad to see them viciously go after a man who has voted straight dem for a quarter century instead of addressing the issues that someone like Walt would consider leaving the party.

[LoZoccolo]

221. Someone gets on here and threatens to take steps...

...to make mine and a bunch of other peoples' lives just a little more miserable, I think I have a right to call them on their credibility, especially since I provided documented evidence.

[AgadorSparticus]

222. thank you for proving the point that it IS a personal vendetta. he

threatens to leave the party for reasons that are appropriate for HIM, and makes no assertions that he's taking hostages with him, and yet, YOU take offense to it. He is entitled to his opinions and to do whatever he wants. How does that make YOUR life miserable?? Because he forced you to read his thread? I just don't see how this affects you personally.

And really, I don't care if he threatens to leave a hundred times in the past. What does it prove, anyways? That he may be hotheaded like 90% of the people here on DU? He has beliefs and he's passionate. It doesn't take away from his arguments. And whether his style rubs you the wrong way or not, he's still entitled to his opinion. And if he's making your life that miserable, then why don't you put him on ignore?

[LoZoccolo]

223. Do you take offense when someone votes Republican?

Oh.

[AgadorSparticus]

225. No. They are still entitled to do so. That is the beauty of democracy.

What I DO take offense on are psyche ops and bullying speech designed to manipulate people to a single agenda--such as, calling people names like "drama queen" because they don't agree with your opinion. These names are vicious, demeaning, and purposely meant to redirect the attention to character assassinations instead of arguing the points brought up.

And quite frankly, the conservatives do enough of that. We should be better than that.

But apparently, you do take offense to people voting Republican. So, would you rather we have a one party system?

[LoZoccolo]

233. I have no clue on how to convince you of this.

When someone performs an action that has a negative effect on someone else, usually the person affected gets offended. If we can't move beyond this general principle, I don't know where to go with this.

[AgadorSparticus]

238. so, I ask you. Would you rather we have just a one party system?

And within that one party, have just ONE acceptable idea?

Like I said, I don't agree with them, but I respect their right to disagree. And I like the discourse. When we have just one, centralized view is when I'm scared. You have every right to be offended. But like I stated above, the problem isn't being offended. It's after the offense and the resulting acts of shutting down discourse that I have a problem with.

[LoZoccolo]

242. No; we already have a two-party system.

A three-party system would in effect be a one-party system if the third party serves to continually split opposition to the second party.

[AgadorSparticus]

249. of which you are so offended, you'd like to shut the opposition.

Make sure those offensive ideas are not heard. ONLY YOUR ideas can be heard, right?

Just because Walt's leaving the party doesn't make him an automatic Republican or Green. Nor does it make him any less a democrat.

You can call yourself anything. Labels mean shit. Look at Zell Miller. He calls himself a democrat and speaks for and supports bush at the RNC!! But the way people have gone after Walt for stating his OWN opinions is a microcosm of the same swiftboating that we saw in 2004 and absolutely loathed.

There are democrats who believe differently from you. Or do you think they are not TRUE democrats because they don't think like you?

[LoZoccolo]

254. Don't change the subject.

I never said anything about making sure ideas are not heard.

[AgadorSparticus]

259. No one changed the subject. And of course you did.

This is about personal vendetta and redirecting attention (from ideas to character assassinations)--which IS an attempt at shutting down the "offending" views.

you wrote: I never said anything about making sure ideas are not heard.

I refer you to your post #248

"...I'm showing people that they don't fool us when they do that so they best quit or leave us alone."


So, I ask you AGAIN, do you feel that Walt isn't a TRUE democrat because his ideas are different from yours? Because from your post (#248) Walt isn't a democrat at all, but some perceived "Enemy" and you are the lone embodiment of the democratic party and its principles. And it is your job to make sure people like Walt quits or leaves "us" alone.

[LoZoccolo]

260. You're confusing his opinion with his tactic.

opinion: "I disapprove of the lack of a filibuster."

tactic: "I am not going to vote for the Democrats again."

I do not disapprove of someone voicing the former.

[AgadorSparticus]

261. You're confusing your opinion as gospel.

Whatever course of action he takes is of his opinion that it is the right course of action. If he chooses never to vote democrat again, it is still his opinion and he is entitled to it--whether you agree or not. You may disapprove of his course of action, but that does not justify attacking someone's character.

Do you believe that it is okay to attack him personally because of his opinions? And did you not say in your post #248 that you want people like Walt to shut up and leave "us" alone? I noticed that you refuse to answer any of my question. WHY?

I've answered the points you brought up. But I see you repeatedly evading my questions. Please answer them.

[LoZoccolo]

262. Your questions.

Do you believe that it is okay to attack him personally because of his opinions?

Yes. He has made the original post all about himself and his feelings, not about whether or not a course of action is effective. Criticizing an opinion of that nature will most likely go into that territory.

And did you not say in your post #248 that you want people like Walt to shut up and leave "us" alone?

Yes, I did say that, for the reasons I give in the thread I linked to.

[AgadorSparticus]

263. so, it's ok to trash a democrat if he takes a differing course of action?

...one in which you don't approve of. And of course he's talking about himself. He's not suggesting he speaks for anyone else. His OP was about HIS decisions and his course of action that HE feels is right. But you intentionally took it down that ugly path because it offends you. And you want to shup him up and people like him because they state their beliefs one too many times for your comfort. But you can state your beliefs over and over.

HOW is that democratic?

[LoZoccolo]

264. No.

Not what I said.

I was attacking his credibility for following through on a threat because the threat he made relied on that credibility. It is a valid criticism of the post, as suggested by the fact that none of my posts have been deleted in the few days this thread has been up.

If someone makes a post out of "I'm going to do this" and I can find a time where they said something similar and didn't do it, I think that is relevant.

[AgadorSparticus]

265. credibility?!!?! it is HIS opinion. Feel free to ignore it.

"Attacking his credibility" is a nice way of saying attacking the person.

And even if he doesn't do what he says, what difference does it make? What does it prove? That he may or may not go through with it? Why would anyone care so much? People make up their OWN minds on DU, right?

WHY is it so important to prove that this man has no credibility?

[LoZoccolo]

266. If someone says they're going to do something...

...and they didn't do it the last time, people are going to take that into account. Walt's message gets a certain reaction based on the idea that he's going to follow through. I'm saying, he doesn't deserve that reaction because he didn't follow through last time.

When the Bush* administration says something, do you take into account where they've shown that they've said one thing and done another before you believe it or not? I do. The same thing applies here.

It does make a difference because it pollutes DU. We don't let FReepers post here because they would waste our time. Why let someone else waste our time? I'm not going to let him waste someone's time if they think they have to beg Walt to change his mind, for instance. And I'm not going to let people get emboldened to do the same thing (and the idea that people should not do the same thing is my opinion).

[AgadorSparticus]

267. The diff. is that the Bush adm. is supposed to represent the people.

Therefore, they are accountable to the people. Walt doesn't represent anyone but Walt. And he isn't accountable to anyone but Walt. Again, what difference does it make if he follows through or not? He doesn't OWE me an explanation.

This is DU--a place where ordinary people share ideas. IDEAS. Not have to prove if they are worthy of the ideas. It shouldn't matter. If it does, it proves yet again, that this is of a personal nature.

People are not agreeing with Walt because of this so called "credibility".

They agree with him because what he SAYS RESONATES with them.

And that may be bitter crux of all this.

If you shut up the lead voice of a sentiment that you disagree with, you can keep DU from being "polluted". Otherwise you wouldn't equate him with the likes of freepers. But I suppose if you make that association enough, people will start believing it and it would make your job easier.

And I disagree about freepers not being allowed here just because they "would just waste our time". I'm sure there are plenty of DUers who would love to have a good reasoned argument with a freeper if they are capable of it. Most of the time, they come just spewing vile. But then again, DU is fastly mirroring those behaviors itself.

And it looks like you will get your wish soon enough. Anyone with dissenting ideas will be chased away by vicious attacks so that you can rule this roost and set your agenda.

I am just sad that this is called DEMOCRATIC underground as there is nothing democratic about it anymore.

[LoZoccolo]

268. You're confusing things again.

Whether or not I agree with his opinion is one thing.

Whether or not I agree with his tactic of expressing it is another.

Whether or not I think he's going to follow through on it is yet another thing.

And whether or not I think it belongs on this message board or deserves attention is still another thing.

You're mixing these things up in your arguments.

[AgadorSparticus]

269. no I'm not. You conveniently ignore what I've written in my previous

posts to you and now you say that I am confusing issues. I've addressed each one of those points you brought up--individually. You fail to see a different point of view.

[LoZoccolo]

270. Let me put it this way.

Why am I allowed to question Bush*'s credibility and not Walt Starr's? Especially since both of them say things that work to keep Republicans in power?

[AgadorSparticus]

271. I refer you to post #267. just look up and read the subj. line.

Since I've already addressed all this, I'm not going to retype everything just because you choose to ignore what is not copasetic with your beliefs. That seems to be the pattern in our little interaction. You go from branch to branch, so to speak, asserting yourself without ever really addressing what is IN my posts.

And your assertion of what Walt says is working to keep the republicans in power is again, YOUR opinion. And there are many who don't agree with you.

This is the internet and sometimes meanings get lost in the black and white words. If you have questions about what I've written, I'll be more than happy to clarify. But I'm not writing it all again.

[mom cat]

114. I am with you Walt. If the Dems cannot stand firm against Alito,

then I guess that I am not a Dem anymore. If the Dems abandon the majority of Americans on this one, they are not the majority party. Recent polls show that the unfavorable ratings for both Republican and Democratic members of congress are low... in the 30's, with the dems only doing about a point better. The American people are waiting for leadership, but I for one think that there are many principles at stake here. If the Dems refuse to stand for principles, then I refuse to support them anymore.

[Rowdyboy]

118. We couldn't even beat Clarence Thomas in 1991 when we ran the senate

And you think there's a chance of beating Alito?

Not gonna happen. Even Harriet Miers would be a helluva lot better than this.

[AntiCoup2K4]

133. As much as I hate to say it.....

....I think Thomas got off easier because he was an African American appointee, filling Thurgood Marshall's chair, and nobody wanted to be branded a "racist" for blocking his nomination. And the Republicans would have played that card, just as they have on some of Junior's previous failed judicial nominees.

We already have an Italian on the court, so they can't make that an issue. They need to fight this as if the entire country is on the fucking line. Because that's basically what it is.

[converted_democrat]

126. I don't blame you a bit, and I feel the same...

I left the pukes because I could see how corrupt they were, and I knew it was wrong. I left my party, I left my friends, I left my family, and I left my church to do what was "right." I joined this board and spend 6-8 hours on Dem causes each and everyday.. Lately though, I've been thinking what am I fighting for?? I feel like I'm putting out alot of effort fighting for people who aren't fighting for me.. I guess I assumed that because I knew what my old party was doing was wrong, that the Dems must be right.. But now it seems to be getting clearer to me that neither party is fighting for the interest of the average American.. Don't get me wrong there are many Dems that do have good intentions, and they do what is right no matter the cost.. Waters, McKinney, Conyers, and Feingold are perfect examples.. But when it comes down to it, there is just too much corruption.. Dems aren't nearly as bad about it as the pukes are, but it's still a big problem none the less. I find it hard to believe that either party as a whole cares about the plight of the average American...

If they won't fight for us now when will they?? This administration made it illegal to send an "annoying" email, and trying to implement a way to prosecute protesters under that Patriot Act as "disruptors." I fought hard because I thought I had someone in my corner, but I don't feel that way anymore.. I'm not going to risk my ass over people that won't fight for me. They aren't even making an attempt to stop it.. I can't keeping fighting like this for a team that doesn't seem to give a shit. If the shit hits the fan, I don't feel like there is going to be anyone that will try to protect us, or fight for us.

[Strawman]

137. Hey look on the bright side! We'll keep our powder dry!

To fight the important battles! Like umm, uhh....getting Hillary elected so she can fight against violent video games! Winning is all that matters. No matter how pyrrhic the victory is! Sure they have our rights we just surrendered, but we've got them right where we want them now for 2008!

:sarcasm:

[Walt Starr]

139. Yep, that powder sure will be dry

when teh Republicans finally get around to taking all the Democrat's powder away.

I should have seen this with the Roberts nomination, but I bought the bullshit hook, line and sinker, like I always seemed to do.

"Oh you Deaniacs are just being unreasonable. There's no reason to be pissed off just because verybody else started an 'Anybody But Dean' movement."

[katinmn]

141. No more flag burning!

:patriot:

[Coexist]

245. LOL!

Dry powder is so important.

[President Jesus]

144. Thanks, Ralph Nader!

This is precisely what happens when you throw your vote away. 30+ years of consequences.

[JudyM]

168. Yeah. And Katherine Harris. And SCOTUS. And Diebold.

Everywhere we turn, there's a constellation of on the ground factors coming together to prevent democracy. It's hard to stay positive in this corrupt climate. Nader, at least, could've been a little more realistic about the impact of his actions.

[President Jesus]

196. ...and 97,000 Floridians that voted for Nader

[theboss]

145. Why didn't you flip out during the Thomas or Scalia nominations?

They weren't even trying to be weasles about their philosophies.

[Walt Starr]

152. I think that's about teh point where I started losing faith in the Party

It's been a slow downhill degradation ever since, with the camel's back being nearly broken several times in the past five years.

[Le Taz Hot]

147. I came to that conclusion

in 2004 and REFUSED to vote Kerry because of his Iraqi war vote AND what they, as in the DEMS, did to Dean. Re-registered as "Decline to state." And before the pro-DLCer's and Walt bashers start screaming about getting their powder wet (thank you, Dr. Fate) I'm in CA -- a solidly BLUE state. I was, however, happy to donate time and $$ to Boxer's campaign and will do so again for the candadate who will fight for OUR Democracy and not be a toady for some corporate puppetmaster.

This isn't a football game. It's not a popularity contest. This is life and death -- the death of our way of life, of our very Democracy. Will Scalito be approved? Yep. But Walt is correct, what the hell is the point of being a member of the "opposition" party if there is no opposition? MILLIONS of us have already left the Democratic Party and MILLIONS more will be leaving in the future.

Personally, I'm so turned off by ALL political parties, that, beginning in 2004, I vowed to ONLY vote for the candidate who represents the best interests of myself, my neighbors and my country which means NOT voting blindly for ANY political party. Those days are over.

[LoZoccolo]

150. Thanks for sharing; now I think I'll get rid of you.

Don't waste our precious 2006 election time.

People like you brought us to this situation to begin with.



:hi: :nuke:

[Le Taz Hot]

183. And how prey tell did I do that?

My goddess, I've voted, BEEN ELECTED, worked, donated, protested my ASS off for 30 years for the Democrats. Until you can say the same, I suggest you re-think this "our" shit. People like me have kept this party alive for the last 30 years.

[Walt Starr]

153. Looks like I'm about 14 months late

but I'm catching up!

:hi:

[Triana]

160. Left the party 5 years ago...

...after 2000. They sat there, silently and said NOTHING while the election was stolen.

Not to mention all the the things they've done (or NOT done) since. I can't be a Dem. I'm going to have trouble voting for one if (s)he is owned by a corprat cabal and only concerned about his/her little district and his/her own little career - at the expense of the rest of us.

DISGUSTED.

[PATRICK]

155. Thinking about our soldiers

You could always depend on them to fight, if winning was not predictable or possible. But in this case, face it. WE are the ones who will do the dying, losing freedoms, going broke or to jail. And grimly one has to face this, we are never sure IF and how much the party will fight even by the means at its disposal, even by its vocal commitments in the past.

It is this NOT being sure, this lack of confidence, that is the most disturbing. Sure, some old warhorse in a fairly safe district might orate mightily and SOME votes coalesce to a large portion of what it should be, but many times they give the fatal sign they do not know how- and do not desire to lead- in this fight for OUR survival- often, at times, not even to realize what is at stake and what is arrayed against them(both in its weakness and in its perfidy).

No single act is needed for me to go one way or the other, but a consistency of action and unity that turns the tide away from this most fatal and overwhelming public perception. Is it a consolation that Conservatives and traditional Republicans are similarly reeling from the revelations of extremism and vast corruption in a runaway, tyrannical government gutted and looted against all THEIR pious principles?

It would be, as in other top American institutions, a vacuum created by universal leadership betrayal. Their is no decent news forum for the masses, no political party, no American institution left uncorrupted or certain of redressing just causes. All that stuff is lying in the gutter and the "best" people don't want to dirty their hands by suddenly seizing the deserted high ground, the populist power, the truth. I suppose politics is full of ugly, tepid compromises, partial victories, token advances, but NOT in a time of absolute crisis invoked by absolutist madmen- not humored, but feared or taken respectfully and seriously. While we, the people who must bear the actual physical cost unfettered by the millionaire life styles of much of Congress, look like absolute fools for trusting Alice's White Knight to galumph to the rescue. No one is looking for perfection or messiahs as much as some of the underachievers like the shine for their future career ambitions.

Only consistent action, not rhetoric can raise the banner, at least that, win or lose.

[LSK]

161. what country you moving to?

[Walt Starr]

164. I won't leave the country

I'm just going to stock up on ammunition and save up for a bunker in the coutnry.

[Cults4Bush]

171. Me too only 15 years but enough time to realize this is it.

If our Dems treat this like they think we'll vote for them because they are the lesser of two evils, they need to understand we are just sick of evil period.

Enough poison to kill a man, enough poision to kill a thousand, whats it matter, if the man is still dead.

[jsamuel]

173. Don't be such a drama queen Walt...

geez...

[Walt Starr]

175. You're free to click the X on the thread

or put me on ignore.

[jsamuel]

176. I won't put you on ignore because I value your opinion, but I think you

are going a little overboard on this one. It is a very defeatist attitude.

[Walt Starr]

179. Well there's probably a good reason for that

If teh Democrats give up the SCOTUS seat to Aliuto without a fight, we will have been completely and utterly defeated.

[alcibiades_mystery]

189. "completely and utterly"

And you wonder why you're accused of being a drama queen!

No stomach for it, eh Walt? Sad.

[Walt Starr]

191. Just sick of being the "battered spouse"

Go figure.

[alcibiades_mystery]

192. Tra la la

Cheers, then, mate.

[Generator]

185. You are not alone

And for the appologists on here, the usual suspects: two things, either you are in denial or you are in fear of facing the reality. America is on the road to being something beyond our worst fears. It happens in small steps. And the supreme court is the last bastion of our rights.

All it takes for evil to prevail is for good men and women to do nothing. And that's what I've witnessed. The same thing from our Dem leaders that I'm hearing here. Defeatism. Excuses. Rationalization. Hope for a better day! You are in denial. The only thing worse than being used and abused is lying to yourself that it's all gonna be okay. It's not. Walt is hardly a screaming liberal moonbat that runs from the party because it's not perfect. And neither am I. I've never voted Republican and I remember being excited about voting after I turned 18 in 1981. So I've been a Dem for 25 years too. But I can't lie to myself. There is no party of opposition. You applogists are lying to yourselves. I can't imagine not voting on the local level and local Dems or whatever. The local affects our lives in so many real ways.

National, senators? No, hell I'm wouldn't even vote for Wyden again based on his votes for Rice and Roberts much less this piece of nazi wannnabe scum. I have better instincts and basic understanding of the difference between right and wrong and know when compromise is a nice way to lie to yourself than these people that supposedly "represent me".

The NAACP spokesman on Democracy Now this morning said something so simple but ultimately the whole ball of wax and profound.

"If you don't even fight, there is no chance of winning." That's your Democratic party 2006.

[Walt Starr]

190. Battered spouse syndrome

I think that's what I've been suffering from for a quarter century.

And recently, I've made the threats to leave.

Time's up. Time to stop the threats and simply to act.

[depakid]

193. I think that's what the Democratic party suffers from

Learned helplessness. They keep "compromising," thinking that the far right (and its media) will stop abusing them. The keep "making deals" thet Republicans have show repeatedly that they have no intention of honoring. They've been shut out of hearings, watched Republicans break the law, violate parliamentary procedure, bribe their own members- and still they allow their DINOs to sell them out with impunity.

They've even been run off of K-Street.

And still they don't get assertive and fight back fight.

That's exactly what battered women do.

[Walt Starr]

197. And Activists enable it all

Just keep on keeping on. Be the robot. Mindlessly pull the lever for all Democrats. Accept whatever buffoon is put up by the party eleitists as a nominee.

[Susang]

194. That statemen is insulting to battered women everywhere

[Walt Starr]

198. I said "Battered SPOUSE"

Women are NOT the only spouses battered.

Saying so is sexist.

[kalibex]

202. Um, no. It's a perfectly acceptable metaphor. n/t

[jus_the_facts]

195. Thank You....most eloquently stated my feelings exactly....

:hi: :loveya:

[DemExpat]

I so agree....

and wonder why anybody would cheer on the Dem Party after this if our representatives don't even fight THIS vital position that feels like a checkmate.

:nuke:

DemEx

[Solly Mack]

199. I'm sorry Walt. There's a lot of soul searching that brings a person to

this point. It's not easy - because it's so painful.

[Walt Starr]

200. Yep, and there's always a lot of false starts

"DAMMIT, THAT'S IT, I'M DONE!!!"

"Well, maybe if I give them another chance. Can't throw the baby out with the bathwater. What about SCOTUS nominees? What about myu other issues? Gotta keep on kleepin' on."

And so forth back and forth over a period of years.

[Lexingtonian]

204. yeah, whatever.

I don't mean to blythe or coldhearted, Walt, but this is silly talk.

You're a pretty hard Left guy and Alito is a mediocre, pretty hard Right guy. Fire meets Ice, sure.

But IMHO you're not doing the hard math. First of all, Tony Kennedy has been the actual swing vote on the USSC for five years in the cases that really matter. Go and look at the record. Putting Alito on the Court IMHO drives Kennedy over to liberal bloc fully. The real trouble is the next liberal retirement, probably by Stevens. That's what the Alito hearings are about, as I see it- making Republicans pay the political price for a Right nominee in a country that is conservative-leaning moderate by character, so that the next hard Right nominee fails. And even then, Roberts is too smart to run the Court over the cliff with The People as Rehnquist did.

Secondly, as I see it, for all the acute middle class economic pain and dignity of mostly middle and working class white men and women being violated by other white men of these past couple of years, that is not the most fundamental set of problems and political divisions of the country. Even if it appears to be the largest.

Underlying this present set of manipulations/retrogression of economic order to colonial conditions is the whole matter of Agrarian/Industrial Age social castes and the legalized privilege system built around them that are becoming obsolete. That is what the Democratic Party has to deal with, the pain of those deep changes under the surface and The People trying to slow down and be as numb as possible to the Modern Age pressures and suck all the good it can out of the Old Order before it gets crushed out.

I think you are simply burned out more than anything else. The Left is rejected for the time being in a fundamental way, the Right has yet to burn out fully with The People (as it's doing, losing the electorate at a clip of ~12% per year) down to its base of 22-24% support. Liberals are the only credible successor faction, by a kind of default, but liberals never hold on to control/power for long. Then it's reascent to by the moderates and Left.

I think you despair at the wrong things; the sun is slowly emerging from the clouds despite the rain still falling. Take six months off from Outrage Mode and let the Republican hollowing out carry on on its own.

[Czolgosz]

205. If he's confirmed, I agree the Roberts-Alito court may be *'s worst legacy

but where was all the outrage when Roberts was at the plate?

Roberts showed a major ethical lapse when he failed to recuse himself from the Hamdan case and failed even to disclose his conflict of interest; Alito engaged in similar unethical conduct in the Vanguard case.

Roberts is an extremist with a record of expanding presidential authority; so is Alito.

Roberts is a judicial activist with a record of ignoring 70 years of precedent on the commerce clause so as to limit congressional authority to regulate corporate misconduct; so is Alito.

Roberts was uncovered as a member in the far right-wing Federalist Society and, when confronted about it, he claimed not to have been a member and then to have forgotten about his membership notwithstanding his leadership role in the organization; Alito has engaged in similar conduct with his membership in the far right-wing CAP.

Yet 22 Democrat Senators -- a full half -- actually voted in favor of Roberts. Where was the outrage then?

[Walt Starr]

206. I bought into the line of bullshit where the Democrats were

"keeping their powder dry" for this nomination.

I was foolish where the Roberts nomination was concerned.

[Czolgosz]

207. Don't lose hope. A congressional staffer friend is telling me he thinks

there will be a filibuster based on what he's hearing on the ground and he is almost always correct in these type of matters.

[Walt Starr]

208. I've lost all hope. It's all over except changing the registration

as far as I see it now.

[hopein08]

209. I think you are wrong.

That makes absolutely no sense at all. You're entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. In this country we also have a freedom of speech and I have read your post and I must write what is on my mind in response.

You are wrong. There is no reason to throw all of your 25 years of hard work away. Honestly, I think there are a lot better reasons to throw it all away. But this one tiny thing in the larger spectrum of our lives does not merit defeatism and concession. If Alito is confirmed, we just have to pick ourselves and move on, just like after Bush was declared the winner of two elections. I may be wrong, but I doubt that this is the first time you have ever been this upset with the Democratic Party. There must be other things that were done that you absolutely do not stand for.

What state are you from, if you don't mind my asking? I'm from Pennsylvania and therefore represented by the thrilling Republican triumvirate of Phil English, Arlen Specter, and Rick Santorum. I know I have NO VOICE WHATSOEVER but I have been a Democrat in spirit since 1992 and in fact since 2000, when I was old enough to vote, and I will be until what the party platform changes...and that certainly did not happen with a single SCOTUS nominee.

Just my humble opinion.

[BelgianMadCow]

210. I understand your feelings, I think

Even if I don't have a true vote in this, being a foreigner, the total NON-answers by Alito are very very scary to me.

On the one thread where we met (freeper-bashing about NSA & FISA, a lot of fun), I learned that you love the constitution.

I understand how the not ruling out presidential overruling of the constitution that Alito was doing freaks you out.

It should freak everyone out, and I think a lot of DU shares the basis of your sentiment (the importance of the Alito nomination). Truthout has an entire corner on him.

The repeated threatening to leave that others in this thread assert, can also be a kind of "survivor's syndrome", where people's emotional "elastic" gets worn out through repeated disappointments.

We all deal with difficulties in our own way, and speak out in our own typical manner.

I think your two-party system and the way it's financed by business and influenced by special interests and lobbying is not a good form of democracy.

I also think there are a LOT of good people in the democratic party.

One of the essential things in having a multiparty system is forming coalitions.


peace

[Atman]

211. Hey, where's Applegrove?

He/she hasn't added a :rofl: to this thread yet!

[B Calm]

212. Never ever forget the outcome of Bush vs Gore!

I'm sick of republican justices that legislate from the bench.

[BelgianMadCow]

214. Taking all passion (which tends to flare) out :

I do think the spying admission and lousy justification that Bush threw in the nation's face IS indicating the time to make a "last stand" is drawing near.

I consider that issue and the way it was handled a watershed moment, together with the torture ban and signing agreement (oh, and the replacements in a lot of federal agencies with Bush cronies, the reversal of succession order in the Army/Pentagon)

The executive branch is grabbing power.

It is time for congress (ALL of it) to make a stand or to not matter anymore as the US glides into fascism and the veils come off.

The issue at hand is broader than just Alito or only the Dems imho.

[DancingBear]

215. Walt, I have a serious question for you

My position, evolving as it is, is that should this filibuster not come to fruition then I will refuse to support those DLC bastards (lest us make no mistake here, a good many, if not all, of those who refuse to filibuster will be DLC) who have caused Alito to have free reign on our most basic democratic tenets.

I have been watching Dean build grassroots support, and I commend him for this. This is quite a leap for me, as I was not a supporter of his in any way, shape or form during the primaries.

I am thinking that should Sammy The Bigot get on the court, i will absolutely steadfastly reuse to donate one dime to anyone who did not make every last effort to keep him off, but WILL donate both time and energy to building back the progressive base that this party so desperately needs.

Is that type of thinking something you could support?

BTW, any monetary support would go DIRECTLY to individual candidates.

[timber84]

217. it's his choice, let him do want he wants

[Rex]

220. I think it is to late.

IMO, one more BFEE Suit on the supreme bench will finally nail the coffin shut on our republic. WE didn't stop the SCOTUS crime in 2000. Now after 5 years of robbery, neglect, mass murder and other global atrocities I think it is to late. History proves that humans love to stare into the abyss and maybe this time will pay for it in unprecedented, horrendous ways. Let us hope the Dem leaders do the right thing. There are some exceptional democratic leaders in Congress, we shall see how influential they truly are.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

224. Walt, Of All The Comments I've Seen, This One Is The Best. I Think

it is concise and effective, and though you didn't intend it this way, think all of use should send something almost exact en masse to every goddamn senator. I think it is perfect and want to ask your permission to use something similar in email to my Senators.

Thank you for your insight, I think you are right on.

[JVS]

228. Get ready to be sold out

[WilliamPitt]

229. Um

You've been a Democrat, a Green, an independent and a Democrat again within the last two years, Walt.

Just sayin'.

[Walt Starr]

232. Um

I've been a Democrat the past two years. Never left. Not once. Voted straight Dem in 2004. Voted straight Dem in 2002, too.

Though on second thought, can you tell me precisely what difference it would have made had I voted for somebody other than the Democrat in 2004?

[WilliamPitt]

236. So all those procalamations and sig-line changes you made

were just cosmetic?

The search function works.

[Walt Starr]

237. Then lay it out

Leaving a political party is a long, agonizing process. The disgust builds and builds over time. Time and again, one feels compelled to stay because "where else are you gonna go?"

I'm at peace with my current decision. I need to spend more time concentrating on matters close to home. I've proven to myself there is no changing the Democratic Party from within and there's no changing the political process at large. The fact that Alito is going to be confirmed and the Democrats are simply going to roll over and let it happens is all the proof I need.

We are in the system we are in. I'm going to accept it and move on.

[LoZoccolo]

243. /I/ laid everything out a few months ago.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2203808

None of this is complicated, and it could easily be found yourself that this is how the system works.

You, on the other hand, have no plan to accomplish anything but a feeling of your own satisfaction.

[mdmc]

255. I always enjoyed your posts WaltStarr

I am lucky to be represented by Dem. Maurice Hinchey. He is a great Dem, and I am very proud of him. To a lesser extent, I am also proud of Howard Dean and everything that he has done at the DNC. In the end, the DLC will fuck us, and you will be justified in leaving the party. I will be justified in remaining. Both of us will be saying "Fuck war. Fuck the DLC." We will be saying it to different people.

[wyldwolf]

240. you noticed, too?

I guess his OP comment of "25 years a Democrat" means "off and on 25 years."

[KoKo]

235. You're pretty special Walt...I had a post locked as "against DU Rules"

when I posted that the Democratic Party needed a third way because it wasn't working with the DNC/DLC Leadership. I was locked because it was interpreted I have violated DU rules by urging people to support leaving the Democratic Party. I don't have the exact quote for the DU Rule, but you must be a pretty popular fellow here not to have this thread locked long ago. :D

[Walt Starr]

239. I can see how that argument can be made

Oh well, I guess it doesn't matter any more. Locked or not, I'll catcha somewhere and some place else.

Laters...

[Donald Ian Rankin]

241. I'm afraid it wasn't.

It looks extremely likely that Alito is going to be confirmed, whether or not the Democrats filibuster him. The most you can hope for is a grand but futile gesture of opposition.

Guts, courage, etc are fine things, but they don't trump the fact that there are more Republicans than Democrats in the Senate and Congress and that they can and will force Alito through by whatever means necessary.

[Coexist]

244. Wow - a lot of rudeness here

a person can support Democratic principles and not support a Democratic Party candidate because they don't believe that person adheres to the core beliefs of the party. If the candidates of another party reflect your values more - than you can vote for them, and wish they were a D on the ballot.

I have seen lots of posts by "enraged" posters that I know are people venting their frustration, and nothing comes of their mighty proclamations.

Status Quo doesn't change anything, folks. Waiting it out and hoping often leads to disappointment and many of us are tired of waiting and being disappointed are are seriously considering finding another path that is more fulfilling. Zell Miller is no Democrat - I don't care if he has a D by his name.

Walt is as disgusted at this party's leadership as I am - I often find myself agreeing with him over more "popular" posters. But I don't deride the other posters in their threads because of my experience with their rants about what they are going to do and then don't. I read their comments and move to another thread.

Peace.

[LoZoccolo]

246. This isn't about not supporting /a/ Democratic Party candidate.

Being able to say the Republican candidate is actually better than the Democratic one is one thing.

Here we see a rash blanket decision to abandon them all...the sort of threat that's not held up in the past, though. Irrational thinking is met strongly, what can I say. And so is attention whoring.

[Coexist]

247. What about mocking someone's frustration with a party

that keeps waiting for the "bigger, more important battle"

For a lot of us, the Supreme Court IS that battle. And it pains us to see our "leaders" throwing up their hands as if there is nothing they can do about it.

From what I read on the thread, Walt is feeling that, as are many others. If you are tired of his "threatening to leave" the party, don't respond and hope the thread sinks. You don't need to keep coming back.

Is there ego glitter attached to that?

[LoZoccolo]

248. I've gone over how to deal with that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2203808

It actually does have a purpose that I'm responding to this; I'm exposing it as attention-seeking, first by it's total lack of being able to do what it's intended, and second, as something that's been threatend before and reneged on. I'm showing people that they don't fool us when they do that so they best quit or leave us alone.

[Coexist]

250. You see it as attention seeking, I see it as expressing an opinion

Sorry, we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

There are other showboaters on this board. I guess you just like those ones.

[LoZoccolo]

251. It's not an opinion that I'm objecting to.

"I'm disappointed in the Democratic Party" is an opinion.

"I'm going to not vote for the Democratic Party despite the fact that they'd never nominate someone like Alito" is a threat to perform an absurd and counterproductive action which comes after a similar threat that he didn't carry through two years ago (see "NBD" or "nobody but Dean").

[Coexist]

252. But as the party moves to the right

those to the left get pushed out and into the Green party.

The Democrat and Republican parties were once quite different. They evolved. Core principles remain the same, but those who embrace them may call themselves by different names.

That's all I'm saying.

(on edit: A lot of us are waiting to see what the Democratic Leaders are going to do on this HUGE issue. Will it be a litmus test for a lot of us?? Yeah. They want our cash, our votes and our time - they need to represent us. The "swing voter" doesn't donate cash or time - which is what is required to to get the ulitimate prize - the vote.)

[LoZoccolo]

253. No one gets pushed anywhere.

People should take responsibility for their decisions. Did you even read that thread I linked to?

[Coexist]

256. Yes. I did. But the "party" decides who gets put on the ballot

and it doesn't always happen at the local level.

When we give money to the "party" and they decide who gets the cash (and in return gets the votes, because money raised has a direct correlation of votes received) - then they get the volunteers, who are fearful of the greater of two evils.

Giving money and time directly to only those you believe in is taking back the power. Maybe some people just want to stand up, and instead of throwing tiny wrenches into the unaffected machine - take their time and money elsewhere. The name of the party doesn't matter - it is the core beliefs I will follow. Do you not get that???

[LoZoccolo]

257. And how does the party decide who gets on the ballot?

You're getting there.

[Coexist]

258. those who can successfully raise in money in advance of the primary

and look good on t.v. and are willing to play the game. Those who won't make waves unless the wake has been approved by those in power.

Those who can get backing from current successfull politicians. Joe voter has little to do with it until the final race.