Now the truth becomes apparent to all of us lefties!

[Tesha]

How many times, after "our" guy (the more-left candidate)
lost a primary battle, have we heard:

"But you MUST support the Democratic nominee for the
good of our party" or "...because this is the most important
election EVER!"

And we're told this no matter how many positions the winning,
more-Right candidate holds that are simply anathema to us.

But now that our guy has won one...

We're hearing from all those same folks how "personal loyalties",
"friendships", or "issues" mean that they must support Lieber-
man over the duly elected nominee of the Democratic
Party. We must hold our noses and vote for their guy, but
now they can't/won't return the favor and vote for our guy.

Now the truth becomes apparent to all of us lefties:

The DLC and their triangulating, lacking-in-actual-values,
ever-farther-Right marching candidates are not real
Democrats. They simply were using the Democratic Party
to gain political advantage and personal power, and they
don't have one drop of remorse that they have destroyed
and disempowered the Democratic Party in order to do so.

Tesha

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Sucker.

Feel better. Maybe Bill & Hill will send you a Christmas card.

[CrispyQ]

2. We're the extremists of the party & if the dems lose in Nov

it will be because of us & the dems will have to move even further to the center.

Holy fuck, why don't they just take up residence at the RNC?

[bleedingheart]

5. You know what pisses me off...It is the Lefties...who do a lot of the

campaign work.

I have yet to find a "middle road democrat" who walks neighborhoods....all the people I know that are walking, calling and helping are all politically passionate and Left.....and yet we are the ones who get dumped on consistently.

[bleedingheart]

3. It makes me sick...perhaps I should pull my support from Casey in PA

because of it...????

I supported Pennachio in the PA Primary...but promised I would help Casey if he won...I had to suffer through people picking on me, and deriding my original choice. Meanwhile I find that now people are shocked...I tell you shocked to find out that Casey is Anti Choice, Anti Stem Cell and Pro War.......I guess they weren't paying attention during the Primary.

The fact that Lieberman is getting any air time at all disgusts me. The corporate shill lost...and yet...he is still being propped up....

[Tesha]

9. I honestly believe that all DLC Democrats must be removed.

I honestly believe that all DLC Democrats (including Casey)
must be removed. Every time we hold our noses and help support
one of these clowns, our party inches farther to the Right.

It is the DLC that has caused our message to become so muddled
as to be inaudible. Democrats should stand for people, not for
corporations. Democrats should stand for women's rights, and
gay rights, and civil rights, and free-speech rights, and not
for anti-abortion laws, anti-gay constitutional amendments,
the USA PATRIOT Act or anti-flag-burning amendments.

Democrats should support peace through progress across the
globe,and not support Bush's counterproductive war machine.

I think we'd be far better off in the not-very-long-run if
all the Vichy Democrats *DID* head off to the Repoublican
Party, and after this latest slap in our faces by Lieberman
and his supporters over the results of the Connecticut primary,
I'm through enabling them with my vote; my nose is just too
sore from holding it all these years to do it any more.

*REAL DEMOCRATS* will always get my vote and my support;
*FAKE DEMOCRATS* will no longer get either.

Tesha

[Breeze54]

21. Well said!! I agree!

:) :hug: :applause: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[MissWaverly]

25. Neocons must GO!

I am tired of politicians who advocate nuclear weapons as "on the table." They are not on
the table and nobody but a fool would advocate this. I am tired of foreign policy that
consists of bullying, bombs and missiles. I am tired of a president who refuses to listen
to the people on anything from Bolton to the Dubai ports deal; he gets what he wants. I
want Congress to provide oversight and protect and defend the constitution and not behave
like a rival street gang.

[CrispyQ]

32. lol -- funny, I used exactly the same phrase.

"I think we'd be far better off in the not-very-long-run if
all the Vichy Democrats *DID* head off to the Repoublican
Party, and after this latest slap in our faces by Lieberman
and his supporters over the results of the Connecticut primary,
I'm through enabling them with my vote; my nose is just too
sore from holding it all these years to do it any more."


My right wing mother, who loathes Hillary, was very surprised when I told her that I wasn't sure I could hold my nose hard enough to vote for her in '08 if she gets the dem prez nomimation. I supported Ken Salazar with time, money & a yard sign in my yard & he votes more like a repuke than a dem. Too bad his term is six fucking years. I would like to vote him out this fall!

I agree with what you say! For those who argue that we need to put the brakes on the neocons however we can do it, I ask, if all we do is continue down the same path but at a slower pace, what have we accomplished? If the dems do not correct the course, we are fucked no matter who is at the helm.

I've got a little bit more nose holding in me, but not much.

[Tesha]

36. We sent quite a bit of moeny to Hillary's campaign in '00

The Tesha household sent quite a bit of money to Hillary's
campaign in '00, but she has turned out to be a tremendous
disappointment to us; we now routinely either write "feedback"
messages (but no checks) for her fund-raising appeals or we
simply throw them away.

It's a shame when Democrats ask the left for support during
the election cycle (and get it!) but then kick us to the curb
right afterwards, telling us to "go play" until we're needed
for the next election.

Tesha

[Clark2008]

81. Isn't it amazing how all Right-wingers think Democrats just LOVE

Hillary - when the truth is that we don't, much?

Every time I get into a conversation with an Insannity-listening, Faux-watching neocon, they say, "Well, I guess you're going to vote for Hillary." And, when I say, "Actually, no. I'm hoping she doesn't get the nomination as do most Democrats I know. I really don't know anyone, personally, who plans to work for her in the primary," then they're taken aback and start questioning me about her poll numbers. Then I have to point out that it's a popularity contest at this point and, that this time last election cycle, Lieberman was polling ahead of any other Dem - and we've seen what's happened to him. I also tell them that on most progressive Internet boards - those populated with Democratic primary VOTERS (not the "likely" voters the corporate media polls), Hillary gets about 2 to 3 percent: the winners are general Wes Clark, Russ Feingold and Al Gore, should he run.

That's when the start sitting down and attempting to think about why they only hear about Hillary. It floors them because they really believe the corporate media spin.

[CrispyQ]

93. In my darker moments, I see a conspiracy.

They select Hill as our dem prez candidate. Then they select her as the prez. Then they tell all of us to shut up about election fraud cuz not only did a dem win, but a woman dem at that. Yikes.

It's five-o'clock somewhere, right? ;)

[Protagoras]

117. The do more than inch to the right

I think it's actually a sprint into the loving arms of corporatism. These are people who will enrich themselves and reduce the country to a feudal state if it'll keep them in power.

Even a big tent has sides and a roof.

[CrispyQ]

20. Soledad O'Brien was literally gushing that "Joe could still win!"

:puke:

Why doesn't he just run as a repuke. Fucking traitor. :grr:

[PittLib]

45. hi bleedingheart...

I'm with you on this one. I can't help but feel a little hypocritical for criticizing Lieberman, while mulling over whether I should support Casey ... who I feel is even more right than Joe (particularly on the issues that I value). A friend tried to compare the races in CT and PA ... and I wouldn't have it. As much as they might dislike Lieberman, he is no Santorum. Not even close, so we slid right (too far) while CT had the opportunity to go left. I am excited for and proud of the voters in CT, but I still mourn PA's lot.

[bleedingheart]

96. I am only supporting Casey because I promised I would and because

Santorum is truly evil.

However..it is the last time.

I can't tell you how hard it is for me as a pro-choice/anti-war democrat to ask voters to vote for Casey and then when they ask me about those two issues...and even stem cells...I have to basically dance around the topic because Casey is with Santorum on those issues or...as with the War...he is a Lieberman...

[MessiahRp]

152. Is there a Green Party candidate of note running in that election?

Replacing Santorum with another Republican basically does nobody in Pennsylvania any good anyway. Might as well find an alternative.

Rp

[bryant69]

4. We'll have to see

My guess is that most of the DLC types will keep their mouths shut until after the election. If Lieberman or the Republican wins, well, they will talk loud and long then about how stupid we were to nominate an "out of touch leftist" like Lamont. If Lamont wins, they will continue to keep quiet.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[havocmom]

7. Good analysis

Bet you are proved correct

[MadHound]

10. The DLC may keep quiet

But that doesn't mean that they won't be active. I imagine that this will play out like a smaller scale version of the McGovern campaign, where the Democratic party gave little support to McGovern, left him twisting in the breeze, and many actively worked against him, and for Nixon.

I imagine that the DLC will do the same thing. There will be nothing upfront from them, but Joe's warchest will quietly be refilled as often as needed, and the various appartus for conducting an election will be slipped over to Joe in order to help him out. In fact we might even see the DLC and defintely the Lieberman campaign working with the 'Pugs on this one, since the republican candidate has absolutely no chance in this race, and Joe is the 'Pugs best hope come November.

Besides, ol' Joe is the DLC's boy, they're not going to abandon him now. He's proven time and again to be a loyal servant to his corporate masters.

[bryant69]

13. You are probably right

I wouldn't doubt it.

[itzamirakul]

89. You are right, MadHound. I fully expect the DLC to quietly work

backstage to try to ensure a Lieberman victory in November.

It really says something when the opposing Party works so hard for and cares so much about a Democratic candidate, doesn't it?

[w4rma]

100. We'll watch them then and counter them. (nt)

[Norquist Nemesis]

18. Yep! While quietly sending Traitor Joe $$$ from their PACs, too!!!

I have a feeling that Schumer's going to come and and "support" Ned Lamont in words but not deed or dollars. Pressure needs to be put on Schumer about that. I'm curious how much Lieberman already received for his primary campaign from the DSCC...Lamont should get at least that much for the general campaign.

[enuffs_enuffs]

6. Ah, the motivations of money and power... n/t

toss in some fraud and you've described the American way of life, for those who can afford it.

[H2O Man]

8. Nominated.

One thing that is important to recognize is that Lamont did not win because he is "far left." He is mainstream America -- the majority of that mainstream disagrees strongly with the Cheney administration's policies in Iraq. Lieberman is the fringe candidate, and he was rejected by the voters. He is out of touch with the mainstream on the war, and he paid a price for it.

[VolcanoJen]

11. What are you guys talking about?

Am I missing something? Plenty of Dems have already come out in support of Ned Lamont; Hillary already gave him $5,000 from her HILLPAC.

Kos has a good rundown of Dems who have thrown their support behind the Democratic nominee:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/9/04547/20355

I think this quote is my favorite: :-)

"This shows what blind loyalty to George Bush and being his love child means,” said Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the leader of the Democratic House Congressional campaign. “This is not about the war. It’s blind loyalty to Bush.”

[Tesha]

15. NPR this morning had statements from several prominent CT "Dems"...

> What are you guys talking about? Am I missing something?

NPR this morning had statements from several prominent CT "Dems",
each stating that they would be continuing to support Joe and for
the reasons I cited in the original post: Personal loyalty,
friendship, and (previously uncited in .0) the fact that he's
still their guy on the issues.

And I think I'll wait for the rest of the Democratic senators to
check-in before I accept that Ned Lamont now has the support of
the national party. I'll *ESPECIALLY* be waiting to hear about
support from those senators, governors, etc. who are self-
proclaimed DLC members.

Tesha

[TahitiNut]

17. George Bush's "love child"?

Who was the mother? :rofl:

I guess the failure of the metaphor ("reach-around" would've been better, imho) doesn't keep it from being funny. I regard it as a bit surprising that such a comment would come from Rahm.

[VolcanoJen]

84. It didn't sound like Rahm to me, either

But he sees the writing on the wall, and he's getting feisty. We'll need that come November, so I'm pretty happy with Rahm right about now!!

[mtnsnake]

19. They're just whining, pissing, moaning, & complaining as usual

Some of these far lefties are the most counterproductive Democrats on the planet because all they want to do is complain instead of talking about positive solutions. Heck, you've even got one here on this thread who implies it's only the "far lefties" who do any work for the Democratic Party and that "middle road democrats" can't be found doing squat.

I would venture a huge wager that this particular whiner has never left their computer chair to walk in a public protest out on the streets somewhere. If they did, they'd realize just how wrong they were about who helps the Party and who doesn't. It's Democrats all across the board helping their Party, not just far lefties as they claim.

[MadHound]

23. How huge?

I'd be more than willing to take you up on that wager, the question is how much do you want to lose. I've been active in party politics for well over thirty years now, and time and again, in campaigns from local to national significance, those who are the most active, have the most feet on the street, who man the phone banks, go door to door, do all of the heavy lifting in any campaign are those from the far left.

Moderates and conservatives thing that it is simply more than enough to either vote, give some cash, or both. But they have a huge aversion to actually getting out and doing the work that is needed in any campaign. Yes, there are a few that do so, but by and large it seems that it is those of us on the left who year in and year out are the ones who are the most active.

[mtnsnake]

26. How divisive you are to say that far lefties outwork other Democrats

What a crock of amazing BULLSHIT!!

BTW, just to be clear, when I said "I'd be willing to venture a huge wager", I didn't intend it to be of monetary nature LITERALLY, but I'm glad you're so loaded, Mr Moneybags, that you can challenge me to lose money. Jesus h christ.

[MadHound]

35. How disingenous are you when you claim that moderates

Centerist and conservative Democrats actually get out and work as much or more than those of us on the left?

And don't whine and moan about me being divisive when you're spewing garbage like "Some of these far lefties are the most counterproductive Democrats on the planet because all they want to do is complain instead of talking about positive solutions." Talk about a flamebait statement:eyes:

Look friend, if you're going to put out such a crock o' shit statement like your OP, don't get pissy when it's thrown back in your face OK.

And while we're on the subject, since you think that lefties don't do much other than moan and groan on anonymous chat boards, what the hell have you done for the party lately? I'd be more than willing to stack up my "far lefty" record of work and activicism(which includes going to the convention as an alternate delegate) over the past thirty plus years against yours any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

And before you once again ass-u-me(get it?) things about me, let me correct you in your thinking. I'm not a rich man, my wife and I are distincly middle class, with a mortage and the other accoutrements of the middle class. The reason that I'm willing to make a very large wager is because I am positive of my position, since I've seen who are the active party members up close and personal for *decades* now. And it certainly isn't those who are in the moderate/right section of the party tent.

[mtnsnake]

46. While you were bragging, I was typing your answer. See post 34

Your opinion is no better than anyone elses. When you or anyone else makes wild claims about certain factions of the party outworking other factions, you leave yourself wide open to speculation.

BTW, I don't claim that ANY faction outworks any other group within the Party. I've seen people from all sides of the party get together to get things done, not JUST far lefties. Get over yourself.

[MadHound]

59. Then lay your money down!

My wife is a statistician, I'm sure that she could devise a poll, and an appropriate sampling number to conduct the poll with, and this fall we can find out just exactly who is doing the heavy lifting in this party. I've worked many campaigns, in many states, and my anecdotal experience is that it is the far left who does the heavy lifting. This is backed up by others I've talked with from across the country, and some on this thread, who state the same. All we have from you is anecdotal evidence from your limited locale. I say let's do this up right, money going to winner's candidate of choice.

And again, I find it disingenous of you to start screaming about how those of us who disagree with you are being divisive when you're the one who tossed the first flamebait out, as I pointed out upthread. What's good for the goose friend is good for the gander.

[mtnsnake]

66. Good for you

[Generic Other]

76. Madhound's observations appear to hold true in Cantwell's race

Her people have publicly complained that she can't get volunteers to work for her campaign because the activists on the left who usually do the work have refused to help her based on her war stance.

Also, it is the leftists who march in the streets. It's silly to suggest otherwise.

[mtnsnake]

80. You're full of yourself to suggest it's just the leftists who march

in the streets. Try telling that to half the people I stand on the sidewalk with on Saturday mornings protesting the war.

Also, it is the leftists who march in the streets. It's silly to suggest otherwise

Yes, the leftists make up a big part of who marches, probably moreso than other factions of the party, but you're full of it up to your ears if you think that Democrats across the board don't march as well.

[Generic Other]

99. I'm so full of myself? I am simply making an observation

about the people who I attend rallies with. A priest who recently completed a prison sentence for trespassing at the School of the Americas...Cindy Sheehan vigilers...very radicalized veterans against the war...ANSWER folks armed with their myriad of leftwing causes...socialists...former Panthers...black and gray...anarchists...60s peace activists...ACLU groups...union activists...CODE PINK...Women in Black...

The platform I voted for along with other delegates to the county Democratic convention included universal healthcare, a substantial minimum wage increase, immediate withdrawal from Iraq, environmental protections, right to choose, support for gay marriage. Do we agree on these concepts? That's more important to me than this continual sniping at Moore. He is entitled to his opinion. Many of us happen to agree with him. As long as Moore supports the causes I do, I will support him.

[mtnsnake]

104. What you said is that it's silly to suggest that anyone but leftists march

Also, it is the leftists who march in the streets. It's silly to suggest otherwise

Nice bit of backpedalling, though, where you now change it to:

I am simply making an observation about the people who I attend rallies with.

LOL, that's a heck of a lot different than your first quote where you implied it's only the leftists who march.

[Generic Other]

116. Not backpedaling at all

I have been paying attention though. And I still think the majority of the people attending rallies, protests and marches represent the left rather than centrists and moderates.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4439801

[mtnsnake]

123. If you had expressed it like that from the start,

we wouldn't be having this long, dragged-out conversation.

And I still think the majority of the people attending rallies, protests and marches represent the left rather than centrists and moderates.

I'm glad to see you've tempered your original thoughts as being more of opinion than as fact...and that you've also implied some inclusion of centrists and moderates with the way you're wording it now.

Peace

[seabeyond]

82. i live in the very red panhandle of texas

and i am called an extreme lefist all the time. if i were out and about would you call me, a leftist? surely, i must be if i am shouting so loudly with my stickers. surely, i can not be a moderate, gasp. nor even maybe an independent. i must be one of the extreme if i am willing to speak out in an area that is so totally red, panhandle of texas, putting myself out there for attack every time i leave my house. what you suggest is offensive, not factual and may be plain wrong. and it may not. but to present it as fact is irresponsible and not valid. it is all on assumption

[Generic Other]

90. Okay, so you may be a middle-of-the-roader

but your car looks like one of us! :)

[seabeyond]

92. that is soooo pathetic. one of you. but we are divided dont you know

"one of you" want us out of the party. can it be each and every one of those stickers actually represent what i believe? could it be, that you have created an illusion of the middle of the roaders are wrong, in order to do battle? might it not be appropriate for you to maybe be a tad openminded that what you have created in your brain to be in battle with me, is not even necessary.

but thanks

i saw the humor and the smile. that is always good

i really find this sad

having been in heavy duty competition all of my young life i know what it takes to win, and what was created to lose. this attitude is for losers. it does us no good. the reason cantwell is not getting people to help is because she has been a bush apologist too. that includes the moderate dems that are not willing to put the time into her campaign because of their dissatisfaction with her performance. the same as lieberman. to bad she doesnt have someone viable running against her too. i think that would be a wonderful thing for our party. bet the leftists would be standing right next to the moderate supporting that candidate

btw: your car looks like one of us. that was my point. how many times are you looking at a car of mine, assuming i am one of you, which i am....... i am voting dem, have voted dem, will vote dem......so i am one of you. how many times are you assuming i am one of you when in fact, i am one of them

[Generic Other]

107. Cantwell is one of the moderate Democrats the left has been yelling about

You'd think her pro-war base (presumably to be found among the moderates of the party) would come out for her. Clearly that hasn't been the case. I am not trying to start a fight here. Just making an observation about what I see in my neck of the woods.

As for you and my "one of us" comment, I only meant that to the average Texan, I suspect you appear a raving radical terrorist with all your bumper stickers. And I deeply admire your courage for putting them on your car.

Here's some articles about Cantwell's problems finding activist to volunteer for her campaign:

Cantwell's stance on Iraq keeps volunteers away, party chief says
Sen. Maria Cantwell's continued support for the occupation of Iraq — and her lack of regret for voting for the invasion in 2002 — is making it hard to recruit volunteers for her re-election campaign, the chairman of the state Democratic Party says.
The liberal activists who dominate the party's grass roots oppose the war and have been looking for Cantwell to distance herself from President Bush's position.
"Definitely right now there are a lot of activists who are not signing up to work on her campaign, and that's very clear," state party Chairman Dwight Pelz said Thursday.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002973154_cantwell05m.html


Voting with Their Feet
Dem Volunteers Flock East
BY ELI SANDERS
There's been a lot of nervous talk lately about Democratic volunteers, those unpaid election-year laborers whose participation in a campaign is often a sign of a candidate's traction among the party faithful. Dwight Pelz, the chair of the Washington State Democrats, last month complained to Howard Dean that the party's wishy-washy stance on the Iraq war was "not helping" volunteer recruitment, and earlier this month Pelz singled out U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell's reelection effort as suffering from volunteer disillusionment because of the junior senator's vote for the Iraq invasion in 2002 (a vote she has since refused to disavow).
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=37069

[seabeyond]

115. but this is where i am disagreeing with what is being said.

i dont think it is necessarily the stance on war. i know media and others, (including those that oppose war) would like for that to be the reason. but i do not think that is the reason people like cantwell, lieberman and salazaar are not well supported. (actually i put salazaar in htere, i dont know how well he is supported, but he is in the same group, with how i feel). i think it is more that these people are supporting bush, not calling bush, apologist for bush, that have them in trouble, with even the moderates. even the moderates want our dems to yell and scream, rant and rave about this administration. i dont think it is about how they are voting.

[Generic Other]

119. I don't think Cantwell has openly supported Bush

other than her votes. :)

I am glad to hear that even moderates are yelling. And I apologize for suggesting only lefties "yell and scream" at these politicians. In that I am clearly wrong. The hard thing for me is that I must hold my nose and vote for her. Because the alternative is so much worse. I hate that.

[seabeyond]

120. thank you.

and i hear what you say. last spring i campaigned for a republican for state senate. a democrat will not run in this area. she opposed creationism in school, on planned parenthood, and worked for school system and saw what we need.

i was the token democrat at their 1000 dollar plate dinner i was given a ticket to. i got to sit next to her and her hubby. but that is my choice i get. she lost me on election day, when i was going to stand at the polls adn her worker giving me a tshirt (a young college girl) said this woman was pro life. ok, if she is anti abortion, i hear ya, about all are in this area. churches preach the sin of it. but i got instantly so fuckin hot when she used pro life. i went off. i said, pro life.... like i am not pro life. like i dont care about life. how arrogant and offensive the word pro life. the girls face turned red adn i could not stop myself. told her, cant do it........ cant have anyone suggest to me i am not pro life. i am more prolife in my stand than any republican can challenge.

[Generic Other]

126. Oh that makes me ill just thinking about it

The one time I ever lost my sanity in public was in front of a right-to-life booth. It was an embarassing spectacle on my part. I screamed at the top of my lungs and berated them in a shrieking diatribe. By the time it was over, a crazed anti-choice nut was waving a Bible under my nose threatening to kill me while her cohorts tried to pull her off me. To this day, I don't klnow where that Bible came from!

They had enraged me by using student body club funds to place an anti-choice ad in the school paper with their names superimposed over a fetus and a rose.

It was not one of my better moments.

[Tesha]

28. MadHound, as I state below in another post, you are exactly correct.

MadHound, as I state below in another post, you are exactly
correct.

Here in NH, the "moderates" like to play boss, but the
lefties are the ones who actually hit the streets and
the phones whenever there's actual work to be done.

Tesha

[Tesha]

27. Based on my experiences attending NH State Democratic conventions...

> Some of these far lefties are the most counterproductive
> Democrats on the planet because all they want to do is
> complain instead of talking about positive solutions. Heck,
> you've even got one here on this thread who implies it's only
> the "far lefties" who do any work for the Democratic Party and
> that "middle road democrats" can't be found doing squat.

Based on my experiences attending NH State Democratic conventions
and doing a bunch of work for the party in many election cycles,
I'm afraid I'm going to have to call "bullshit" on your speculation.

While moderates can be found doing some of the work (and a lot
of the "directing" ;-) ), it is the folks whose views fall towards
the populist left who do the bulk of the grunt work, at least in
my personal experience. We were the ones who got our asses
out in the rain to carry literature door-to-door, or who spent our
weekends making the hated telemarketing calls. We were the ones
providing free housing to the college kids the party brought in
to do more of this work. And this year, we were clearly the ones
who attended and dominated the NH State convention, much to
the chagrin of the "moderate" party hierarchy.

We lefties can be found a lot more places than just warming our
Aeron computer chairs while typing on our Macs sipping lattes.

Tesha

[mtnsnake]

34. I consider myself pretty liberal, & I think you're just as full of it

as anyone else who says that far lefties outwork other Democrats. How diviisive can you get.

I worked shoulder to shoulder with Democrats in 2004 building signs and getting out the message, and I've personally worked alongside numerous Dems in previous national campaigns as well as local elections. I've stood on the sidewalks on most Saturdays in the past two years protesting the war in front of a local post office, and in no circumstance did I notice "far lefties" or any other faction of Democrats out performing any other faction. Enough with your divisive NONSENSE.

[itzamirakul]

103. Maybe you are a far lefty and just don't realize it....

:)

Seriously, I find that it is those who are considered to be the far-left-fringe-element who are willing to get out and do the real grunt work. Why? Because THEY CARE PASSIONATELY ENOUGH to try to bring about change.

Moderates don't really care if change comes today, tomorrow or in some other lifetime. Modeerates DO care...just not PASSIONATELY. Just the fact that they get out and vote is usually enough effort for them. I'd be willing to bet that all of those Democrats who were arrested for marching in protest of the RNC convention and the war in Irag in New York City in 2004 were far lefties. No moderate cares enough about issues to get arrested for his/her beliefs.

It's not that we don't need ALL real Democrats...it's just that in a thread like this, we need to recognize who really does the stump work. Like the Grannies Against the War...I bet there is not a moderate among them.

This is why the foreign hardliners and the Republicans want the Democrats to become more "centrist" because they know that the moderates are more easy to go along to get along with Republican candidates and policies. Today's moderate Democrats might as well be called leftist Republicans.

[seabeyond]

106. post 82. to suggest i dont have passion

wow. hm, well..... i think anyone who actually has to spend their time with me, listening to all i have to say, would argue with you.

[mtnsnake]

109. Maybe, but I'm not tellin!

:)

Lately, I'm just too busy standing up to so much propaganda and so many lies being made by people (not you) in lame attempts at smearing so many Democrats that I come across as being associated with those particular Democrats I'm defending. For example, I'm always defending Hillary, not because she's my first choice (she isn't), but because the lies and accusations made against her on this forum often border on insane and dirty. People will call her a neocon, a republican, which is ridiculous. She's a progressive Democrat. They will also call her a warmnonger, when the reality is that they should be getting on her case for being against immediate withdrawal. Calling her a warmonger is a gross exagerration that they can never back up with any proof when you ask them to. Calling her someone who's not for immediate pull-out of our troops would be the truth, and they should blast her for that, not for a lie.

[seabeyond]

118. good point. i do this often too. biden is a good example

he will say something, and on this board it will be presented in such a way that in no way characterizes what he actually said. so i will say, wait a minute, that isnt even what he said. doesnt mean i want the guy as president. it means, i want it factual

to suggest reid, schumer and dscc does not support lamont when they say they do, is just wrong information. they said it. but some want to turn it around and say, not good enough, they should have said......

well bottom line, they support lamont. that is word for word what they said. present the facts.

ok they say they FULLY support lamont

[mtnsnake]

121. Yup

We're on the same page on that for sure.

It's such a waste of energy to have to spend so much time clearing up propaganda and innuendo, even if it's about someone most of us don't like. Lies are lies, whether they're about someone we support or someone we don't like.

In retrospect, I find it ironic that the word "truth" is used in the title of this thread.

[Tesha]

122. Why?

> In retrospect, I find it ironic that the word "truth" is used in
> the title of this thread.

Why?

Tesha

[seabeyond]

124. what you are presenting as a truth is a non truth

as the examples and explanations being given to you. few are supporting liebermans independent run, yet your truth is all moderates are by gosh.......

even those that say they are supporting lamont is still not good enough. you ignore the truth and present an agenda, because they did not tell all democrats to support lamont, ergo them supporting lamont is not really supporting lamont. where is there truth in that

[Tesha]

127. Curious: I presented examples too. (Salzar, etc.)

Why do you deam my examples non-truthy and your
examples truthy?

Or were you just trying to call me a liar without
falling afoul of the DU rules? ;-)

Tesha

[seabeyond]

129. because if you were honest and had put a couple a handful.....

then i wouldnt have challenged. but you did not. you imply a few = whole and that is wrong.

and if you would care to note in your post, when you talked about salazar specifically i was in total agreement and supportive of you

because even though i give you hillary, reid, schumer, the group you speak of that you have tarnished with your post, as saying they support lamont, you dismiss it, say it is not good enough, and still to this post refuse to acknowledge, they support lamont.

that, i think, is dishonest

[Tesha]

134. Reid and Schumer have spoken nice words.

Reid and Schumer have spoken nice words.

Not enough words, as I have pointed out, but nice as
far as they went. But I think I'll withhold judgement
on whether they'll really support Lamont.

Hillary has sent money. So have I. Big whoop.

But at oeast it's honest of you to admit you're calling
me a liar.

Tesha

[seabeyond]

137. i havent called you are liar because i dont see you as lying

i see you as manipulating, ignoring, dismissing the information to justify your position.

but nice of you to make up words i havent said

[Tesha]

140. You need a thesaurus. (NT)

[mtnsnake]

125. Because of some of the responses

that are simply untrue. Here's just one quick example:

DNC + DLC = GOP

There ya go. If you want more examples, just go down the posts, not that you'd agree or anything.

[Tesha]

128. Bzzzt! *I* didn't write that post. But thanks for playing. (NT)

[mtnsnake]

133. Of course you didn't. THat's why I said "in retrospect"

when I said it's ironic that the word "truth" was used in your title.

If I wanted to use an example of something YOU said that made the title ironic, I would've used this:

Now the truth becomes apparent to all of us lefties:

The DLC and their triangulating, lacking-in-actual-values,
ever-farther-Right marching candidates are not real
Democrats. They simply were using the Democratic Party
to gain political advantage and personal power, and they
don't have one drop of remorse that they have destroyed
and disempowered the Democratic Party in order to do so.

Tesha

That might be true in a few limited cases, but to generalize like this is nothing short of outright fabrication at its highest.

[itzamirakul]

131. I'm not a fan of Hillary, either...but I think I am a fan of mtnsnake,

because he DOES get out and work for his beliefs.

Thanks for doing what you do to help us all...

P.S. and take that secret "far-left button" out of your back pocket and wear it proudly. :toast:

[mtnsnake]

136. hey thanks

and likewise. Don't get me wrong, though, about Hillary. I do like her okay (except for her war vote), but she's about third on my list as far as who I'd like to see win the Democratic nomination. Clark would top that list for me, followed by Obama. If Gore entered the race, my loyalties might shift toward him. I'm not sure.

I see you're a fellow NYer. Do you like Eliot Spitzer? I think he's going to be a strong future candidate for president someday.

Anyway, thanks for your kind sentiments. I appreciate that.

P.S. and take that secret "far-left button" out of your back pocket and wear it proudly

Don't worry, in real life, I do. Whether or not I really am as liberal as I think, its only here on DU that I come across as not being that way, especially when I find myself defending someone like Hillary for false accusations hurled her way. In real life, some of my more conservative friends think I'm as liberal as it gets, lol.

:toast:

[mopinko]

24. go rahm

thanks.

[Tesha]

78. And then there's Senator Ken Salazar...

And then there's Senator Ken Salazar...

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4903995,00.html

Salazar in a tight spot

Colo. senator says defeated Lieberman worthy of support

By M.E. Sprengelmeyer, Rocky Mountain News
August 9, 2006

WASHINGTON - Sen. Ken Salazar is in an awkward position after Tuesday's U.S.
Senate primary in Connecticut.

Salazar has pledged to work to re-elect incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman in
November, even though Lieberman now plans to run as an independent after
losing the Democratic primary to challenger Ned Lamont on Tuesday.

"I am disappointed in the outcome," Salazar said in a statement Tuesday
night. "Sen. Lieberman is a good friend and a good man who has contributed
greatly to the nation and the state of Connecticut. He has sought to pursue
common ground and worked to transcend the partisan poison of Washington, D.C."

<snip>

Salazar is one of a handful of national Democrats vowing to campaign
against the party's nominee, Lamont, and for the independent, Lieberman,
from now until November.

<more>

[seabeyond]

97. i have been disappointed in salazar from day one

i dont have issue taking representitive one on one. i do have issue painting with broad brush. i was excited salazaar won against coors. i live in this area and was in colorado a lot during this election. i really really didnt want coors as much as i didnt want bush. i have my own issue with that man. but as soon as salazaar stepped into his seat, i have not seen representitive of the democratic party. yes,i would be all for a more liberal coloradian. and though they are preceived as conservative, i think that area could vote in a more liberal democrat that better represents the party. i think in 2004 salazaar was the best colorado could do.

you will find no argument with me, with this man

[theHandpuppet]

12. Great posts, tesha, and I agree!

A hearty K&R

[LiberalEsto]

14. There are two Democratic Parties

One is the appeasing, pro-corporate, go-along-to-get-along DLC-led Democratic Party -- the one that supports the Liebermans, the Hillaries, the Landrieus. The one that gives a wink and a nod to whatever the rethugs want to do in their destruction of the Constitution, the middle class, and the United States.

The other, the true heart of the Democratic Party, is the stand-up-and-fight pro-worker, pro-middle class, pro-people party of John Conyers, the Kennedys, John Edwards, Move-On, DU, and so many more. This is the real Democratic Party -- MY Democratic Party.

[Tesha]

16. Thank you -- You've got it! (NT)

[Breeze54]

22. Hell Yeah!!

;) :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[mtnsnake]

29. There are 3. The third one is the 1% of divisive whiners, all of whom

are attracted to this forum like flies and have nothing better to do than COMPLAIN about everything under the sun that doesn't cater to their own couple of personal issues.

[Tesha]

31. Ahh, you're speaking about yourself? (NT)

[MadHound]

38. LOL

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Beat me to it Tesha!

[mtnsnake]

40. You know exactly whom I'm speaking about.

I'm speaking about YOU and the rest of the counterproductive chronic whiners who have nothing to offer other than your complaints about Democrats in general.

"He sucks, she sucks, he's Republican Lite; she's really a neocon repuke, and blah, blah, blah."

[Lars39]

43. You mean those that complain about the New Democrats.

[Tesha]

48. ...who are really the Old Republicans? (NT)

[seabeyond]

52. lieberman voted 90 or 95% dem. that is old republican?

there is a reason lieberman behaved as he did with bush and it got his ass a loss. that is a good thing. but to suggest he is old republican is bullshit. not factual. at least lets be honest with what is happening here instead of making up stories

[Tesha]

53. You're forgetting how he first won election.

> but to suggest he is old republican is bullshit. not factual.

You're forgetting how he first won election: he ran to the
right of Lowell Weiker, the actual Republican in the race.

And a statistic like "voted with the Democrats on 95% of the
issues" is pretty meaningless. Firstly, you'd probably find that
a significant number of those votes are entirely non-controversial
and Democrats and Republicans were both voting the same way. And
many of the votes where there actually was controversy were minor
votes.

But on more than a few really big issues, Lieberman voted
the wrong way. And more than a few times, Lieberman's speech
gave succor and comfort to the Republicans while giving pain to
the Democrats.

Tesha

[seabeyond]

56. and that all started happening with

his support of his religion, which is what fucked him up and lost his job for him as it should have. things worked out just the way they should have. perfectly. yet here you are complaining.

[mtnsnake]

69. Notice how the chronic complainers disappear when they're asked for proof

Funny how they call someone old republican, republican lite, a rightwing neocon, etc etc, but can never prove squat when challenged to do so.

[seabeyond]

70. or ignore because it doesnt fit agenda n/t

[LiberalEsto]

170. I thought his real voting record was 50% Democrat

The 95% is fiction.

[Tesha]

172. The key is to throw out all the uncontested votes.

Doubtless a huge number of those votes where he "voted
with the Democrats" were on votes where *EVERYONE*,
Repubs and Democrats, all voted the same way.

E.g., to adjourn for lunch.

Tesha

[Lars39]

68. Lieberman helped establish the DLC New Democrats.

You'll find them voting with the Repubs on critical votes.
I view them as a trojan horse designed to permanently change the Democratic Party.
It could also be called friendly fascism, where you have what looks like a two-party system, but is actually a facade.

[seabeyond]

72. you dont like dlc.... fine

i have listened to more people accuse any dem that doesnt behave exactly how they want as the evil dlc. this election in conn. did exactly what we wanted and needed it to do. the people at dlc is listening whomever they may be. schumer and reid both have been accused of being part of this group, and hillary. all three have taken their stand. but yawl want to ignore the victory and look for the battle with fellow dems, i cant do a whole lot, but call bullshit. we will see as we progress to fall elections

and hey girl,..... good seeing you , lol lol lol

[Lars39]

86. Here's an example of the New Democrats handiwork:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3259653

[Zodiak]

50. Then go find another place to play

If you hate it here so much and think we whine too much, get some of your life back and go somewhere else. If not, then drop it with the "all you DUers" talk because you are just as much as DUer as anyone here and you complain as much as anyone here.

You just complain about different things/

[mtnsnake]

61. Huh? Where did I say "all you DUers"? I wasn't talking about all DUers,

just the ones...and there are plenty of them...who complain about everything under the sun but have nothing positive to offer in return. If you're going to quote me, please get it right.

If you hate it here so much and think we whine too much, get some of your life back and go somewhere else.

I don't hate it here. Again, you're putting your own words into my mouth. However, I will say that your post makes sense in the regard that more and more I've often thought of moving on (away from this forum), and getting more (not "some") of my life back because this place, IMO, had become overloaded with so many chonic counterproductive whiners about the Party. I've actually been spending way less of my energy here than I used to. That doesn't mean the forum has gotten any better or worse, just that it's not the same for me as it used to be.

You just complain about different things

You're right :)

BTW, although I do "complain about different things", I've offered my fair share of positive suggestions on how I think we can help the party in various threads I've started in the past...not the Hillary threads, though. Those ones were mostly for fun ;)

Peace

[seabeyond]

65. except too many trying to unite the party

so we can win in 2006 and 2008 cause we want this pathetic excuse of an administration out of our f*ckin lives are leaving cause we are tired of the continous attack on anything that is dem by our fellow dem

i have been here a long time, and last so many months i too have spent less time here because time and again i watch us attack our party harder and faster and more unrealistic than any republican or media

[Zodiak]

75. no, you said 1% of voters like to complain about Democrats

and all of them are attracted to this forum like flies. 1% of voters is well over a million people, so that would be a considerable chunk of DU if they were all here. (it would be 20,000 CT voters from the primary if that is what you meant....clearly more than the number of people who post here).

If you mean 1% of DUers, then I misinterpreted your post, and apologize.

People who "whine" about the party have an agenda, and that is to maximize their representation within their own party. Even though a party loaylist would see thier actions as counterproductive, I see it as democracy in action. Getting in their faces about it and accusing them of hurting the party only entrenches them further.

Since this forum is a party-only forum, I see no problem in airing our greivances behind the walls of our own little space.

[mtnsnake]

77. I meant 1% of Democrats but sorry if my # is off by a few hundred thousand

Regardless of any exagerrations on my part, I think you got the point.

(disclaimer: I apologize for "1%" being an incorrect number to any of the other people here who take things as literal as you do.)

BTW, I agree with your philosophy about the other things you talked about in your post. Good points.

[Zodiak]

88. I'm sorry I take things literally at times

It can be a problem of mine. I automatically did the mental math and saw that you were talking about a big number and assumed you meant most of DU based on how big the number was. My mind is trained to do such things because I swim through data for a living...it is automatic, but probably unwarranted in an open-ended discussion forum where hyperbole, sarcasm, canards, exaggerations and other such rhetorical devices are endemic.

Carry on without my unwarranted distractions. I apologize once again.

And I get the point. To make yourself happy, I suggest only responding to and commenting about intelligent posters and leaving the knee-jerkers to their own auspices. The "rabble" is justifiably ignored anyways.

But then again, the rabble are only clumsily parroting another intelligent posters' thoughts, I suspect. If that is the case, then it should come to no suprise that these same people cannot defend their knee-jerk positions and should probably be ignored for the sake of sanity.

[mtnsnake]

94. No problem

Enjoyed chatting with you and listening to what you have to offer.

[rucky]

166. It's a floor wax AND a dessert topping! n/t

[seabeyond]

30. reid and schumer put out pretty good statement in supporting

lamont. i would hope you would also recognize that in your post. maybe there is not as great of a battle as you are suggesting

[Tesha]

33. I'll be watching for the actions as well as the words, of course.

> Reid and Schumer put out pretty good statement in supporting
> Lamont.

Thank you for telling me that; I haven't yet seen
either man's statement.


> Maybe there is not as great of a battle as you are suggesting

I'll be watching for the actions as well as the words, of course.
Right now, the jury is definitely still "out".

Tesha

[seabeyond]

37. my point, we ignore or forget all the dems do

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1860920

and continually attack them for agenda sake. it is not healthy for a winning party. and it isnt right. you, along with a lot of others on this board, making a statement like this while the jury is still out is as guilty as ignoring action and just accepting words. your post appears to be that the jury has already decided and it has not

[Tesha]

39. The most crucial piece of evidence is already well on display.

> Your post appears to be that the jury has already decided and it has not

The most crucial piece of evidence is already well on display:
Mr. Lieerman did not gracefully accept defeat and say "Yes,
I Joe Lieberman will support Ned Lamont, the duly elected
Democratic candidate for United States Senate."

Instead, Joe Liberman is still supporting Joe Lieberman.
Quelle surprise, ehh?

Tesha

[seabeyond]

42. so because Lieberman didn't back down, he is representative of the whole

democratic party picking on the left of the party. kerry is the left,.......and he was ran in 2004. gore is the left and again, he was 2000. these two were attacked as lefties as "your people?" attacked them as viciously as any republican or anti dem media. this makes no sense that you are in battle because of one man. obviously the jury isnt out for you, you simply misrepresent for agenda

[Tesha]

47. Lieberman is a perfect representative of the school of thought...

Lieberman is a perfect representative of the whole school
of thought that seems to dominate the DLC and its friends.

Before the primary election, Lamont repeatedly promised to
support the eventual winner of the Democratic Primary no
matter whether it was Lamont or Lieberman.

Lieberman promised to support Lieberman, promising to go
so far as to leave the party and wage an independent
campaign (that is, remember, a campaign AGAINST the
Democratic nominee) if he lost the primary election.

Let's see how the rest of the Democratic Party machinery falls
on this one; it will be interesting to watch and it would be
damned fascinating to be the proverbial "fly on the wall" as
all the DLC folks decide whether the DLC or the Democratic
party comes first in their loyalties.

Tesha

[seabeyond]

49. he is only representitive of whole, in your story. what bullshit

lieberman is one man, that is behaving in this manner. this is the exact reason the democrats voted him out. because he does NOT act like a dem but a republican. what bullshit to just out of the blue, your theory, your story, your agenda to say lieberman's behavior is indictive of the moderate dem. i see no such example anywhere else of this behavior by the moderate dem. this is unique. truly allow it to play out and see if it doesnt help the democratic party in that the voter has spoken, other dems get it and have learned a valuable lesson and not start battle with fellow dems when it appears we are winning, not losing, ergo not in need to battle

[Tesha]

55. Why do you keep using words like "bullshit" to characterize my claim?

Why do you keep using words like "bullshit" to characterize what
I'm saying? Have you no facts to support your position (so that
you're forced to revert to invective and the hope that no one
notices what you're doing)?

I'm debating the issue calmly with you. Can you not do the same?

Tesha

[seabeyond]

58. who says i am not calm.

bullshit, full of shit. i am using it cause you are fighting a battle where i dont see one. it is full of shit. calmly, and even with i smile, i say this

i do have some evidence that the evil moderate dem is supporting lamont, i believe

[mtnsnake]

71. Thank you!

what bullshit to just out of the blue, your theory, your story, your agenda to say lieberman's behavior is indictive of the moderate dem.

Well said, seabeyond.

I find it ironic how so many people on this forum are using this opportunity to whitewash so many other Democrats as being of the same mold as Lieberman. Instead of celebrating Liebeman's rightful loss, they're using his loss as a means of crucifying and dividing a major portion of the party along with him.

[seabeyond]

73. this is what i am seeing as just plain stupid. we win, and still

we are dumping on our party. trying to divide it and create a loss.

[seabeyond]

54. here is my point. you have yet to acknowledge and praise

either schumer or reid for their stand. you still look for a way to make this divisive. on a number of occasion i have seem people go after both reid and schumer as being this evil group you are referring to in our democratic party. and yet, now that you have their statement you ignore it. that is what i consider to be disingenuous on your part, and your argument. a non truth in your stand.

[Tesha]

60. Golly, here's what they said:

Golly, here's what Reid and Schumer jointly said:

“The Democratic voters of Connecticut have spoken and
chosen Ned Lamont as their nominee. Both we and the
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) fully
support Mr. Lamont’s candidacy. Congratulations to Ned
on his victory and on a race well run.

“Joe Lieberman has been an effective Democratic Senator
for Connecticut and for America. But the perception was
that he was too close to George Bush and this election
was, in many respects, a referendum on the President
more than anything else. The results bode well for
Democratic victories in November and our efforts to
take the country in a new direction.”

That's pretty tepid. Where's the call for Joe to do the
right thing in the interest of party unity? Where's the
call for Joe and the rest of the CT DLCers to vote for
the Democratic nominee in Novermber? Or does that call
just get made when it is lefties that are threatening
to leave the big tent?

Tesha

[seabeyond]

63. you mean in order to get the support they need to say, f* you lieberman

you are down. we kicked your sorry ass out.

well, i think their statement is right on. sorry it just is not good enough for you. feel picked upon

they dont have a place to say shit to lieberman about his decisions in life. it is liebermans to do. they support lamont. good for them

continue on with your battle

[Tesha]

64. No, they need to say words like...

"Now it is time for all Democrats to come together
and support Ned Lamont, the nominee of the Democratic Party!"

It's done all the time. But not this time, oddly enough.

Tesha

[seabeyond]

67. (DSCC) fully support Mr. Lamont’s candidacy

"Both we and the
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) fully
support Mr. Lamont’s candidacy"

you..... wow

they came pretty damn close to saying exactly what you wanted them to. they didnt say ALL dems must support. how assinine and irresponsible of them not to tell people what they are suppose to do.

this is about the most pathetic argument i have seen in quite a while to be able to attack our own party

[Tesha]

74. You're still depending on invective, ehh? Ahh well.

> This is about the most pathetic argument i have seen
> in quite a while to be able to attack our own party

You're still depending on invective, ehh? Ahh well.

I'm pretty confident that, had the foot been in the other mouth,
we would have heard exactly the language I suggested,
calling for all Democrats to support the nominated candidate.
The reason I say this is that we've heard it all before, in
election cycle after election cycle, as "the nominated candidate"
has sucked more and more in their non-support for democratic
principles.

Tesha

[seabeyond]

79. nope. again you refuse to acknowledge

their stand which was totally supportive of lamont, to win your argument on what you are sure would have happened. another made up story, because it didnt happen, so you cannot be sure. this is irresponsible reporting, basing an argument on what you suggest would happen, without reality or fact to support.

the fact is dscc and reid and schumer support lamont. that is the fact. fully. that is it. end of story. if we find something later that suggest otherwise, then that is the point we discuss and argue

[Tesha]

85. Go read my reply below about Kerry, and compare and contrast (NT)

[Tesha]

83. See, here's what Kerry said...

See, here's a small portion of what Kerry said:

Notice how he uses almost exactly the formula I was
prescribing:

"It’s time for all Democrats to come together to
support Ned Lamont. It’s time for Democrats to unite.”

Now go back and read what Reid and Schumer said
(and, more imortantly, what they didn't say).

Tesha

[seabeyond]

87. good for kerry. i like that man. i am one that really wants kerry

to win the primary in 2008. i think he is kicking ass and saying exactly what people want to be said.

now, start a thread on kerry and see how many of our dems will jump in and attack the man for every falsehood republicans and media presented in the runnup in 2004

the bottomline.

dscc, schumer, reid, clinton FULLY support lamont

[Tesha]

91. (There is a current thread somewhere around here.) (NT)

[WildEyedLiberal]

41. SO who are all these DLC Dems supporting Lieberman?

You have names to back up your broad-brush bullshit, don't you?

Maybe Rahm Emanuel? Wait, nope, he slammed Lieberman for his "blind loyalty to Bush."

Maybe Chuck Schumer? Nope, he and the DSCC endorsed Lamont.

Maybe Hillary Clinton? Nope, endorsed Lamont as well.

So who are all these DLCers still promoting Lieberman?

The only "truth" apparent to me is that this post is a steaming load of bullshit devoid of any facts whatsoever that exists solely to provide a cheap shot that isn't even true.

[Tesha]

44. NPR had a story this morning...

NPR had a story this morning that provided sound snips from
a number of prominent CT Democrats who said exactly what I
alleged in the original post. I'm sorry, but I didn't catch
their names.

Tesha

[MadHound]

51. I heard that also, here's the link you need

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5629311>

Utterly despicable how many Democrats are not going to get behind their party's nominee. One good thing though, it does finally expose the DINOs, out in the open for all to see.

[WildEyedLiberal]

132. You don't say CT Dems in your OP though

You say "DLC" which implies national Dems.

I don't doubt that some local politicians are Lieberman loyalists. It's not right, but then again, your implication that all centrist Dems will support Lieberman is not right, either.

[Tesha]

135. And with the evidence of Ken Salazar, that is true. (NT)

[seabeyond]

138. one person = all these people = truth?

We're hearing from all those same folks how "personal loyalties",
"friendships", or "issues" mean that they must support Lieber-
man over the duly elected nominee of the Democratic
Party.

[Tesha]

141. I mentioned, and someone else confirmed, more voices...

I mentioned, and someone else confirmed, more voices being
heard on NPR this morning.

And I'm confident more will check-in as the days go by
(although, as Volcano Jen observes on another thread,
others will "check-out" of Lieberman's delusion).

Tesha

[seabeyond]

143. regardless it appears as of your post, the majority of dlc is supporting

lamont, clearly. the strong majority. as of this moment. slip sliding away. you dont have a leg to stand on with your op. you have hemmed and hawed your way thru on this thread, and not well.

[Tesha]

145. Let's talk later in "campaign season".

We'll see which of us has a firmer grip on reality.

And remember, "support" means more than saying "Of
course we in the DSCC support Ned!".

Tesha

[seabeyond]

153. and this post shows the shallowness of your op. the future will

prove you right, not today when you posted. and lets define what support is today so tomorrow we can say they did not.

[seabeyond]

155. to illustrate further. all us calling you on your misrepresentation

of fact are thrilled with the outcome. we see the advantage to our party. we say it is a good thing lamont won. yet still you create us as enemy. even in a time of victory for our party, you do not celebrate, you are adament in seeing failure. i ask you, what is that? youa re getting what you want, and still you refuse to see, refuse ot embrace

[Tesha]

158. "All of us?"

> all us calling you on your misrepresentation

"All of us?"

Who? You, mtnsnake, WildEyedLiberal, and the mouse in your pocket?

Sheesh! Talk about misrepresentation! What a crowd! Why not call
Mr. Benchley over here so there can be FIVE of you (well,
counting the mouse in your pocket)?

Tesha

[seabeyond]

161. those of us. better. ready to address the post

or another flimsy get a thesauruses post?

technically, all of us that are calling you on your op....... are not pro lieberman, as opposed to some of us are some of us not. or all of us are pro lieberman. you assuming all meant a number of people is your interpretation. my point was those of us that challenge you are not pro lieberman. yet still you battle on. cannot accept a victory. gotta at all cost diss a dem

but whatever in missing a point.

[WildEyedLiberal]

139. What did Ken Salazar say?

Do you have a link?

And since when did Ken Salazar become the entire DLC? If indeed he is supporting Lieberman as an independent - which I require a link from today to believe - then he is one person and doesn't represent anyone besides himself. As I and others have pointed out, famous "DLCers" have pledged support for Lamont.

Your thread is cleverly designed to tar all centrist Democrats with one brush, and it's highly disingenuous, to put it mildly.

[Tesha]

142. It's posted elsewhere in this thread -- look it up. (NT)

[WildEyedLiberal]

150. If one person is the entire basis of your OP, then maybe you should

I'm not digging through this nightmare of a thread to find whatever the hell Ken Salazar said, as if it matters or proves your broad-brush point in any way.

[Tesha]

159. Look downthread. Look upthread. Don't be deliberately ignorant

Look downthread. Look upthread. Don't be deliberately ignorant
and then act proud about it.

Tesha

[seabeyond]

144. post 78. not a tough one to help you out with, wink

one officeholder as of yet.

from what i have gathered.

[Tesha]

149. Okay, now explain Al From's remarks. (See them posted down-thread) (NT)

[WildEyedLiberal]

151. Is he an elected Dem? nt

[Tesha]

160. He is a powerful Democrat. *I* never talked about *ELECTED* Democrats.

> Is he an elected Dem?

He is a powerful Democrat. *I* never talked about *ELECTED*
Democrats. *I* am talking about *ALL* Democrats who demand
that the left vote for anyone with a "D" after their name
and then spend all their time pissing all over the lefty
activists.

Al From is *MOST CERTAINLY* the *A-NUMBER-ONE* example of
just such an asshole.

Tesha

[WildEyedLiberal]

164. I don't think I'd call Al From a powerful Dem

I agree with your criticism of Al From - he's a huge asshole - but how influential is he really? Who takes their cues from Al From?

I saw Salazar's statement, no thanks to you, and agree it's shitty, but he and Al From still aren't enough of a crowd to justify your OP. Even if you throw in Will Marshall and Marshall Wittman and other DLC talking heads, it doesn't matter, because who actually cares what they say? They have about as much serious influence as Kos.

I kind of get what you're saying about Reid and Schumer's endorsement being milquetoast, but they endorsed Lamont and that's what matters. The DSCC will undoubtedly fund him. So I just don't think there's this party wide conspiracy to help Lieberman; the only Lieberman holdouts are the diehard kooks who are irrelevant in terms of the mainstream party anyway.

[LincolnMcGrath]

111. A dlc Vice Chair said Joe should run indy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1852196&mesg_id=1852196

[Avalux]

57. None of our Dem Leaders (DLC included) will support Lieberman.

Their own political skin is on the line and it won't happen. Make no mistake that what happened last night was very, very big and a defining moment for the Democratic Party. The media may try to spin it as a left-wing hijack but I don't think it will work.

[Tesha]

62. From your keyboard to dog's ears! (NT)

[fishwax]

95. I haven't heard any national figure saying anything like that

:shrug:

Schumer, Reid, and the DSCC said they fully support Lamont. Dodd did too. Evan Bayh ain't exactly a raging liberal, but he came out right away in support of Lamont. Hillary cut a check already.

Who still supports Joe?

[seabeyond]

98. thanks you. i didnt know about dodd and bayh.

a few back lieberman. and a few is not the whole party

[Tesha]

102. Look up-post for Ken Salazar, the Senator from Colorado. (NT)

[Liberal Dose]

101. DNC + DLC = GOP

It's been my sig for a looooooong time now. :hi:

[seabeyond]

105. then why dont alllllll the dnc and dlc leave the party, and leave it

to ya....

take out about 3/4th of your party.

that is the way to win. big thumbs up

not to mention you are just flat wrong

[mtnsnake]

112. You could be asked a thousand times to prove it and

a thousand times you'd go silent.

Funnay about that...

[WI_DEM]

108. sounds like most democratic officeholders are lining up behind Ned

[Tesha]

110. Sometimes, of course, you need troops *IN FRONT OF YOU*...

> sounds like most democratic officeholders are lining up behind Ned

Sometimes, of course, you need troops IN FRONT OF YOU
rather than just hiding behind you in the cover you provide. ;-)

Tesha

[tinfoil tiaras]

113. Sounds like a tactic of a facist regime (i'll explain)

See, the Rethugs want to lessen the political gap (by nominating candidates like Lieberman) b/w the two parties so eventually, the will morph into one, incredibly right-wing Bush-esque Republican party.

Does that make any sense at all?

[itzamirakul]

114. What you said, Tesha! I'm in agreement with you 100%...

I am so sick of this, "Vote for them because they are Democrats and we need the seat!"

What good does it do to have a DINO-voting ass warming a seat? What difference in the way they will vote and the way a Republican will vote?

I used to BE a moderate, centrist Democrat until they moved the line so far right that I fell happily into the activist, far-left, fringe element by default!:patriot:

[samsingh]

130. very good points

[Generator]

146. You said it sister!

Lieberman's four hundred betrayals-and now this. The ultimate betrayal with salt in the wound. He outs himself. He hasn't been a real Democrat for awhile. I guess us "far left cancer on the Democratic party types" aren't so dumb afterall.

Isn't anybody else fucking pissed that a supposed Democrat is running as an Independent because he lost to a real Democrat so he can get Republican votes? I find it wacked out. And this is the dude that was there at the start of the freaking nightmare that never ends, selection, surrender 2000.

[Cleita]

147. Hey, that's "extreme leftie" to you and

I'm proud of it.

[Tesha]

162. :-) (NT)

[Tesha]

148. Al From, *MR. DLC* checks in...

Al From, *MR. DLC* checks in, deeply-disses Connecticut voters:

http://www.nysun.com/article/37604

> The CEO of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council,
> Al From, showed up mid-afternoon to speak for the man
> he called a "friend" and to stop everyone from pushing
> the panic button. Hold on, hold on, he said. Don't make
> too much of a prospect of a defeat for the man who served
> as his party's vice presidential nominee in 2000. "It is
> one primary race," he was saying. "It's the state where
> Jerry Brown beat Bill Clinton."

Oh yeah, the DLC will definitely support Lamont.
And Ronald Reagan wil rise from the dead to support
Ned too.

tesha

[Tesha]

154. Marshall Wittman of the DLC checks in...

Marshall Wittman of the DLC checks in:

http://www.socialistworker.org/2006-2/597/597_06_Leibermen.shtml

> What we’re seeing is an ideological purge,” Marshall
> Wittman of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC)
> told Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone. “It’s a national
> effort by the left to get rid of somebody they’ve
> decided to demonize...We have concerns about narrow
> dogmatism.”

He sounds like he'll support Lamont now, doesn't he?

Tesha

[Tesha]

156. Ariana Huffington's on my side...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/joe-lieberman-spoilered_b_26880.html

> What's more, he has the nerve to continue to insist that
> he's doing this "for the sake of... my party". That's right,
> the same party that he rejected this morning.
>
> Party leaders now need to return the favor. They're off to a
> good start, with Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Evan Bayh, John
> Edwards, Barak Obama, Frank Lautenberg, Rahm Emanuel, Barbara
> Boxer, the DSCC, the DCCC, and Lieberman's Connecticut homey
> Chris Dodd all throwing their support behind Lamont. Even
> better, Hillary Clinton cut Lamont a $5,000 check from her
> HILLPAC.
>
> But it's not enough for party leaders to back Lamont, they
> have to do everything in their power -- publicly and privately --
> to pressure Lieberman to drop his For the Sake of My Ego run.
( -- Emphasis added)

[seabeyond]

157. i thought you were talking about our elected officials, the dlc,

supporting lamont? cant find them so now you are going all over the net putting up voices to prove your point.

no way....... another bullshit along with lmao........

[mhatrw]

163. Exactly. Where are all their strident calls for unity and loyalty now?

They've always played by Republican rules. Two for them, and none for us -- and whatever bs argument works to satisfy their masters at the current moment in time.

[Tesha]

165. ABC news just cited Inouye, Landrieu, and three or four more Senators...

ABC news just cited Inouye, Landrieu, and three or four more Senators
as still supporting *LIEBERMAN* and *NOT* Ted Lamont, the *DEMOCRATIC*
nominee.

I believe a Nelson was also on that list, but it was on screen for too
short a time for me to capture it all. So it sounds like my claim that
the DLC wouldn't back down is holding fairly true.

Perhaps someone has the complete ABC list?

Tesha

[Tesha]

169. From another website...

Another website* claims that the following four Senators
will back Lieberman. This list seems to mostly agree with
the list that ABC news flashed (minus Landrieu):

o Daniel Inouye
o Ken Salazar
o Mark Pryor
o Ben Nelson

Tesha


* http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/08/the_5_stages_of.html

[Tesha]

173. Cat got your tongue?

Cat got your tongue?

Am I still full of bullshit, or does the fact that five or so
*"DEMOCRATIC" SENATORS* are stil supporting Lieberman add some
street cred to my claim?

Tesha

[AntiFascist]

167. The DLC is losing....

their efforts only draw attention to Republican priorities, and if people want a Republican they will vote Republican.

[eviltwin2525]

168. The very LAST thing America needs

is TWO Republican parties. Yuck. And Eeek! And no f***ing way!

[yurbud]

171. one cancer in two parties. GOP is nothing but skin and cancer

like a garbage bag full of used chewing tobacco.

The Democrats are just this side of terminal, but doing everything to fight off treatment.

[LWolf]

174. This is exactly why

so many voters no longer associate themselves with the Democratic Party. I've met and talked to all kinds of active, progressive people who have left the party behind.