To Those DU'ers Who See The Big Picture In November, I Need Your Help.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

I'm hoping what I'm about to request isn't considered completely inappropriate. I have had quite a long week and my brain's a little fried, so maybe my judgment isn't as strong as it could be right now. All I know is that after a really long and tiring week, this influx of Dem bashing threads is really starting to get frustrating.

Regardless of how some feel about some individual Democrats or the differing perceptions to the levels of responses to certain issues from the Democratic Party itself, most of us would still agree that November carries an immense amount of importance and we must come together the best we can to ensure victory. It is not just a narrow picture of like this candidate, don't like that one. This election is about putting the Democratic Party in the majority. It must be viewed as a whole. It is all or nothing. Some may say this is a shrubby-like 'you're either with us or against us' philosophy and I would say you are exactly right. But it applies here. In the terms of GLOBAL importance of this upcoming election and the overall mission of DU itself, this simply IS a with us or against us scenario. Advocating against ANY Dem on the ballot or taking up positions that can only serve to discourage others against voting for certain Dems, is just quite simply working against everything DU is here to accomplish. It is with us or against us. It simply is a choice of help the Dems as a WHOLE win the majority, or work against us. It is not an individual candidate popularity contest.

So, having that said, I'm asking for the team spirit help from those DU'ers who agree and understand this simple concept. Like I said above, I'm not sure if the following request is inappropriate. I'm hoping it isn't. What I want all of those that align with the premise above to do, is to simply commit to not replying to threads that in some way advocate against our mission, but instead seek out threads that rally it. It may not be a guarantee to rid ourselves of the contradictory to our cause threads, but at least if we ignore their premise the best we can we have a better shot of those threads sinking like a rock. In my opinion, the faster those threads can sink the better. I'm going to commit myself to here on out not kicking such things.

Like I said, I'm hoping that request isn't overly inappropriate. I fully understand that some can accuse and be angry with me for advocating against a 'free speech' concept, but my response to that would simply be this: The mission of DU (in my opinion) isn't to be a free for all sounding board for venting frustrations and criticisms against Democrats. It is to GET DEMOCRATS ELECTED AND SPREAD TRUTH!

My apologies if this post is uncalled for. All I know is that I'm fed up right now with finding threads that actually seem to cross the line of dissent and instead actually advocate positions against our cause. I'm sure many of you are as well. So let's do what we can, and more than anything let's stick together and forge forward despite our differences, to make sure at all costs we've done whatever we could to win back congress in November. Vote. But more importantly, make sure you vote Democratic. We are being counted on globally.

Peace,

OMC

[Dr.Phool]

1. OK, our "leadership" hasn't exactly been shining this week.

I get pretty mad at them sometimes, but when it comes right down to it, I'm going to support our people in the general election.

Here in Florida, I can't stand Jim Davis D-LC (for Governor) on a personal level. I supported Rod Smith in the primary. But I'm sure as hell not voting for Charlie Christ(R). I'll be voting for Davis.

I've had a lot of differences with Bill Nelson this year, but I'm sure the fuck not voting for Katherine Harris!

As a former congressional candidate, and currently a congressional campaign manager, I get pissed off at my own candidate about 6 times a day, but in the end, we work it out, and move on to the next level.

What we're experiencing right now, is just some well deserved frustration at our leadership, but things will come around by November. I hope.

[LynneSin]

13. I've got to vote for a democratic senatore that supports Lieberman

and it makes my skin crawl knowing that I have to support Carper.

But I'll vote for Tom Carper and I would probably yell at any Delaware DUer who for some reason felt that we shouldn't support Tom Carper in November.

And in 2012 - I'm going to remember what Tom did and help support a candidate to replace him

[seabeyond]

35. ya well..... in panhandle of texas i have ALL repugs. you at least

get to see the D. lol lol

[brentspeak]

2. Your post is not uncalled for

You are not imagining things: There really are people on DU who are trying to screw things up for the Democrats. The fact that the number of the negative threads has mysteriously exploded within the past few days all but confirms that. Constructive criticism is one thing; inciting denouncement of Democrats or apathy towards the election is quite another.

Thanks for posting your thread.

[magellan]

5. Yes, it's all a great big conspiracy theory

The reason the negative threads have "mysteriously" exploded within the past few days has nothing at all to do with the fact that the Democratic leadership decided to assail Chavez for something he said on Wednesday (coincidentally, a few days ago) rather than condemn Bush**'s lovely little Rose Garden speech about torture of over a week ago.

It has nothing to do with the fact that many of us (judging by the 213 recommendations on this thread -- DEMOCRATS IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT I GOT TO SAY...THEN LOSE AGAIN. -- at the moment) are fed up with the silence and inaction on the part of the Dems.

Keep those blinders on.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

6. The Goal Of DU IS NOT To Embrace Chavez. It Is To Get Dems Elected And

strive as a community to ensure we regain the majority. If you would rather focus on the former than the latter, then I fear it is you that has blinders on.

[magellan]

10. You're missing the point entirely

I don't give a rat's about Chavez or what he said. The question is, why do the Dems? And if they're going to take the opportunity to lash out about his UN comment, which was so trivial as to be a non-event, then why squander the opportunity to jump on Bush** over the far more disturbing matter of his pro-torture strong-arming last Friday?

Their silence was part an incredibly well thought out plan, I know. The Dems' plan for almost everything of vital import is to make everyone wonder if they require resuscitation.

[Bluerthanblue]

54. very well said. Thank you n/t

[Vidar]

89. Exactly on target.

[brentspeak]

8. Maybe you didn't read this article just posted on LBN

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2526195&mesg_id=2526195

It basically confirms that the Democrats did the right thing by not getting involved in the argument between Bush and the GOP. Now, there's a very good chance the torture bill will be totally canned.

[magellan]

11. Read my response to you on the other thread about this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2194928&mesg_id=2202132

[specimenfred1984]

45. Torture WAS NOT mentioned in the post

Take your blinders off and you might have noticed that.

Repeat: TORTURE WAS NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN THAT HIGHLY REC'D POST

And, I don't give a sht what you don't give a sht about.

[magellan]

57. How amusing

And for that you willfully ignore the point of the highly rec'd post, which is what got all the support -- THE DEMS ARE ASLEEP AND HAVE BEEN FOR YEARS AND PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF IT.

FYI, I don't give a shit that you don't give a shit that I don't give a rat's about Chavez. What that has to do with the rest of your post, other than being nonsensical ad hoc attack, is beyond me.

The fact, whether you like it or not, is that the 'Purity before principle' and 'STFU or leave' attitudes from some here are helping to turn off people including liberal indies like me as much as the inaction of the Dem leadership.

I expect much better from our reps. But hey, it's your party, not mine...and you can keep it if goose-stepping lockstep is all you're about.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

58. "But hey, it's your party, not mine"

That explains it.

It's my party and I'm damn fucking proud of it.

[magellan]

62. Meanwhile, I'm fucking trying to SAVE it

...since I, like many others, realize a TRUE opposition party is the only hope we have against the Repugs. And because of that I'll keep speaking out in spite of you.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

64. Not Sure We Need That Kind Of Help, With All Due Respect.

And not sure which party is your party, since you declared the Democratic Party isn't, but I'm sure they could use your help instead.

[magellan]

66. As stated, I'm an indy

And quite frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn what kind of help you THINK you need. I've voted straight Dem since '92 but I'm not willing to be taken for granted by people like you by pigeon-holing myself with a Dem party registration. I'll fight the way I choose. And I'm hardly alone in my frustration with the status quo, if the paucity of recs on this thread is any indication.

You want to continue sacrificing principle for party, you want people to do it YOUR way or hit the highway? JOIN THE REPUBS.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

68. There IS Only One Way Or The Highway This November

And that's voting for the Dem on the ballot: Period.

[magellan]

69. Duh.

Who said anything else? I think you're intentionally reframing justified anger over Dem inaction as the desire to stop people voting Dem, simply to promote your own lockstep agenda. Do the midterms look that fragile to you? They should. But the blame rests with the Dem leadership for consistently failing to rally the troops, not those of us who've been waiting for them to finally yell "CHARGE!" on matters that are of far greater import to this country than what some other nation's leader calls Bush**.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

70. "Duh. Who said anything else?"

Ummmmm hellooooooo..... McFlyyyyyyyyy

That's the whole damn point of the thread. It isn't a thread against justified anger or constructive criticism against dems. The entire point was when posters actually advocate against voting for certain dems based on their frustration. There is a point where the criticism simply crosses the line and begins to work against what we should be working towards. Not sure why this is such a tough concept for some to grasp.

[magellan]

71. Actually, what you said was:

All I know is that after a really long and tiring week, this influx of Dem bashing threads is really starting to get frustrating.

Regardless of how some feel about some individual Democrats or the differing perceptions to the levels of responses to certain issues from the Democratic Party itself, most of us would still agree that November carries an immense amount of importance and we must come together the best we can to ensure victory. It is not just a narrow picture of like this candidate, don't like that one. This election is about putting the Democratic Party in the majority. It must be viewed as a whole. It is all or nothing. Some may say this is a shrubby-like 'you're either with us or against us' philosophy and I would say you are exactly right."

"STFU and vote Dem" is your message. IOW anyone who raises a ruckus, no matter how legitimate, is a threat to Dem solidarity.

Bass-ackwards, my friend. The lack of Dem leadership is what threatens Dem solidarity, not the alleged agents provocateurs you claim are here advocating voting against certain Dems. I must admit I haven't noticed that, so they must be in the vast minority, as you readily admit in the second bolded sentence from your OP above.

So if it's true those advocating against certain Dems is what inspired your OP, and not the general gnashing of teeth from the majority of us (which is how your post reads), then I'd just like to say, "And the award for best dramatic actor goes to OPERATIONMINDCRIME."

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

73. Mock The Mission All You Want. I, However, Will Choose To Continue To Not

think it a joke. I understand the importance of this upcoming election and know that it is going to take all of us being committed to its success. You can joke all ya want, but this is far more serious than that. The world is counting on us.

I'm proud of my dem leadership, and I'm proud of what they've been able to do in such a volatile environment. I appreciate them and I respect them and will strive to ensure that come November, we have the majority.

I will start committing myself to finding well written informative Dem posts and will do my best to ignore the bashing Dems suck ones to assist in helping them fall like a rock. I hope all those DU'ers that agree with me will do the same. This isn't a joke anymore. We're down to almost 40 days to go. It is time to come together and spread the most positive Democratic messages that we can. Those that choose not to are in fact working against our causes in my opinion. November. That's all that counts. That's all we should be focused on. We can go back to the interbitching afterwards.

[magellan]

75. So it IS the Dem bashing and not those advocating other Dems

...that has your knickers in a twist.

Your post #69: "That's the whole damn point of the thread. It isn't a thread against justified anger or constructive criticism against dems. The entire point was when posters actually advocate against voting for certain dems based on their frustration."

Now: "I will start committing myself to finding well written informative Dem posts and will do my best to ignore the bashing Dems suck ones to assist in helping them fall like a rock....It is time to come together and spread the most positive Democratic messages that we can. Those that choose not to are in fact working against our causes in my opinion....We can go back to the interbitching afterwards."

How can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you can't even stay honest in a debate?

Since you were so kind as to give me your bottom line, here's the bottom line for you: I will not STFU till afterwards, and those that choose to and advocate that mentality are part of the problem IMO.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

79. Well, Come Election Time,

Just know you cannot advocate against not voting for a Dem since it is against DU rules thank god. And twist my words all you want. I have made it quite clear what line I'm talking about that when crossed is inappropriate. It is all about Dem bashing threads that Advocate against getting certain ones elected. I said that repeatedly already so I thought I wouldn't have to repeat that easy to understand notion each time I stated the concept. I figured you to be perceptive enough to know that when I said to boost the most positive dem messages but attempt to try and get the dem bashing ones to sink, that you would've grasped that I meant dem bashing ones that advocate in some way against getting them elected. I see now I should've spelled it out for you each time, as to not have my intent spun.

And dissent all you want. Hell, you aren't even a Dem. Just know that right now us Real dems need to do whatever we can bring the positives to the people to get us out en masse to vote for the dems on the ticket. Anything short of that is just plain contradictory to our mission. But since you aren't a Dem anyway, I guess it technically isn't your mission anyway. So I really see no need to have continued this argument with you.

Bye now.

[magellan]

84. Deny it's what you said all you like; it is what you wrote

I misinterpreted nothing. You misrepresented your rationale for this thread's existence just to shut me down, and you failed.

And in response you take the childish attitude that since I'm not a Dem, your having continued this "argument" wasn't necessary on your part, and you dismiss me.

Disgraceful.

Hear me well, OMC. If the manipulative, elitist nonsense you display here was what being a "Real Dem" was about, I'd be ASHAMED to vote Dem in November. Thankfully I know better.

You do no service to your party, sir. And I'll shout over your losing rhetoric every chance I get.

[bluestateguy]

106. point

The threads that basically have as their underwritten tone: "don't vote. It's all hopeless. Diebold will fix all of the elections with their voting machines. Karl Rove has a secret computer in the White House, etc." That's the kind of stuff that I just don't make time for myself to hear.

There used to be a time in this country when if one side tried to steal an election, the other aside would steal it back.

[mmonk]

3. The constitution of the United States and the rights of all

Americans are under an historical unprecedented assault. Some thought it might be a good idea for our leaders to fight like they've never fought before. Sorry if that offends some here or seems to be hurting unity. Could be a perception problem or a strawdog problem. What say ye?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

7. I Say This:

"Some thought it might be a good idea for our leaders to fight like they've never fought before."

Some more think it might be a good idea to support them however we can with whatever it takes to make sure we regain control of Congress in November so that checks and balances can be restored and investigations can commence on the plethora of wrongdoings this administration is guilty of. Big picture mmonk, big picture.

[mmonk]

9. So the perception is if we're a little pissed they aren't

fighting as much as we think they should, we're not going to support them against the republicans in november? I'm trying to follow this where it makes since.

[Moochy]

20. It's a mind crime, it can't make sense

It's a trap!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

21. Anything Coherent To Say? Or Just The Unsubstantial Nonsense?

Instead of only issuing a personal attack outside of any contextual substance whatsoever, how bout a viewpoint on why you do or don't agree with the premise of the OP. That way, you'll be abiding by the rules rather than just baiting with provocation. Thanks.

[Moochy]

22. Well to start... OPERATIONMINDCRIME

You seem hellbent on deliberately misinterpeting the majority of replies to your posts, UNLESS they agree with you. Sounds like a Mind Crime to me.

And your call to flood the moderators with alerts on posters whom you disagree with, is just plain wrong, and typical for one of your useless, shouting, emotional rants.

It's pretty amusing, but not coherent or logical.

But your Mis-Capitalized PoSTS are good for a laugh which is why I won't ignore you ever!

:grouphug:

You wrote:

The mission of DU (in my opinion) isn't to be a free for all sounding board for venting frustrations and criticisms against Democrats. It is to GET DEMOCRATS ELECTED AND SPREAD TRUTH!

SPREAD TRUTH The truth is, that many good solid democratic voting DU'ers are frustrated this week. FACE it. DU is full of a many kinds of Democrats. Centrists who don't malign the leftists, leftists who don't malign the middle and then there's those who don't play nice on both sides, and those stuck "in the middle" who won't fight.

Your call to alert in the OP is another amusing episode in a long string of nonsense.

[U4ikLefty]

40. I like your style Moochy!!! n/t

[omega minimo]

77. Like you said

The OP was a trap.

And Unsubstantialized As Well.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

81. A Trap For What Omega? Unsubstantialized How Omega? What Are Your

real problems with the OP Omega? I haven't seen you give any. Instead I see your personal criticisms as usual.

What's wrong with the premise of wanting to boost up really positive Dem threads while trying to let the negative dem bashing advocating against us threads sink? What are your opinions on this and why do you not support such a simplistic request? It's ok to not support it, I'm just curious as to your reasons for agreeing or disagreeing. Do you not agree that this November's election is one of the most important of our lifetime and that as a community we should be doing everything in our power to ensure that every Dem on the ticket gets elected? What are your thoughts towards the actual substance of the OP? Do you even have any?

[Greyhound]

96. Seems to me that every election since 1976 has been "...one of the

most important of our lifetime..." and yet, here we are. We now have several thousand metric tons of bone dry powder just sitting around waiting for somebody to use it.

A pep rally is not a discussion, and discussion is the only reason for this place to exist. BTW, your insinuation that anyone with a gripe about the party is going to vote for re:puke:s is disingenuous, even for you.
:kick:

[Moochy]

97. you said it yourself "simplistic"

In general something "Simple" is better than something "simplistic". from http://dictionary.reference.com

Simplistic
–adjective
characterized by extreme simplism; oversimplified: a simplistic notion of good and bad.

Simple
–adjective
easy to understand, deal with, use, etc.


OMC wrote:
"While trying to let the negative dem bashing advocating against us threads sink?"

Hide the threads you dont like, they'll sink really fast. (for you)

But, If they actually do ADVOCATE withholding support for dems, and ask others to rally round that action, then alert them.

An made-up example:
"Hey guys don't vote for Pelosi, she's a nazi appeaser" (alert it)

"Wow I really am pissed that Pelosi and Rangel couldnt have just STFU about this Chavez thing." ( Is that post permitted, Mr self-appointed DU hall monitor? )

OMC, you are ignoring the posts that call out your straw man argument, as is your custom, but really it's quite obvious I think to those seeing this thread that you made a common and false assumption that any criticism of dems is equivalent to a campaign of "infiltrators" and freepers coming here to upset the apple cart.

It's a dishonest argument tactic to employ so please stop it.

(on edit: cleared up attribution of my quoted statements. )

[mmonk]

88. "advocating positions against our cause"

I believe that was in the OP. Seems to me that falls under "baiting with provocation". Or perhaps you can give examples?

[Cameron27]

4. I think that it's entirely possible

that if any one of our fav democratic hopefuls began posting anonymously, they'd be completely trashed, bashed and trounced for their views.

I'm a democrat and I chose to fight republicans.

Good post K&R

[Erika]

12. Sorry, I can't decipher your post

What are you trying to say in one paragraph or less?

The DU is not an election tool and it appears you wish it to be used as such with your controls put on it by your interpretation. Maybe, I'm not understanding you.

[tnlefty]

14. I didn't realize that you get to make the rules around here.

Does it ever occur to you that some of us who wouldn't dare publicly say anything negative about Dems need this space to vent?

I would think that if something is truly out of line the mods or admins would deal with it.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

15. I Don't. But I'm Pretty Sure I Can Make Requests.

And I'm requesting that we let threads that ask to not vote for Dems to fall like rocks, and boost up threads that carry a positive and strong message to our cause instead. Seems like a somewhat reasonable request I guess. But feel free to disagree with it: You're entitled.

[tnlefty]

16. Where are these threads that ask people not to vote for Dems?

I'm not here all of the time, but I would like to see them.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

17. Self-Deleted. Come To Think Of It I Don't Want To Give Them More Attention

[tnlefty]

18. Then I'll just have to assume that no one broke the rules here or the

threads wouldn't have been allowed to continue without being deleted.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

19. Do What Ya Want.

I know I'm going to be committed to ignoring them in the future and instead putting every effort I can into finding productive, positive and pro-Democratic threads to kick instead. The more positive Democratic threads we have on the front page the better.

Goodnight.

[tnlefty]

24. Let me get this straight. Threads requesting that people not vote for

democrats, as you stated, weren't locked or deleted by the moderators, which I mention must have not been out of bounds or they would've been and as it seems to me that you come across with a slightly pissy attitude! I didn't see the threads and as stated for the third time they must not have been out of bounds, possibly rubbed you the wrong way, but still not out of bounds and with no clue as to what you're talking about just a pissy, dismissive attitude.

Goodnight yourself.

[Raksha]

72. I think I know which thread you're referring to, a totally righteous rant

with over 200 recommendations that's already on my bookmark list. Thanks...you just inspired me to re-read it and print it out!

It's probably superfluous to say I don't trust you, but I'm saying it anyway.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

74. I Don't Give A Rats Fat Ass If You Don't Trust Me.

In fact, I don't even know you exist. Don't recall your name at all.

Not a good first impression, though, since you are completely wrong in your assumption. There were quite a few threads going around lately. The one you reference was not by a longshot one that inspired this thread. Sorry, better luck with the accuracy of your snarky assumptions next time! :hi:

[Raksha]

76. I've been here a while but I've never written an OP,

so I guess a lot of people don't know me. But I've been here at DU long enough to form definite opinions about certain people, both positive and negative. And I'll leave it at that.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

80. I'd Rather You Didn't. I'd Much Rather You Elaborate.

If it's one thing I am it's trustworthy. Hell, my whole persona is to speak the truth and be straightforward and blunt, to a degree that can even be considered a flaw. Distrust is a concept I loathe, so you are really far off target with that assumptive notion, as you were in your notion of which thread I was referencing.

So please, since you seem to have more to say, indulge me with some elaboration.

[omega minimo]

83. So You Do Give A Rats Fat Ass After All

:shrug:

[Raksha]

86. I can't find the posts or threads right now

that gave me a negative impression of you, but it was in the past few days or the past week. It's never only ONE post with me--I look for patterns over time. It may have been some of the Chavez threads and/or the ones dealing with Reid and Pelosi's reaction to Chavez' speech. Like many other posters here I was disgusted that some people backed Reid and Pelosi, who AT THE SAME TIME couldn't be bothered to speak out against Shrub's disgusting Rose Garden performance in defense of torture.

Also, I tend to be extremely suspicious of calls for unity that are really "sit-down-and-STFU" posts. I understand that reasonable people can reasonably disagree, that we have a tremendous diversity of viewpoint and temperment here at DU and that in spite of all that, we somehow have to come together to elect a Democratic majority in November. I understand this sometimes involves compromise--personally, I'm going to have to hold my nose and vote for Feinstein!!!

HOWEVER, there's a point where compromise becomes counterproductive and even self-destructive. I can't support a Democrat just because of the "D" after his or her name once that individual convinces me he/she is a sellout to the Empire. Joe Lieberman is the most obvious example, and I don't see anyone publicly defending him on DU any more, although I did a few months ago when he was still pretending to be a Democrat.

I honestly don't remember if you were one of them or not. But you raised my hackles because you seemed to be urging unity at the expense of principle, beyond my level of tolerance. You were doing it a little more tactfully today, less so a few days ago.

I know you want specific examples but I don't have time to look for them right now.

[lonestarnot]

41. My aren't you clever. Good for OP didn't fall for the bait!

[tnlefty]

52. Clever? Perhaps, dunno. Now I've made the request of the OP 3 times to

provide a link as to what he/she is referencing or at least a clue about the thread titles that I can go searching for to try to determine what started this thread and I've received nothing short of derision and dismissiveness.

If you could be so kind as to at the very least give me a link, thread title or something to go on, I will be happy to try to find it. Until I receive more information I can only conclude that the thread(s) that the OP found offensive must not have been out of bounds or the mods or admins would've locked or deleted. :shrug:

[Moochy]

91. Maybe someone should PM you these infamous links

Because they are afraid of them getting kicked and rec'd.

Oh these legendary "DONT VOTE FOR ANY DEM THAT DOESNT SUPPORT X" posts. Where might they be?

If you'll excuse me I will be out hunting unicorns and griffons.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

65. There's a ton of them - haven't you been on the boards???

n/t

[tnlefty]

104. As I've mentioned previously, no I'm not always here and I missed them.

If there were threads here that were actually advocating for people to vote against Dems, I would think that the mods or admins would've either locked or deleted them. I can't even get a clue (via PM or anything else) about either the thread links nor title(s) that I can go search for myself.

I searched the greatest page when I logged on today and I didn't see a thread title that would lead me to believe that the thread is advocating that people not vote for Dems. Anyway, I have much more to do than to go off in search of phantoms without clue or direction.

[symbolman]

30. I call this these a

"Mayor McCheese" thread. Always those who get a few posts under their belts and all of a sudden they are the Karl Rove for the Democrats on the DU..

Done it a few times myself, been right a lot of the times, with flash attack ads that WORK, or activism, but there are alot of "Mayor McCheese's" running around, the more strident and insulting the better, becomes entertainment after a while.

It's also a DISCUSSION BOARD.

Personally there are some DINOS that need to be thrown out on their ears just like most Republicans. Cheerleading for ALL of the Dems doesn't work. LIEberman is NOT a Democrat, and quit being one a long time ago.

We have Ed Case running for Senator Akaka's place in Congress, I've met the yellow dog little shit and I'm just about ready to make a big sign and stand in the street, the sign saying, "ED CASE IS A REPUBLICAN." Just Like LIEberman.

There are grey zones and since all politics are LOCAL (a wise saying) before they go GLOBAL, those that live in certain areas KNOW BETTER than YOU who should be elected as a DEM.

I fully SUPPORT Democratic ideals and am a proud Liberal, a fighting Liberal for the Dems. But there are a few turds that haven't been flushed, and are corporatists just like the Repigs, so this isn't an ALL OR NONE proposition.

I DO agree that Liberals and Progresives need to consider LOCKSTEPPING on some issues like the Repigs do, we'd do a lot more damage.

But you might want to chill out a bit with your OP - maybe it's been a long week for you, but there are a lot of races and people more knowledgeable than you in their own town or county or district.

You get points for cheerleading tho :)

[tnlefty]

50. ??? If I had a clue as to which threads to OP referred to , then I might

have a clue about why this thread was started, and it might clue me in to your response to me. I don't even know as of yet what has the OP so motivated to start this thread. Perhaps if I could get a link or even a thread title to go looking for then I might better be able to understand the OP and your response to me?

I remember Mayor McCheese, but with no context I still don't understand.

[symbolman]

87. I wasn't referring to you

the Mayor McCheese is a cheesy comment and not aimed at you, once again.. I was just calling these threads CHEESY and someone trying to puff themselves up as leading the way with a black or white call on elections, when it's all gray zones..

No, YOU I was agreeing with :)

[seabeyond]

38. as much as you have the right to vent, some of us has the right to be

damn tired of it. and clearly op is not making rules, but is equally practicing free speech in an effort to rid of a lot of those posts that others have the irhgt to make in a very democrat and free will way. i see nowhere there is an infringement on your right to vent and my right to not see the shit

[tnlefty]

49. I made a request to be directed to the threads referenced, and the OP

couldn't even give me a thread title to go looking for. If the threads were out of bounds, then they would've been locked or deleted by the mods or admins. So perhaps I should ask of you, albeit unfairly, do you have a clue as to the threads that the OP found so offensive?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

51. Some Of Them Were. Stop Acting So Naive.

Not sure anybody's gonna buy this "I don't know what you're talking about? There are never any threads advocating against dems!" argument.

And besides, who really cares if you've seen the threads or not? Is that what is really important? Do you not agree with the sentiment in the OP? If you don't, why? Do you actually need to see a physical example in order to understand the concepts expressed in the OP? Aren't they clear enough even without illustration?

Sheesh.

[tnlefty]

55. As I stated before, I'm not in DU all of the time, and I truly missed the

threads and that is why I asked you for a link or at the very least a thread title so that I could go to search for them and try to find them and read them.

I can't agree or disagree with something that I'm unaware of, hence the request for more information. I didn't post that there are "never any threads advocating against dems", I merely asked for a reference so that I could read through it myself.

Yes, I do like to read and to sort things through for myself.

I don't think that I'm being naive, I am asking you for direction to the threads that led you to start this one. Taking an agressive, hateful tone still isn't leading me to the threads that I'm looking for to make a determination for myself about what has you so upset.

[Greyhound]

98. I hope you're not holding your breath. Providing examples and

evidence to support his ravings is not his style. Mangling the language, invective, and most importantly using the CAPS LOCK key, are the methods of choice.
:kick:

[Moochy]

99. Exactly look how many abandoned subthreads

Actual honest discussion would entail conceding some points, but the OP can't be distracted with such niceties as logic now can he?

nothing but tumbleweeds in response.

[Greyhound]

103. I like to think that, at least, he is very young and will,

whether he wants to or not, learn.

Keep fighting the good fight, it is, nominally, our country:patriot::kick::patriot:

[upi402]

23. This is where you lost me OP

"It is not just a narrow picture of like this candidate, don't like that one."
This is as far as I could go...

ugh
do u really think we're THAT simple minded?
not cool.

there are Republicans in the Democratic party, AKA corporatists.
which tribal totem doesn't matter.

it's like 2 wolves and 4 chickens voting on what's for dinner.
it ain't democracy

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

25. One Mission For Us: Get EVERY Dem On The Ballot Elected.

The issue goes no deeper nor more complex than that quite simple notion.

[Asgaya Dihi]

26. Not inappropriate at all

You've got every right to express your wishes and opinions and it doesn't matter if anyone agrees with them or not. I thought it was well said and a lot more productive to ask it than to demand it. No, nothing inappropriate at all in that.

[bridgit]

27. i remain unconvinced it was called-for either, my greater sense is that...

du will be voting where their minds & consciousness has reasonably lead them...and i find that to be as it should be, though in closing i will humbly suggest restful sleep :hi:

[sufrommich]

28. great post.

I always look forward to reading what you have to say,and usually agree.I admit though,I have a hard time staying off contentious threads.

[cry baby]

29. OMC, you have my commitment!

Very "big picture" thinking...thanks!

[elehhhhna]

31. Same here.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

32. Thanks.

I'm just in awe at how some people here who are otherwise informed and intelligent let their emotions overtake them to the point of actually putting a gun to their own head, so to speak. It's mind boggling to watch.

[JeffR]

33. K & R

I don't (as usual) agree with you entirely. But I'm happy enough to defer engaging in internecine ranting until after a Democratic majority is secured.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

34. LOL To Be Honest, Half Of The Time I Don't Even Agree With

myself after later perusal... But I guess that's just simply the hardship I have to deal with when having a complex mind and a multiple personality disorder LOL

That aside:
"But I'm happy enough to defer engaging in internecine ranting until after a Democratic majority is secured."

Hear fucking hear!

:toast:

[JeffR]

36. It's the same for me

Various factions and individuals in this big tent have a lot more in common than we often think we do.

[annabanana]

37. Democrats FIRST, then "What kind of Democrats".. . .ok with me.

[seabeyond]

39. actually omc i am already down with this and i dont even go into the

trash dem threads anymore let alone post and kick.

i am with you

[lonestarnot]

42. 44 days left, I agree make good use of them.

[cali]

43. All I care about

is Democrats regaining the majority. I'm with you, OMC.

[B Calm]

44. As Americans, it’s our patriotic duty to put things right!

Think about how the world use to look up to America as a bastion of truth. How sad for America right now and how humiliating for us. The whole world knows this administration’s word is no good. In fact, Bush is probably the first American President to be scorned, looked down upon and viewed with distrust and suspicion by the entire free world.

As Americans it’s our duty to put things right again. It’s our duty to repair our relationship with the world. We deserve better and we’re going to get better. So in November we are going to go to the polls like we never have done before and vote DEMOCRATIC! Bush must be IMPEACHED!!!

[paulk]

46. you know, OMC, DU has always had a large number of

members who don't want to see Democrats elected...

For me, DU has become a place useful for sharpening the arguments that I use in the "real world". Engaging in the negative threads you mention is not for me an exercise in trying to, primarily at least, change minds - it's a way to understand what tactics the right (and the uber left, who in my book are little different)are going to use, and how best to counter them.

[never cry wolf]

47. As I said in another thread. 5 words. John Conyers with supoena power.

This admins biggest nightmare. Keep your eyes on the prize guys!

[lildreamer316]

48. Count me in.

Exactly what's needed; thanks. We have less than 2 months.

[SeattleGirl]

53. I'm with you, OMC.

Here in Washington State, a lot of us are unhappy with Maria Cantwell (D) for her vote on the war and some other things, but I'll be damned if I'm going to vote against her, and give Mick McGavick (Repuke) a chance to win. Both our state Senators are Dems, and I would like to keep it that way.

As I have said before, instead of voting against someone one considers a DINO (unless there is another Dem candidate who has a hell of a good chance of winning), take the fight TO the DINO. Support them, vote for them, but if there are things they have done that you didn't like or agree with, if they still hold views on certain issues you don't agree with, LET THEM KNOW. Encourage others who feel the same as you do about a particular politician to do the same. Keep after them until they can't ignore you any more. Not saying they will suddenly change their minds, but they are supposed to represent you, so you have a right, and dare I say, a responsibility, to tell them what you want and expect, and what your thoughts are on the issues.

Going back to your main point, I am with you. The big picture IS the MOST IMPORTANT THING. We have got to do what we can to take back at least a portion of the government. One party rule does not work; especially when that one party is populated with a bunch of people who's days are spent kissing Bush's ass and giving him whatever he wants.

[omega minimo]

56. That's your opinion, not what DU Rules says

"The mission of DU (in my opinion) isn't to be a free for all sounding board for venting frustrations and criticisms against Democrats. It is to GET DEMOCRATS ELECTED AND SPREAD TRUTH!"


Some brown shirts might look nice for your new little club.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

59. But The DU Rules Do State To Not Advocate Against Dems.

And maybe you completely failed to notice the part of the quote that explicitly said IN MY OPINION. I'm not sure how you missed it, it's even in your own friggin post. Do you know what 'in my opinion' means? It means it is my perception and interpretation. It means you or someone else may have a different perception or interpretation. It means the statement was not fact, but was one of personal feeling. If you weren't so busy trying to find something in the post to pick apart and attack, you might have realized this quite simple aspect of it. Therefore, stating "That's your opinion" is a compltely non-value added statement, since I had explicitly stated that myself to begin with.

Your statement about brown shirts and little club also makes absolutely zero sense in this context. I just have to wonder why you are resentful against a thread requesting that we boost up pro-Dem threads as opposed to ones that serve to work against them.

Do you not feel that getting every Democrat elected with whatever effort possible is the number one priority we should be working towards right now? If not, why?

[Moochy]

94. Your "opinion" of the rules stand in stark contrast to the actual rules

I doubt that "boosting up" threads that you agree with is a problem in anyone's eyes.
It's the inappropriate alerting of posts that criticize dems that I and I assume others took most offense at.

You and your supporters on this thread are equating criticism of dems with "I wont vote for any dem cuz they badmouthed Chavez" Which is the slippery slope meant to stifle legitimate anger at the politicians statements, and is at it's core dishonest rhetorical tactic.

A Straw Man

I for one was angry, but understand that current wisdom within the beltway says that the Realpolitik of the situation demanded that Pelosi and Rangel criticize Chavez. So now the right wingers can't make accusations that the Dems support a communist "dictator and thug" etc. yay.
More bullshit political posturing at the national level to stave off the fascists attack in the media. Great, let's move on.

Now let's get some Democrats elected in the house and senate so we can finally voice our critique of their neoliberal policies and threaten them with the change that I personally advocate. Once we get the congress, can we start asking them to start listening to their constituents or will it have to wait til 2008?

I'll wait till 2008 if we agree to impeach in 2007! :)

Cheers OMC

[lumberjack_jeff]

60. For many of us, our objections are not only moral, but tactical.

Are there really any votes to be gained by voting for torture? Are there any votes to be had among those who want to make it harder for the elderly, minorities and the poor to vote?

Setting aside the moral outrage that many of us feel, the November election IS probably the most important in my lifetime (as the abuses accumulate, each election becomes more important than the preceeding one). From a tactical perspective, it's about damn time that Democrats differentiate themselves clearly from their opponents.

I think "Americans don't torture people. Period. It stops here, it stops now, and those that enabled it will be held accountable." is a good place to start.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

61. Thanks for the post - I agree. It looks like there are a lot of naysayers

though. Why they don't go to another board and post there if they dislike the Democratic Party so much - I don't know.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

63. That's When It Really Starts Getting To Me.

When you start seeing posts/threads that obliterate the line of productive criticism to such a degree that the poster would find they had more in common with a freeper's opinion on the matter than a fellow DU'er, then it becomes apparent there's a problem. That's when I start getting frustrated and fed up. Constructive criticism is one thing, but hateful rhetoric and advocating against them for selfish narrow minded reasons is completely another. The sad part is that most of those that post such things are not freepers, and my comparison above was not to call them such. It's just that they are so wrapped up in their petty narrow minded resentment that they have completely lost the ability to be objective and see the bigger picture.

We must strive to vote for and elect every single Dem on the ballot this November. The world is counting on us.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

67. I think 99% of the people here agree with you - just remember that.

Why these people didn't post all of their nonsense during the primaries or even before then I don't know.

[Moochy]

92. 99% huh? I think you could get a job at Rasmussen

With polling accuracy like that. :eyes:

[Divine Discontent]

109. Include me in with that majority

after reading all of these posts, all I want to say is -

the OP is trying to say to ignore the stupid posts of dissenters, even if some find it wordy and along the line of an order, which it isn't. The goal of us on DEMOCRATIC underground is to cement a DEMOCRATIC majority in the house & senate.

I remember in 04 a mess of threads that made me think, "what a negative message to Dems!". I realize there are fake dems on here, and there are some people that just love to argue, and finally, there are some that say this dem sux but this one rocks, and hey, this is an OPEN community to talk, but I agree with the OP that we need to ignore the wasted threads and focus on lifting our spirits and being positive this time, and not caving in on each other the way it seemed last election.

GP, OMC!

[Roxy66]

78. It's not the people her on this board they need to win over...

I assume everyone of us will vote Democratic...it's the ones not reading this board that need to be won over. I just want them to get their faces out there and fight, so those who are on the fence will vote to take our Country back.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

82. But Some Of The People Out There May Come And Browse On Here.

Let's hope that when they do, they come across the right message.

[Moochy]

93. I see so the OP was really just talking about PR

Public Relations. Maybe Skinner should hire him to craft a more sale-able image for DU.

Can't be looking like we disagree on anything can we? What will the NYT, the WAPO and the fence sitting ex-freepers we wish to convert think? :sarcasm:

Better to stifle dissent in the name of PR. yep. That's the ticket.

And for the record I am against anyone saying they will "withhold their votes" or advocate for same, *only* because these are the rules of DU. But, to me that's the 'price' of participating on a lively discussion board that likes to police discussion that only benefits the election of members of the democratic party.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

100. Not At All.

This will be my only correspondence to you here, as it is evident from your vitriol in your plethora of posts in this thread that you are intent on only twisting my words and attacking my character. I will address my main refutations below.

This thread in no way equates dissent with voting republican. This thread in no way asks for everybody to walk in lockstep and not express their opinions. This thread in no way criticizes anyone for simply offering dissent. You can claim it all you want, and twist it with disingenuous intent all you want, but the truth is the truth nonetheless.

This thread was about one thing and one thing only: Threads that cross the line of constructive dissent and instead take positions of directly asking others to not vote for Dems who don't align perfectly with their false self-righteous convictions.

It was about being frustrated with seeing several threads pop up that criticized the Democratic Party as a whole to such a degree that it would be far more likely for people on FR to agree with the sentiment then the majority of members here. There is a point where the slams against Democrats becomes completely counter productive and sounds like it comes from the right wing itself.

As a proud Democrat who sees clearly how monumentally important this election in November is, it is within reason that I would have the desire to request of the majority of others here to feed the threads that pass along truth, hope and wisdom towards our goal in November, and ignore those threads filled with such vitriolic sentiments towards our party that they could've come straight off of FR.

Now it was made clear that it was my opinion. It was further made clear that it was a request. Nowhere in the thread will you see any demands, as if I thought I had the right to make them. It was a request. If you don't like the request or you don't believe in its spirit, than by all means don't participate. That's why it's called a request: You have the right to say no.

And lastly, you said:
"And for the record I am against anyone saying they will "withhold their votes" or advocate for same, *only* because these are the rules of DU."

I would think members here wouldn't need DU to have rules stating that in order for them to condone that spirit. Anyone who would actively wish for others to not vote for the Democrat on the ballot even if the rule didn't exist, is probably on the wrong message board.

We must win in November. In order to do so, we need to GOTV as much as possible and do whatever we can to not discourage anyone from voting for a Dem. Any Dem. In any state. On any ballot. Period.

[Moochy]

101. We agree on your final paragraph

"We must win in November. In order to do so, we need to GOTV as much as possible and do whatever we can to not discourage anyone from voting for a Dem. Any Dem. In any state. On any ballot. Period."

Slim pickens but I'll take what I can get. And by the way,

"... intent on only twisting my words and attacking my character."
Who needs to do that when your own words are doing plenty on that score.

And your intimation that I'm on the "wrong message board" probably explains the vitriol. Right back at you.

Here's to Victory in November.

[IChing]

85. Your cause as far as being a Wal-mart shopper and a SUV driver

with no realization, apology or consciousness on your personal habits, It offends me that you shout your name as OPERATIONMINDCRIME to us.
I agree on your drift only after you changed your call out to mods to do alerts on people who are not democratic party enough for you in your op edit.
But this either you are for us or against us then you are terrorist to the democratic party talk
reminds me that
hey, I not really for you and your opinions that you have expressed
so that makes me an enemy of your state?

If this is your new peace greeting then so be it
but, your posts have spoken for themselves

OK peace for now
and we have 6 weeks to get through that needle of hypocrisy or truth for this party and americans to change
our own selfish means of existence contributing to the pain of the world
equated by adopting
a child from the third world from a TV commercial is an affront to those that suffer.
Which I apologize to Jesus and Mohammed for saying that.
the world is watching what we, you and I do.

so end the comments and peace
this is the last chance we have for America
it will be way too late if we lose this one and they might control physical torture now
mental torture, I have witnessed by the msm, this administration and to the truth itself.


Peace
and may Love and Liberty set us free.

[Nikki Stone 1]

90. Hey, if the DEMS run a banana slug, I'm voting for it.

:patriot:

[Moochy]

102. That candidate just might win in Santa Cruz!

:patriot:

[Nikki Stone 1]

105. Sounds like my kind of town!

Is that the college team?

[Moochy]

107. Yep The fighting Banana Slugs!

The University of California Santa Cruz Mascot, "Sally"

Actually I added the "fighting" bit, I'm sure that Sally is more into non-violent conflict resolution full of affirmations. It *IS* Santa Cruz after all. :D

[Nikki Stone 1]

108. Oh my God! The vicious, kick ass Banana Slugs!

:D:D:D

It makes "The Mighty Ducks" sound like bloodthirsty killers.

(I'm surprised they didn't just call the team "The Snails" and be done with it.)

[brentspeak]

95. kick

[BlooInBloo]

110. As much as I like picking nits (and lord knows i do!)....

... I find it an accurate microcosmic statement about DUers that so many take issue with the goal "GET DEMOCRATS ELECTED AND SPREAD TRUTH!".

Geniuses DUers are, absolute geniuses.