Can I just say something? We ARE united...we are NOT divided.

[AnnInLa]

So much bemoaning about us being divided over Murtha/Hoyer, Schumer/Kerry, Carville/Dean, etc, etc, etc.

We haven't been in this position for years and years and years....So, it is a GOOD thing we can argue like this over who gets credit for this or that, or argue over who should lead, or who said what to whom.

What if we had lost Congress? We could be like the repukes are now. They are arguing about who didn't lead, who said what to whom, whose fault this was or that was. Wouldn't you rather be having the arguments but be on the winning side???

This is a natural thing that is happening to us. For every major win, or every major loss, it is natural that the 2 sides go thru GREAT INTROSPECTION and realignment of our priorities, and that is just what the Dems are doing, and what we are doing on DU (microcosm).

So, let's keep arguing, discussing.....it's good for us, and good for the party. But, jeez, the bemoaning that we are falling apart is just not true. We won for goodness sakes! All the details will come out in the wash.

[H2O Man]

1. Yep.

We can find that differences of opinion can be a strength, not something to fight about.

[Sapphocrat]

2. I think the perception of division is greater than the division itself.

But then, that may just be my perception. AFAIC, it almost doesn't matter who gets what now, as the end result will have the same impact on my life, and on the issues that mean the most to me.

(I said "almost," people.)

P.S. As far as division goes, there are gaping chasms between factions on issues, but I'm referring to divisions over specific Democrats, as you do in your OP.

[lapfog_1]

3. Yes, you are right.

But it's interesting to contrast things.

When Murtha was the only Congress critter to stand up and say "we need to get out of Iraq" when few others who weren't considered "fringe" would say anything. Because Murtha was a pro-military social conservative, his condemnation of the war was powerful. And everybody here was fourscore behind him (I never heard a word about his stance on abortion or something... and though it was well known that he was a target in Abscam, though not charged or convicted, that never surfaced here either). His courage to state something as a leader of Democrats, something that needed to be stated, is in no small measure responsible for the Win we had exactly one week ago. Yes, there were many other reasons, we had strong candidates, Dean ran a great campaign. But it was Murtha that set the agenda.

Now, from reading DU in the last few days, many of our members are ready to throw him under the bus because he isn't perfect or pure enough for us.

[valerief]

4. You're right. And I know I like to see a difference of opinion. That's

how I learn stuff. I don't see the problem with loving/hating Carville/Murtha. They get just so much energy from bloggers anyway before the bloggers get bored with them. We know what the big stuff is and are itching for 2007 to get here to see it happen.

[AnnInLa]

7. You know, I think that is it.....we are filling in time,

arguing among ouselves, impatiently waiting for 2007. It's the waaaaaiiiting, it's making us fractious, like kids. (Hope our expectations aren't too high.)

[KharmaTrain]

5. Whose Fighting? Only Those With More To Lose

I firmly agree with you. I sure am enjoying the aftermath of this election than anyone in recent memory and I've like the tone things are starting to take in this country. Finally, a little light at the end of a long, dark tunnel. What's is that light? Daylight or another train? With the election of so many new voices into the House, I see daylight...it's the "old guard" that wants us to see another train.

As I've said before, the credit for the elections go to each candidate. They were the ones who rang the doorbells, met the voters and won their votes. Yes, the party helped by throwing in the cash for the TV ads and some GOTV activity, but without these people believing as they did and working as hard as they did, we'd still be the minority party.

The beltway mediatypes thought the world revolved around them. The election showed their "conventional wisdom" for the bullshit it is and they're not too happy. We see it in the "journalists" like Joke Line...err I mean Joe Klein, who see the growth of the netroots and true populism as a threat cause they didn't manufacture it or can control it. It's something to be feared as makes them irrelevant and forces them to do something they haven't in ages...prove their qualifications to be a "pundit". Nothing would make me happier than to see the "mighty 500" and their allies get their long-deserved comeupance.

There seems to be a lot of DLC blowback...moreso than from the Repugnicans. Makes one go hmmm...

[AnnInLa]

8. I firmly see the netroots movement combined with

the new "populist" (progressive) movement as being THE future of the Dem party, and the future of this country. It makes me estatic...and if others have to brought kicking and screaming to the new ways of doing/expressing things, so be it.

[KharmaTrain]

9. Amen!

Populists derive their power from the people...not from a cozy TV studio in Midtown Manhattan.

The netroots still has to prove itself as this is truly our first taste of success, but it's a big step in reshaping the political dialogue. It's brought many of us together who had previously had no common place to share ideas and support and makes an end-run around the corporate media and pundits that feel they're entitled to power and have long lost any sense of fairness or honesty.

The beltway establishment hates Dean and the netroots cause they can't control us and see us growing. They also saw all the money we raised for candidates last year and how that really threatens their power and relevancy. Damn right they're fighting back...that means we've drawn blood!

[Blue-Jay]

6. Thankfully, DU does not represent the majority of Democrats.

It's weird how I can agree with so many people on so many issues and still feel like slamming my own head with a hammer.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. Up to a point.

If you open a discussion on Lieberman, impeachment, gun control, Israel/Palestine, moderates vs liberals, Christianity, Murtha, late-term abortion etc then "united" is not likely to be as good a choice of word to discuss the result as "divided", I feel.