Do we need an IMPEACHMENT area/group, something?

[mzmolly]

Holy Kriste.

Anyone else think so?

[Me.]

1. Count Me In n/t

[mzmolly]

2. /

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. That is what the pro silence folks want

the dungeon, that way they don't have to deal with the misguided amongst us in the general forum.. so you will not get my vote on this

And I hope a special dungeon is not created

[mmonk]

6. Yep.

Away with us and the inconvenience of debating the issue.

[mzmolly]

10. So, you do not feel you'd have debate in a seperate area?

The areas I've visited here have plenty of debate. :hi:

[mmonk]

16. Not sure.

It might be a separation into like minded groups.:hi: Then if we want to make a point in General Discussion, our thread would be whisked away like when someone mentions Israel and it automatically goes into the Israel/Palestinian section.

[mzmolly]

21. I suggested it because it's not a "new" subject and I expect it will not evolve much over time.

Same old, same old for now KWIM? That said, I'd want to catch H20Mans brilliant posts, but they always hit the greatest anyhow. And, I'd like to stop in one area so I don't miss anything. There are so many threads on this in so many areas, that I thought it would be "nice" to have the threads consolidated.

My motives were not sinister as has been "suggested." But, that's life on DU huh?

[mmonk]

24. I understand.

Of course from an activist's point of view, it's difficult if we keep getting diverted to a side street. I imagine it will be at a more normal like posting count after this Cindy/Conyers madness cools a little.

[mzmolly]

26. I hope so. But as I've said, I considered it consolidation not diversion.

Peace.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. I get it, but his threads will go intto the Dungeon not the greatest

page if they dealt with the I word

[mzmolly]

29. Well I would not want to see that happen.

Not at all.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. It happens with designated posts regularly

posts that should be openly discussed

I mean the 9.11, too hot, the dungeon, Israel Paleistine... I remember those wars, so now they are on the side track...

And I fear they will do this with impeachment, after all pro impeachment is becoming verboten

Oh and here you go

http://www.comic-con.org/

[mzmolly]

35. I understand that concern.

Have a nice night NB.

[martymar64]

77. Another DU "free speech "zone

Just another way to squelch any discussion of anything real. More room for the posts from the Hillary Poll Parrots and demands for loyalty oaths.

:scared:

[John Q. Citizen]

49. I prefer a fillibuster right on the main floor, thanks. Thank gawd the Dems saved the

fillibuster. And I'm not being sarcastic here. It's one of the protection of the minority (that would be those opposed to impeachment) against the majority.

Since Democracts favor impeachment by a wide wide margin, and since this is Democratic Underground, I think it's only fair that you in the minority opposed to impeachment can have your fillibuster right out in the open. Main Floor. Don't thank me, thank the genius of our founding fathers and mothers. They came up with it, and they were right.

[mzmolly]

59. I support impeachment, I don't support Cindy Sheehan's method of achieving that goal.

:hi:

[John Q. Citizen]

76. I'm a supporter of putting demands on power. I supported it when King did it,

I supported it when Nelson Mandela did it, I supported it when the Chines democracy movement did it, I supported it when Vietnam Vets Against the War did it.

Demostrating and civil disobedience are some of few tools people have to move power.

Of course, there are always people who say they support the goals, but not the tactics. I doubt that will ever change.

[mzmolly]

78. John, MLK didn't threaten, he took to the streets which I applaud.

Regarding civil disobedience, I am a FULL supporter. What I don't support is setting a date for justice and adding threats to run against Pelosi IF X isn't done by tomorrow. Nothing in MLK, Mandela, Park's history mirrors that tactic. Nothing.

[John Q. Citizen]

81. Here:

In 1968, Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference organized the Poor People's Campaign to address issues of economic justice. The campaign culminated in a march on Washington, D.C. demanding economic aid to the poorest communities of the United States. The march originated in Marks, Mississippi. From there, Dr. King crisscrossed the country to assemble "a multiracial army of the poor" that would descend on Washington--engaging in nonviolent civil disobedience at the Capitol, if need be--until Congress enacted a poor people's bill of rights. Reader's Digest warned of an "insurrection." Dr. King was assassinated prior to the completion of the campaign.

(See the date was to stay camped out on the mall and stay until congress passed the legislation. 100s of thousands of people, staying, was the goal. Never done before. )

King's economic bill of rights called for massive government jobs programs to rebuild America's cities. He saw a crying need to confront a Congress that had demonstrated its "hostility to the poor"--appropriating "military funds with alacrity and generosity," but providing "poverty funds with miserliness."

A recent issue of Time Magazine explained that MLK empathized more and more with all people suffering from poverty in the late 1960's. As a result he started trying to help not just Blacks but all disadvantaged Americans. When asked why he wanted to help whites from places like the Appalachian mountains, King answered: "Are they poor?" <1>

The 1968 Poor People’s Campaign did not focus on just poor black people but addressed all poor people of every minority. Poor Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, American Indians, and even poor whites were included in the campaign. Martin Luther King, Jr. labeled the Poor People’s Campaign the “second phase,” of the civil rights struggle. The “first phase” focused on the segregation problems. Both phases were addressed in a non-violent manner. The Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and Martin Luther King, Jr., before his assassination, planned for the Poor People’s Campaign to be the largest, most widespread Civil Rights Movement. They set goals high, such as aiming for 1500 protesters to lobby in Washington D.C. to congress for an “economic bill of rights,” Under the “economic bill of rights” the Poor People’s Campaign asked for a $30 billion antipoverty package that included an increase in housing for the poor and a guaranteed annual income for the poor people across the nation. On April 4, 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated, but the campaign continued on in his honor. Not long later, on May 12, 1968, the demonstrators showed up in Washington D.C. to start the Poor People’s Campaign. For the next couple weeks protesters campaigned at various federal agencies pushing for the “economic bill of rights,” which would benefit all the poor people across the country. With only 7000 demonstrators in Washington D.C. for this event, the Poor People’s campaign came to an end in mid June without passing the purposed “economic bill of rights.”



I think Cindy has a good idea. I hope others do it other places.

If a canidate can promise something to voters in return for their vote, like they will vote to bring jobs, loew taxes, why can't a voter promise to run if a public servant won't follow the expressed wishes of her constituents and push impeachment? Seems fair and organic to me.

[mzmolly]

7. So all the groups are "dungeons"

Hmmmm, interesting. I had no idea that this was suggested before. Unfortunately I missed it.

[mmonk]

9. But I like mzmolly.

[chknltl]

51. Got to add my agreement with nadinbrzezinski

You put it well, better than I (as usual), thanks.

[libnnc]

4. Can we call it CD?

Constitution Dungeon?

How cute. :eyes:

[mzmolly]

8. Aren't you a member of the craft dungeon?

:P

[libnnc]

11. um. no. and I'm not laughing right now.

[mzmolly]

12. Oh, I don't know if I'll sleep knowing that you're "not laughing."

:P I kid.

[libnnc]

13. I really don't give a flying fuck if you sleep or not.

[mzmolly]

14. Wow, that's a bit over the top.

Huh.

[libnnc]

17. Is it over the top? 'Cause lately I can't tell anymore.

People have been really ugly here over the last two weeks.

I'm kinda sick of everyone right now.

Tough, ain't it?

[mzmolly]

19. No,

Not especially. I leave for a bit when I'm sick of it all, take a break and such.

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. I will be forced to, comicon san diego starts tomorrow

and I am doing demos... will be there until sunday, pretty much 12-14 hour days

;-)

[mzmolly]

31. Oooooh have fun!

I had to look it up I admit. I do hope it's a great time! :hi:

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. I hope it is a profitable and enjoyable time

marketing and all that

Of course the new computer gets here tomorrow, a hell of a timing, this one is dying a component at a time

The CD writer died yesterday

[mzmolly]

37. Yikes,

I hope it goes well in spite of it all! :hi:

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. It should

but no cds with freebies... and I will not get the other one going until I can give it the apropriate time to set up vista ::shuder:: but hubby is a gamer

Yep, already aware of some serious compatibility issues with the "legacy software" I have on this machine

[Nutmegger]

5. I strongly disagree. [n\t]

[Breeze54]

15. I think you need to join a group...something, anything.

Possibly AA? It might do you some good. :P

[mzmolly]

18. Do "DU dungeons" count as "groups?"

;) Apparently groups are now considered "dungeons?"

[Breeze54]

20. I vote that you should

join a group in any dungeon of you're choice, of course.

How about the "Uptight, close minded, needlepoint group"?

Just a thought....

Have at it. Enjoy.

[mzmolly]

22. Well, I'd have to be uptight and closed minded as well as enjoy needlepoint,

so that wouldn't work.

[Breeze54]

23. Well, try basket weaving. I hear it's theraputic. n/t

[mzmolly]

25. I'm pretty well entertained with my life currently, but thanks for the insults and inaccurate

assumptions about my character.

Edited to add an (s) to the word insult as I just saw your foolish "AA" comment. What a bizarre and frankly insensitive remark considering the many who participate here who ARE actually in recovery.

I'm a bit surprised by your recent comments. I have generally enjoyed our discussions.

[Breeze54]

45. I'm a bit surprised by your recent comments. I have generally enjoyed our discussions...until lately

Your 'opinions' towards anti-war activists soured my lemonade.

I can't stand or tolerate warmongers or supporters but, hey! That's just me.

Your mileage may vary and apparently...does.

MY 'AA' doesn't necessarily stand for your 'AA' acronym and/or meaning.

Enjoy your basket weaving! You seem to be good at spinning and weaving. ;)

[mzmolly]

60. Sorry pro-impeachment is not anti-war and the two should not be confused.

That's what I take issue with. Enjoy your cheap shots from behind that PC. Be sure and tell yourself you're doing some good.

[ConsAreLiars]

30. Or maybe a "Chimpy's crimes should never be held to account' group.

Or a "I'll follow my party's hierarchy no matter what" group. Choose your favorite. Maybe a "I'll defend the Chimporer to the death" group. Who knows?

[EFerrari]

34. . . .

:spank:

[ConsAreLiars]

39. Yup. I'm baad.

:rofl:

[mzmolly]

36. How bout a "reasonable people can disagree on impeachment"

group? ;)

[ConsAreLiars]

41. Hey, define it however you choose.

And have fun in your self-imposed exile.

(Edit to add, I'm sure you meant to request some private space, and not to simply send all those you disagree with off into some sort of Stalinist Gulag. That would be, don't you agree, reprehensible.)

[mzmolly]

42. Let's see we've got "exile, dungeons and ghetto's" DU-ers are a bit dramatic

I'd say.

[ConsAreLiars]

44. You are the one who wants to put those you disagree with off into

some exile, ghetto, or dungeon. How sick is that?

[mzmolly]

58. I agree with impeachment, I just don't agree with the fools who've inserted themselves into

a "leadership" role on this issue.

Let me be clear.

I support impeachment, and I have faith in John Conyers to do the right thing. Do I demand he do so in ONE WEEK, HELL NO! Do I think, it's "productive" to bring a dog and pony show into his office and shout at the man, HELL NO!

What I do NOT support is Cindy Sheehan and the left over band of Nader supporters who are using her today for counter productive purposes.

Hope that's clear.

[babylonsister]

47. Or, censure's so much better! Or, let's gloss over it and wait til 08! nt

[stimbox]

40. no way

just another way to silence people.
round them up and put them in an impeachment ghetto.

[bigtree]

43. fight them over there

so we don't have to fight them here?

You hate their freedoms?:P

[Norrin Radd]

46. No.

Keep it mixed in.

[eridani]

48. All the current candidates have special areas--

--this certainly has not inhibited posts about them in GD: Politics.

[timtom]

50. I believe it needs to stay here.

This is not some fringe hobbyist topic. This issue lies at the very core of what well happen before the next election.

[H2O Man]

52. Exactly.

Keep it in DU:GD.

[mzmolly]

61. I don't consider the discussion areas "fringe" topics. Election reform is not "fringe."

Impeachment isn't either. It's a movement and a place to "organize" might be productive rather than the daily shouting matches that take place here.

That said, I respect your concerns and the concerns raised by others in this regard.

[Phredicles]

80. This is what I think, too.

[Warren Stupidity]

53. Lets avoid all discussions I dislike! nt.

[mzmolly]

65. Or lets avoid getting organized and being productive.

which was my goal in suggesting the group. ;)

[Anita Garcia]

54. why?

Ummm, what I've heard on other threads...
If you don't like it here, start your own site...
So, if you don't like Impeachment or "IMPEACHMENT" in GD, then why not start your own site?
But wait, maybe you don't want to discuss the pros of impeachment?
Am I wrong?
I can't really tell from your OP.
But, it appears from the replies that maybe others do?
Sounds like we need to keep it out in the open where others can debate it... a lot.

[mzmolly]

63. My reasoning was to consolidate the discussion, avoid duplicate topics

and to have a place where we knew we could discuss this issue in depth. I don't think it's a popular idea however. ;)

[lonestarnot]

55. Ugh. No. I don't think so. Hugh ugh. Nope.

:noheadshake:

[PA Democrat]

56. No. It seems to me that a serious discussion of the impeachment issue belongs on the most popular

forum. It is an important issue and deserves serious consideration.

The problem IMHO has been the countless copycat, flame bait type threads that have lowered the level of discourse. I don't think that people who desire a serious discussion should be banished to a separate forum because of the antics of a few.

Edited to correct spelling. Spell check doesn't always save you from your own carelessness!

[LWolf]

57. I'd rather not relegate impeachment discussions

to a group that, for all practical purposes, "hides" the conversations. We already have to put guns, israel, and 9/11 into "free speech zones." Let's keep impeachment on main street.

[Zywiec]

62. Then what would be in GD? n/t

[Individualist]

64. No, but a separate DLC group would be really nice

[omega minimo]

69. "Gatekeepers Group"

:yoiks:

[mzmolly]

72. How bout a "Closet Libertarian" group? That's who is heading up the current charade no?

:hi:

[stimbox]

84. I think it already exists

It's a "secret" forum where the DLC interns hang out and direct eachother to various posts to flood.
I'm sure you can guess the members.

[bobthedrummer]

66. No, that would be similar to the 1st Amendment "zones" of BFEE eom

[Generator]

67. Yes

then we won't have to bother your pretty little world with our rantings. I don't care what you call it-impeachment isn't the point. The truth is the point. This country is going to magically become HEALED because a Democrat is in the White House on 1/20/2009.

The war is going to be going on until AT LEAST summer 2009. The only way to stop this war and future wars is to tell the truth. Getting a Democrat elected has nothing to do with the truth. It has nothing to do with the Constitution or the rule of law. Only by standing up and protecting those-and exposing the little precedents that have been set by this administration is there any hope for a better future.

Not only is your ilk betting that a Democrat will be president on 1/20/2009 you are betting your children's lives and futures that a Democrat (and a damn good one at that one that never uses absolute executive privilege, spying, et all for his own ends) you are betting that a Democrat will be president until the day you die. Because if not-I would be a little less cavalier with my children's future on the precedents Bush/Cheney are setting for generations.

[omega minimo]

68. Alternatively, howzabout a "Head In The Sand" Forum?

:hide:

[mzmolly]

70. Good idea, Cindy "tactic" supporters can gather in that area.

:hide: ;)

[omega minimo]

74. ...with the NaderHaterz

:hi:

[EFerrari]

71. Maybe what we really need is a Cold Shower Forum.

:rofl:

[mzmolly]

73. LOL

Agreed.

Sounds good to me >

;)

[Vidar]

75. We don't need "no more stinkin dungeons".

[BlooInBloo]

79. Do you mean Cindy-is-god-impeachment, or just impeachment? Yes to the former, no to the latter.

[omega minimo]

82. Ya take a break from DU and look!! One petty taunt tells what all the infighting has been about!!

Saves a lot of time. :applause:


(Maybe not "all" .........) :yoiks:

[proud2BlibKansan]

83. Yes, a PRO impeachment group

to discuss strategy. Those who want to debate the merits can do it here in GD.