Whats with the Kerry bashing around here?

[MirrorAshes]

I've lurked on DU for quite some time, and recently started posting. I am quite disheartened by this new trend of Kerry bashing though, as I see more and more people undermining his credibility and contributing to the FALSE notion that "there is no difference between Bush and Kerry". The majority here on DU obviously knows this, but many seem to doubt it. I do not see what good this can possibly do.

Kerry is not my first choice for president. Dennis Kucinich is. But, facing reality, I recognize that Kerry may just be the best man we have to BEAT BUSH. And that is the first step in this process.

We may look back in the future and see mistakes that Kerry has made, and hopefully we can learn from them. But now is not the time to speculate to the point of paralysis.

Call me blind, call me a sheep, I don't care. I recognize that Kerry has flaws, but there are also many positives about the man. At the VERY LEAST, you have to acknowledge that Kerry is not wedded to a right-wing, christian coalition ideology. That alone ought to be enough to get people to the polls.

The BOTTOM LINE is that Kerry winning gives us hope to end this madness. A fighting chance at undoing some of the damage Bush has done. If we don't give Kerry this chance, we might never get another one. So lets give him this chance. We have to, now, and we might as well make the most of it.

[JI7]

1. some can't get over the fact that their candidate lost

and Kerry won. most have accepted it though but it seems there are a few who can't get over it. if you watch long enough you notice they tend to be the same group who people who do this.

[freetobegay]

9. Amen & pass the donation plate!

[Nlighten1]

15. When you frame the debate...

as people who don't like Kerry are "sore losers" it completely ignores legitimate reasons for people to dislike Kerry.

Some other reasons people may not like Kerry.

His vote for the war.
His support for ousting Chavez
His wanting to "stay the course" in Iraq


There are many more reasons too but you get the point now don't you?

[MirrorAshes]

20. You make my point--

He does not want to "stay the course" in Iraq. He recognizes that we cannot simply withdraw without dooming these people to a unending cycle of violence. He is approaching it from a realistic point of view, not continuing Bush's ideology. That is a huge difference!

[Walt Starr]

22. In the end, American troops continue to die, Iraqis continue to die

and nothing of substance will change.

BIG DIFFERENCE THERE!!! I figure John uses rosy red rouge and Bush uses magenta.

:eyes:

[MirrorAshes]

26. This may be true.

But it is the grim reality we face, and we have 2 options.

1) Take responsibility as a nation and clean up Bush's mess, always remembering the cost of such a mistake.

2) Leave now and hope it all works out.

Personally, I see the 2nd as a selfish choice, and one that we would regret down the line.

[Walt Starr]

28. Like I said, I'll vote for Kerry on November 2nd and start

protesting his almost as evil as Bush ass on November 3rd.

Bring the troops home, not a yeaqr from now, not a month from now, not a week from now, not even a day from now.

BRING THEM HOME NOW!

[MirrorAshes]

32. I can't argue with that.

But I do hope we'll all give him a fair chance before we start giving the republicans ammunition.

[Walt Starr]

34. If the Republicans want to join in the anti-war protests

they will become my brothers and sisters.

This is bigger than political parties, IMO.

[MirrorAshes]

39. Actually, maybe I can argue it.

I don't think for a second Kerry is "almost as evil" as Bush. I don't believe Kerry has any intention of pushing the conflict with Islam, which is what the larger picture all boils down to.

Personally I don't believe we can leave until Iraq has at least a fighting chance of recuperating from the terrible mess we've made. Maybe I am kidding myself. Maybe it can't be done. I just think we have to try, else we leave the Iraqis out to dry--which might have serious reprocussions down the line.

[Walt Starr]

42. If Kerry does not immediately order all troops home after inagurated

he's almost as evil as Bush in my book.

[BillZBubb]

54. I take it you're one of those one issue voters?

There is a lot more at stake than foreign policy issues. The very nature of our government is on the line.

Kerry is much more than the lesser of two evils. Everyone on DU should know that. If they don't, if anti-Iraq war or some other single issue set is what drives them, we've got big problems.

[Walt Starr]

91. I am voting for Kerry as the lesser of two evils

At least I still recognize the government will remain evil, albeit a kinder and gentler evil.

[sangh0]

98. Walt refuses to respond in order to repeat his bashing

Please note that Walt studiously avoids discussing the very real differences between Kerry and Bush*, in order that he can endlessly repeat his slogans about "Kerry voted for war", etc.

This thread is clearly devoted to the point that Kerry *IS* different, but Walt studiously avoids the subject of this thread in order to repeat his mantras.

[Andromeda]

63. He almost surely will NOT do that...

and I think you already know that. You have made your views quite clear and have made it a point to undermine Kerry at every opportunity acting as though he was Satan personified. Then you add after every tirade against Kerry that you will vote for him only because there's nobody else and because you hate Bush more than you hate Kerry.

Repeating yourself ad nauseum doesn't give your words any more impact it just makes you sound redundant. One issue voters like yourself do little to bring up the level of discussion and enhance the debate because there are many issues more important or just as important than the fate of Iraq.

No candidate is going to be as idealogically pure as you want and nobody is going to do exactly what you want them to do. Kerry will do the best he can and that will certainly be better than having Shrub another four years. Kerry's a good man -- not perfect -- but nobody is and we're not going to get a more capable presidential candidate.

Stop making whine with those sour grapes.

[Walt Starr]

90. Hey, I'll vote for the lesser of two evils

but we still end up with evil.

:shrug:

[sangh0]

99. All the "evil" talk sounds like Bush*

.

[Nlighten1]

38. Like the unending cycle of violence that grips Vietnam today...

Get real.

[MirrorAshes]

47. So we are just to assume...

that this situation will resolve itself and all work out for the best?

Hmm...theres 2 words that come to mind, but I don't want to steal your material ;)

[Nlighten1]

50. You must make an assumption either way.

You must make the assumption that keeping our troops there will actually accomplish the goal they set out to do.

If the goal can't be reached what will the outcome be? Many dead America soldiers and many dead Iraqis. If the goal is reached we will still have many dead Americans and many dead Iraqis.


If you pull out our troops what will the assumption be there?

Many dead Iraqis or maybe not as many dead Iraqis as if we stayed there and killed them...like we are doing now.


Hmmm

[MirrorAshes]

53. Yes, but...

I think one thing we can safely assume is that things will change when Kerry takes over. I know people will continue to die either regardless, but with smarter leadership and international aid, I believe we can make much more progress than we can under the current circumstances.

Maybe I'll hate myself in a couple years for taking this stance, but right now I think we have to give Kerry at least 1 chance to fix this. Not to bring democracy, not to "stay the course", but to make it just barely GOOD ENOUGH that we can leave without totally screwing the Iraqis.

[Nlighten1]

56. Huh?

I think it is safe to assume that things will change when Kerry takes over. However, I am skeptical that they will change "for the better". Kerry has to undo 4 years of pissing off all of our allies and convincing them that they need to send their sons and daughters to die for our vanity war.
If he can't do this then guess what? We are stuck with the Bush doctrine.

[MirrorAshes]

57. Why would we...

be stuck with the Bush doctrine?

Like I said, I believe the right thing to do is to give Kerry 1 chance. If it can't be done, I would fully expect him to see the reality of the situation and deal with it accordingly.

If theres one lesson he took from Vietnam, this would have to be it.

[Nlighten1]

59. Because...

When Kerry takes office he will inherit the Bush doctrine. If he can't change it then it stays the Bush doctrine. The Bush doctrine is uni-lateral...that only changes if Kerry can convince other countries to send troops to join our troops...then it becomes multi-lateral(which I understand to be his position).

This is going to be a hard sell given the colossal fuck ups of the Bush administration and given the increasing danger to troops on the ground. What country would want to send troops just because Kerry is president?

The danger will still be the same regardless if Bush is in the White House or Kerry is in the White House. Troops and Iraqis will be dying every day that the war continues. Billions of dollars will be spent every day the war continues. America's credibility gets damaged more every day the war continues.

Kerry should remember the lessons of Vietnam...pull out and bring them home.

[Nlighten1]

114. Ummm

Did you even read my last post? We will be stuck with the Bush doctrine of unilateralism in Iraq UNLESS we can convince our allies to send their sons and daughters to die in our vanity war.

I don't see it happening. And I wouldn't be one bit suprised if our allies say they won't help because the situation on the ground is far too dangerous AND they don't want to take the chance that their troops will get caught up in a war crimes trial.

[kiahzero]

104. What support for ousting Chavez?

In his speech (a thread was created about it entitled something along the lines of - "Kerry, shut your mouth about Venezuela") he pointed out that the Bush Administration's tacit support of the coup injured their ability to help stabilize the country now.

[Guaranteed]

74. STFU!!!

God DAMN. You have NO clue.

[Nlighten1]

75. Well.

The tunnel-vision that infects these sort of extremists minds reflects the values of a particular conservative website I know. I remember the Republicans making similar claims after the 2000 elections calling our candidates "Sore/Loserman".

And there you have it...even people on our side behave that way.

[Wickerman]

2. welcome to DU

and I agree with nearly all you say.

thanks

:hi:

[MirrorAshes]

8. Thank you!

I know this post didn't even really need to be made. For some reason though, as a newcomer, I guess I just had to get it off my chest.

[Wickerman]

16. that is what we're here for

sometimes living in bizarro down is up, black is white, right is wrong world you need a chance to express yourself. Hang around - you can do that here. You will be challenged and disagreed with, but as you already know, learn a lot and, if you choose, have some fun.

[LittleApple81]

3. I would have preferred Wes Clark (I love Kucinich's honesty

and message but I think America is still too much in the clutches of the RW propaganda machine to appreciate somebody like him... what a pity.)
But I am behind the Democratic candidate all the way. We need to get out of the quagmire... this government we have now is a tragedy for our country and the world.

[pinto]

4. "End this madness." welcome to DU, MirrorAshes. Apt phrase.....n/t

[Alerter_]

5. I'll vote for Kerry, but I'm not going to play make-believe

Kerry is pro-war and pro-corporate. He'll be a much better president than Bush.

[Walt Starr]

6. I'll vote for Kerry on November 2nd

I'll start protesting him on November 3rd.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

13. Maybe you should

wait till Feb. 20, or at least Jan. 21

[Walt Starr]

17. Nope, not a minute to waste

Once the election is called for Kerry, it's time to hold his feet to the fire, and not a second later.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

27. How will you know what to protest against

if you don't wait till he's in office? Or doesn't it matter?

[Walt Starr]

31. Oh there's only one thing to protest against

troops remaining in Iraq for even another hour.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

35. Then wouldn't you want to protest against the person in power?

That is, Bush? Why spend months between Nov and Jan protesting against Kerry when he isn't in power? Why not protest against Bush?

[Walt Starr]

36. Bush won't do dick about it when he's a lame duck

so come November 3rd, it's time to tell Kerry to Move On from Iraq.

His first move upon inaguration should be to order all troops home immediately.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

41. I don't see anything wrong in advocating the immediate return

of the troops. I don't see advocating that position as a protest against Kerry, however.

[Walt Starr]

44. It is a protest of Kerry because of his stated stance on Iraq

He;ll "stay the course". The troops will come home by the end of his first term.

Kerry advocates a kinder and gentler PNAC agenda.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

45. You just have Kerry's position wrong

as you will see after he is elected.

[Walt Starr]

48. Nope, I think I've got him pegged exactly

you'll see starting on November 3rd.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

58. You are wrong

now, just like you have been wrong about Kerry all along.

[Walt Starr]

88. I disagree, I believe YOU are wrong

So there.

:P

[Feanorcurufinwe]

94. The difference is, you assert you know the future, I do not.

You are ready to protest things that haven't happened yet, I prefer to base my decisions on the real world, not the world as I imagine it will be.

[sangh0]

100. Here's proof that Walt is wrong

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1486785&mesg_id=1487792&page=

in the real world Kerry is failing miserably

Since Walt has predicted Kerry's failure, Kerry has pulled out in front of Bush*

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1486785&mesg_id=1487560&page=

Kerry couldn't do a worse job if he were intentiuonally trying to throw the god damn election.

[Walt Starr]

102. I will be protesting Kerry's stated positions

or are you saying Kerry is now for removing the troops from Iraq?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

108. No, you will be protesting againt your fears.

Being governed by fear will have a tendency to close your mind to the real situation. Well, now you can't say you've never been warned.

[Walt Starr]

112. WTF???

Seriously, I cannot make out WTF you are trying to say there.

:wtf:

[Walt Starr]

89. Everything I have heard from Kerry tells me

he will have a kinder and gentler PNAC agenda.

That means I wil protest him after I vote for him.

I'm going with the lesser of two evils, but that still means I am voting for evil.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

95. It is false to characterize Kerry as PNAC

It is not based on reality, which is why you can assert it is based on something he said, but you can't actually reference anything he said that would lead to that conclusion.


Because it is a false assertion. A deceptive and misleading characterization.

[Walt Starr]

101. I do not believe it is flase to characterize Kerry's stated positions as

a kinder and gentler PNAC agenda.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

106. If what you are saying were true, you could provide a reference.

You would be able to reference one of "Kerry's stated positions" that backed up what you said.

Since what you are saying is untrue, all you can do is make assertions.

[October]

83. Nixon was forced to resign in his "lame duck" term...

Speaking of "Dicks."

Of course....we had a "real" press back then...

[Vladimir]

86. The correct attitude n/t

[MirrorAshes]

7. I do not believe he is "pro-war".

He has to face the reality of *THIS* war, yes. But would he have started it on his own? Would he start another one like it?

I see no evidence to say he would.

[timtom]

73. I'm sorry, but

I have to call you and all others on this matter:

As long as we Americans call the illegal invasion and occupation of another sovereign nation a "war" we legitimize that action.

This is an illegal and highly immoral little escapade the US has going for itself, and it needs to end now. It appears (note the word "appears") that Kerry is complicit merely by legimitizing this adventure as a "war".

There is also an assumption that when we pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan, no other nation will step up to the plate and offer resources to aid in the rebuilding attempts. (I think that we should offer any non-militaristic aid we can to that end -- but do it remotely.

I don't mean to be strident, but it's NOT a "war".

[Catch22Dem]

21. The guy who came back from Vietnam

And became the most central figure in the Vietnam Veterans against the War, is pro-war? Ok...just checking.

[Alerter_]

29. I guess he was anti-war in the 60's, 40 years ago

Before he was in the Senate and running for President. That's what I read in school at least.

[Walt Starr]

33. It was actually in the '70s

30 years ago, give or take a few.

[Catch22Dem]

43. Correct

Where he put his reputation on the line, and has been fighting people ever since. Just yesterday, at the wall, that asshole (can't think of his name offhand...he means nothing to me) shows up while Kerry is talking to schoolkids and says to him, "Senator, I'm here to escort you away from this wall, you don't belong here." Then the fucker opens his shirt and reveals his "Hanoi John" shirt. Kerry's been battling this bullshit for 30 years, all because he was anti-war.

Sometimes, you gotta weigh things on a much bigger scale than one vote on one resolution. There are people here who understand that, and there are those here who do not. Either way, not one opinion will be changed by my post, or any other, so....

[Walt Starr]

46. The one vote is more important to me than every other vote he's made

and it's why once he is president, I will be against his adminstration until the troops come home.

He has my vote. I don't like it, but he's the only way to get rid of Bush. I don't trust the man any further than I could pick him up and throw him.

[Alerter_]

49. that's to Kerry's credit

Kerry came out strongly against the Vietnam war. He served there. I'll give him that. The "Hanoi John" bullshit is really revolting.

[Catch22Dem]

51. Definitely revolting

He saw too many people die for a bullshit war, and decided to do something about it.

Walt, to say that one vote is more important than EVERY OTHER VOTE EVER, is a little narrow sighted. IMO.

[Alerter_]

52. define revolting?

It's revolting that people attack Kerry for speaking out against the war and trying to associate him with the enemy. That's revolting. It revolts me.

[Catch22Dem]

55. No, I was agreeing with you

I said "definitely" revolting. ;)

[Alerter_]

61. oops

I just find the "Hanoi John" bullshit revolting :)

[Catch22Dem]

62. Without a doubt!

It's bullshit! Total bullshit.

[saracat]

79. BTW I agree with you but

the guy in question is Ted Sampley and the story is probablly untrue as the only source for it is Newsmax which is a RW propaganda source.But Kerry has put his rep on the line and Sampley has done worse to both Kerry and MCCain over the years.He is a vile creature. But we will have a President Kerry in November despite him!

[Catch22Dem]

85. Yeah

I was wondering if that was bullshit myself. If newsmax was the only source, then odds are it's nothing. I was getting suspicious. However, I think it's safe to say Kerry HAS been in similar positions as a result of his anti-war stance.

[Forkboy]

10. Kerry is a dildo

the fact that he is a better dildo than Bush doesn't infuse me with enthusiasm.

But yes,I'm voting for the better dildo.

[NNN0LHI]

11. You know that huge tax cut Chimpy gave to the wealthy...

...who make over $200 thousand a year? Well Kerry is going to cancel that as soon as he is sworn in? And the greedy fucks who make over $200 grand a year are starting to get nervous now. There you go.

Don

[Nlighten1]

76. I want to believe this.

But Congress is the one who has to cancel it not Kerry. How is Kerry going to get Congress to do it?

[NNN0LHI]

78. You start by doing your best to see to it that Kerry wins in a landslide

If that happens, his coat tails should be enough to regain one or both houses of congress. Short of that Kerry can use the bully pulpit to pressure the Rethugs into going along with his plan or he continues to use the issue to win congress back in 2006. Thats the way it works.

Don

[Nlighten1]

113. Kerry can't pressure them alone.

We need other Democrats in Congress to get behind him and get spines. I don't see that happening.

[otohara]

12. Kerry Has Flaws???

No sir! Welcome to DU

[democracyindanger]

14. Any number of reasons

Some truly believe that there is no difference. Some have sour grapes from the primary season. Some are Nader backers. Some are just looking for a confrontation. But I think you'll find that the actual number of people who put up Kerry-bashing posts is pretty small, with the same bashers popping up time and time again.

It's just the price we pay for being the Big Tent party. Everybody gets their say. And in the final calculation, confronting the bashing now, on our own turf, makes us more able to battle it once the real campaign begins.

[MirrorAshes]

24. well put!

thanks for the insight!

[madfloridian]

18. Is presenting policy questions considered bashing?

Just wondering.

[Catch22Dem]

23. No, not at all

Not in my opinion. To me, it says you're smart enough and thoughtful enough to actually go out and read policy papers. I say you should definitely get bonus points for that.

[MirrorAshes]

30. No, and I do not mean anything should be "out of bounds".

I am just frustrated when I see so many people taking little jabs at Kerry while offering no real substance.

We should certainly discuss his policies, as they reflect on him as a candidate and a leader, but I also believe we should keep things in perspective.

[Deja Q]

19. I'm voting Kerry too, but Kerry needs to respond to *'s negative ads...

Right now he's only using the limpest 'captain nice' ads ad they are not working. Bush, in terms of tv spots, is wiping the floor with him. x( At least to the undecided voters...

[Catch22Dem]

25. I'm wishy-washy on that one

I think Bush is doing a fine job of imploding while Kerry is barely having to spend pocket change in comparison. However, people are going to want to start seeing more of him, and quick.

[Virginian]

37. I agree, for a while.

As long as the 501s and 527s can do the negative ads, Kerry looks like the good guy.
Matthews had comments on the bush negative ads tonight and a lot of them are misleading or outright lies. People are starting to believe the negative ads. Somehow, these lies need to be exposed for what they are. Can Moveon do that? This needs to be done soon. Should Kerry bring them up in the debates to make sure they are addressed while people are looking?

[JayS]

40. "People are starting to believe the negative ads"

What ads are being run? What are they about? None are showing here to my knowledge.

[noiretextatique]

60. it is not a new trend...neither is this thread

people always criticize X candidate...then other people post threads decrying the criticism...and so it goes, ad nauseum. just the nature this beast, imho.

[WilliamPitt]

64. The distilled essence

A recent post from a forum member who shall not be named:

What I think is that I'm sick and tired of seeing Kerry posts in this forum when there's a whole forum devoted exclusively to the Election.

So I'll keep repeating myself: I loathe Kerry. I loathe him in the exact same way that I loathe Bush, with the ONLY difference being one of degree.

I stay out of the GD2004 for the express reason that I LOATHE Kerry and do NOT want to read anything about him. I am likely going to have to live with him as President for 4 years, which fills me with dread and nausea, and I'd really appreciate it if I didn't have to suffer the reminder of that HERE.

The slogan is stupid, as is pretty much everything Kerry and his sycophantic, delusional advisors dream up. If any of them had an ounce of creativity or originality they might be able to THINK UP THEIR OWN DAMN ORIGINAL SLOGAN. But no. Not in their genes. And far too risky, I suppose.

Bah.

Basically, MirrorAshes, you're seeing the snarling petulance of those who cannot abide the fact that, by dint of fate or alleged (and never even slightly proven) underhanded tactics, their beloved candidate failed to achieve the Democratic nomination. Somewhere between 77% and 99.997% of the anti-Kerry bile you see here comes from this particular sector of the populace. The post captioned above is an absolutely crystalline example of the breed.

Most of us, though, break the other way. A lot of people didn't see our candidates win. But here's the difference between us and them: I was a Kerry supporter, but I would have broken my back for whomever won the nomination. The bitter-enders, however, cannot see their way clear to do the same, so outraged are they that the universe snatched from them the primary victories they assumed they were owed. Most of us are not like that. Some...well...read above again if you are still unsure.

So it goes.

There's always the transitive nightfall of diamonds if things get too goofy here. ;)

[Alerter_]

65. Some of us are willing to give up in times of crisis

and the posting history on DU proves it. This particular poster was obviously cranky, and the parent post rubbed her the wrong way, but I bet she'll be voting for Kerry.

And if Bush is complicit or negligent in a horrific terrorist attack she won't be calling for surrending the Constitution and "supporting the President" - of that I have no doubt.

[JI7]

66. that particular poster

made the same type of post in other threads. it wasn't just a one time thing.

[MirrorAshes]

67. ahhh...

I also would have broken my back for whoever won the nomination, and I guess that is what it all boils down to. I wish it was so clear for everyone.

Good catch btw, not many get the reference ;)

[WilliamPitt]

69. Hey, man, when you get confused

listen to the music play! :)

[October]

82. I agree with you

And I almost didn't post. Sometimes I feel awkward posting "I agree" without adding an original thought, or something of substance to the thread.

There are many here at DU who feel as you do, and would've supported wholeheartedly whoever won the nomination. It seems though, that those who disagree are often just "louder."

Welcome.

[stickdog]

68. Bush ain't Hitler.

Kerry ain't Bush.

Nobody gets a free pass. N - O - B - O - D -Y.

Is that better?

[Pastiche423]

70. It's a surprise to you that not all liberals think alike?

Given that Kerry was appointed by the DLC and the media after only one state voted, where is it written that all Dems/Liberals must march in lockstep in support of someone who is yet the party's nominee?

If it was just one issue that I disagreed w/Kerry, then I might be able to see him in a different light.

But it isn't just one issue. It's many issues...

His IWR vote
His continued support of the war in Iraq
His desire to place 40,000 more troops in Iraq
His statement that he would consider anti-choice judges
His support for the terrorist, Sharon
His negative comments and views of Hugo Chavez
His support of the PPI, the nuanced PNAC
His blantant FEAR of being labeled a "liberal". (Though many if his supporters are constantly screaming - HE'S THE MOST LIBERAL!)
His total disregard for the left wing of the Democratic Party
His boring, don't rock the boat, status quo, fence sitting, waffling, do nothing campaign

...to name a few off of the top of my head.

And I am not alone in my disappointment and disgust that We, the People don't have the power to fucking choose who we would like to represent us as the President of the United States of America.

Does that answer your question as to why some here have legitimate concerns about Kerry?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

96. Given that your premises are false

and your list of 'issues' are false, misleading and deceptive characterizations, where they are not outright intentional falsehoods, no, the question hasn't been answered, at least not honestly.

[hippiegranny]

97. so what's your solution?

some of your points may be valid, but boring? not left wing enough? afraid of the word liberal? some of these things are so subjective that you undermine your entire argument by including them. additionally, you do not address the fact that if we are stuck with bush for another four years, the issues you are angry about will be insignificant by comparison. reality check, please. kerry needs to try to oust bush, and he is campaigning in a country chock full of morons. do you ever consider the possibly he is campaigning from the middle (that worked for the 'compassionate conservative) and will govern from the left?

[kiahzero]

105. He was appointed? The elections were a sham?

Wow! That's an amazing find! I can't wait to see the proof of it... imagine, millions of people thought they were voting, when they actually weren't!

:eyes:

What a surprise, another anti-intellectualism post attacking nuance.
:puke:

[kaitykaity]

71. I'm liking Kerry more and more

every day.

I know he's not perfect--I supported Howard Dean, still
do, and am glad to see Dean out there giving the GOPers
hell on Kerry's behalf.

As for this place? Take what you want, and leave the
rest. If you don't want to listen to the Kerry bashing,
hide the basher's threads. (I had to do that to the
Randi Rhodes' bashers, and I feel much better now.)

:hi: and welcome to DU!! Glad you came out of lurkdom.

[RoyGBiv]

72. Well said...

I recently took a few days vacation from DU for this reason. I live in the midst of a highly Republican-leaning area, yet at times I got more anti-Kerry rhetoric from DU than from people I met daily. I got tired of the incessant Kerry bashing that echoed the Republican line, or at least didn't materially disagree with it, and I began to question what the purpose of DU was. If it's just another source of extremest opinion one way or the other, it has little utility.

But I don't really believe that, which is why I stepped back for a few days to gain some perspective. Those assaulting Kerry are the same people, over and over again, with a few "insurgents" using the opportunity to pile on. That's not to say that there aren't legitimate complaints about Kerry, but there are those who express them with a certain regularity that don't seem to have anything good to say about any Democrat. I am learning to ignore their input as irrelevant.

Kerry wasn't my first choice either. I was a Dean supporter. But Kerry is the nominee. I am a Democrat and will support my party's decision with vigor. I respect the political process. Kerry is the man, ladies and gents; Kerry is the man.


OnEdit: Welcome to DU!!! :hi:

[MadHound]

77. Buyer's regret?

The ABB crowd was quick to jump on the Kerry campaign bandwagon, which used those increased numbers to score an early and decisive victory. Now that all of the sound and fury of the primary season is over, these folks have had a chance to delve into just what Kerry stands for, and are starting to find it distasteful, with a broad PPI agenda of more corporate taxcuts(in some vague trickle down fantasy of somehow creating jobs) and continued war in Iraq. Now that the reality is setting in, these people are starting to suspect that they have been sold a bill of goods, and are starting to get POed about it.

This is the consequence of blindly rushing into the ABB trap, you wind up with a candidate who will give us a kinder, gentler version of Pax Americana.

[saracat]

81. Not on your life.

Democrats voted.Kerry won. He is our nominee and the best man to represent us.End of story.

[Walt Starr]

103. Yes Kerry won

He is most certainly NOT the best man to represent us. He is the lesser of two evils, but still he is evil.

[paulk]

110. who is "us"?

Who are you speaking for?

Clearly you're not speaking for the majority of Democrats who elected him as their nominee.

[Walt Starr]

117. Ask saracat, not me

I responded to the "us" in saracat's post.

[saracat]

116. Baloney.

There probablly isn't a politicaian that could pass "your" vetting. Give it a rest. The Democratic Party has chosen to "win".And God bless them for it. John Kerry is a good man and a winner. He is nothing to do with evil. He is our last hope for sanity.You don't like his war vote .Tough. Get over it . It is yesterday's news. Winning the Kerry Presidency is tommorrow's news.

[Walt Starr]

118. Yeah yeah yeah, and I know of 80,.000 Freepers who say

George Bush is a good man.

I'm simply voting for the lesser of two evils but am doing so with my eyes wide open to the fact that no matter how it goes, we still end up with evil.

[saracat]

119. And as usual with your type

you have no practical solution. And BTW who wouldn't be evil in YHHP?

[Walt Starr]

120. Dennis Kucinich would not be evil

There are many choices I believe would not be evil.

Okay, so I admit it. I'm not choosing the lesser of two evils. I'm choosing the least of three evils because Nader would be worse than Kerry if he actually won.

[Classical_Liberal]

80. Ok he supports abortion rights

but wait, there are thousands of conservative catholics and evangelicals that would vote dem if he would just give that far left position up!

At what point to do we notice that appealing to certain right wingers is the death of the democratic party?

[Sparkly]

93. the "death of the Democratic party" is not winning elections

First step: accept what IS and deal with it. The voting public is where it is; we have to start there, not where we wish it would be. Kerry's record and proposals are still far different from the Chimp's, on more issues than choice. If he's not exactly in agreement with us in two areas, but is closer to where that elusive 4% is in those two areas, FINE. It's hardly the "death of the Democratic party."

[Malva Zebrina]

84. It is amazing how people will l latch on to anything when full of

intensity--spinning and whirling in the gyre

Now that we have agreed upon a suitable political saviour, we have people incredibly failing to remember how Kerry voted to give Bush a blank check and now we have people taking the Kerry line, or rationalizing. It is amazing how the human psyche will strive to protect itself and survive.

Kerry's pitch may sound something like--"well I voted for it because errr I didn't know as much as you and now that we are there--errr welllllll we may as well take advantage of all we raked in--and let's just say we simply cannot nowwwwwwwwwwwww leave these beseiged people, who have developed a dissident fighting force, who are incapable of fixing their own country, to screw up all those contracts we gave to the big corporations. errr--once we secure that particular area of corporate embedding, maybe we can bring in the UN to clean it all up--you know, give the people water and electricity--or the right to buy it from American corporations that were given the contract, unchallenged, no bidding.

How fast people's minds can rationalize and adjust and ignore all that is ignoble and immoral and unethical and turn that around to believe that the noble and the moral and the ethical now means we can DO NOTHING but colonize a country Kerry voted to colonize anyway Bush wanted. Because I know Kerry is not a stupid man, and is a man who can figure things out, having the experience of all those years in congress, I am inclined to think he knew that once there it would be feasible to say--welll we are there nowwwwww, so make the best of it ( a statement like that simply reinforces with invisible struts, Bush's motives to invade, does it not? It gives us what Bush bombed the hell out of thousands of people for, does it not?) There is now nothing left to do but just stay there, build fourteen military bases and the biggest embassy ever seen anywhere in the world--yup--and we gets a new president who we see is offering nothing much else but the same.


I would take the same stand if Edwards, or Gephart, or Lieberman and perhaps even Dean or Clarke were to be the candidate. I have been against this horrorific action and slaughter, having anguished over the immorality of it, since Bush dropped his "pre-emptive attack" justification for war, in a speech he delivered to the graduates at West Point.

I am seeing politics clearly. There is NOTHING as important as the preservation of human life--to murder children, women, elderly and all who were murdered, in their innocence IS THE ISSUE for anyone seeing this election's real core issue and this cannot be simply ignored or brushed away as irrelevant.

Perhaps the reason people do not want to look at that for what it is, is because Kerry could NOT emphasize that so he instead is said to be "running a smart campaign" by taking our eyes off the most poignant, egregious and important issue,the slaughter of thousands in Iraq in Bush's pre-emptive war. He voted for the damn thing. So he does not discuss such trivial things because it would not be running a "smart campaign" and the rest of us are sneered at for being "single issue" voters.



There is nothing bashing about this--it is just reality as far as I am concerned.

[LWolf]

87. I don't know.

I have gradually moved out of GD2004. Where you don't have to bash Kerry to be a "Kerry basher." All you have to do is present a concern about one of Kerry's positions, and the Kerry troops rush in in full battle gear to do battle until the death...of your interest in the candidate. Because they don't want to acknowledge the issue. They want to ridicule it and "de-bunk" it rather than acknowledging that anyone might have a legitimate concern. It doesn't matter how constructively the concern is aired; it gets the same response. And then whole threads started for the purpose of wholesale bashing of the so-called "bashers."

I've posted both positive remarks about Kerry, and concerns. The concerns are thoughtfully addressed by some, and then generally die under the full frontal assault by the "troops." But they don't go away.

I figure it's all part of the process of getting your guy elected; you act like he's perfect and go to war with any suspected doubters. Just in case their doubt spreads to the GE. No need to actually address the concerns. If that's the way they want it, I can accept that. They don't really think they need me to get him elected anyway; either "jump on the bandwagon," or vote and STFU. So I just skip by GD2004 and the Kerry threads, which keeps me out of the target zone.

Until the threads complaining about "bashing" morph out of GD2004 and into other forums, and here I am responding again.

[sangh0]

109. Someone who makes stuff up about Kerry is a Kerry-basher

like the way you falsely claimed that Kerry was attacking teachers, when his plan does nothing but praise teachers.

[John_H]

92. Freepers, 1 percenters, & political adolescents who cant take Dean's loss

account for the majority. The Freeps and Naderites just want Kerry to lose.Hiding behind "policy differences" what the one-percenters and Dean-or-nobody folks really mean is, "ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME!!!!!!!!"

Like spoiled fifteen-year-olds they'd rather pout because have nothing than get something that's better than hat they've got now.

[Delano]

107. The minority are often noisiest...

Kerry's far ffrom perfect, but he's a fine candidate. Some people are never happy with anybody.

Clinton didn't look like such a hot prospect at this point in '92, but he turned out to be an excellent republican president ;).

Kerry is probably more liberal (though not quite as charismatic) . And every bit as competent. In contrast to mega-failure Bush - that sounds pretty good...

[genius]

111. People are hoping to improve Kerry. The feedback is good.

Most of the posts I'm currently seeing are about how Kerry needs to improve in certain areas. We knew all along we would have to sit on him to get him to do the right thing. The best thing anyone can do for him is to send him the comments and concerns and ask him to re-evaluate his position on certain issues. Kerry is flat-out wrong on free trade and on Hugo Chavez. These are the two of the areas where he needs to educate himself.

[Solidarity]

115. Will Kerry Be A Better Republican President Than Bush?

I don't think that Kerry is some dummy who simply needs to educate himself on Chavez, NAFTA,the Patriot Act, Iraq, etc., He's not some political novice who will see the light and re-evaluate his position after progressives have his ear. He's been around a long time and knows the score.

Delano pointed out that "Clinton didn't look like such a hot prospect at this point in '92, but he turned out to be an excellent republican president"

If Kerry wins the election I'm sure many will consider him a much better Republican president than Bush. That's how far right both major parties have drifted over the past 20 years or so! Bush makes Nixon seem like a raving liberal and Kerry makes Carter look like some radical pacifist! That might be just a slight exaggeration.