Issues that concern me

[jiacinto]

I am 25 years old, and I have been semi-active for Democrats. I have knocked on doors, made phone calls, and volunteered in my time. I also tried to work for a non-profit org in FL on a ballot initiatve; but, after a few weeks, for a variety of reasons, it fell apart.

However, I really have been wondering where I fit in here. Some of the ideas people here have really don't agree with mine. I will detail them here briefly.

I was shocked over the Thanksgiving Holiday to see some of the posts where some members here literally attacked the woman who suffered injuries at Wal-Mart. I really was shocked. This woman, a victim of the madness of other shoppers, gets attacked here because she chooses to shop at Wal-Mart. We have no idea what her political views or her attitude. Yet some people here savaged this woman unfairly.

I am sorry, but I don't hate people who shop at Wal-Mart. Did it ever occur to you that in many rural areas it's the only store where people can shop? Or maybe this woman's budget was so small that maybe that's the only palce where she could shop? The level of condascending attitudes that I saw toward that woman is sad.

Maybe a lot of people don't understand the effects of Wal-Mart. Did that ever occur to you? Maybe people do and can't afford to shop anywhere else. But this woman harmed no one and people who had never met were making all encompassing denounciations of her. It just made me very angry.

Secondly what angers me is the apparent lack of respect for those in the military. Maybe some of you will be offended, but there are some people here who complete hate the military and anything remotely connected to it. Their hatred seems to be knee-jerk. And I don't understand that either.

I was not in favor of the Iraqi war, but I don't think it's right for people here to judge those soldiers as being all "baby killers". They are just as much victims as everyone else in the situation, if not even more so. They didn't ask to be sent there, yet too many people here attack them and denounce them all. Are there some people who are "baby killers"? I am sure that there are a few soldiers who do meet that standard, but the vast majority aren't there relishing their jobs or taking pleasure in killing Iraqis. No military person I've met--even my right wing friend--takes pleasure in killing Iraqis.

How many of those folks who make the "baby killer" argument are willing to go to the brig or to Ft. Leavenworth for those soldiers? Are you going to support their families who are shortchanged? Maybe those folks joined the military so that higher education could be more affordable? Did that occur to any of those sitting behind their keyboards making these denounciations.

As Democrats aren't we supposed to be reaching out to those groups? Those people whose budgets are strained and can't find work, aren't they the main part of our party? As for the soldiers, isn't it our job to make sure that they do return home as soon as is feasibly possible and that this war ends soon? Isn't it our job to make sure VA benefits are protected and that our men and women in uniform get the services they deserve? Isn't it also our job to make sure that Bush et al eventually find themselves accountable for their mishandling of the war and the decision to begin military action against Iraq?

On those two issues I see arrogance and elitism. And I don't understand it. I really don't. I don't understand how people expect to get votes by attacking people who should be part of our base.

[wysimdnwyg]

1. Bravo

Well said. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[sangh0]

2. Yes, you DO understand it

It's arrogance and elitism. You understand it well enough

[jiacinto]

Thanks

nt

[jiacinto]

3. Thanks

nt

[Jack_Dawson]

4. Agreed. Those issues will re-elect Bush

Yes there seems to be a very knee-jerk anti-military viewpoint across this board, and until we reach out to the military, veterans, independents and moderate republicans, we're doomed to go over the falls again. There's a reason some of Dean's biggest contributions have come from republican coffers.

[poskonig]

5. Another thread turned into a Dean bashfest.

This time it took only four posts. Nice.

[sangh0]

6. One post is "a Dean bashfest"

Talk about being overly sensitive.

[jiacinto]

8. I don't want it to become a Dean bashfest

nt

[Wonk]

7. Got a source for that claim?

"some of Dean's biggest contributions have come from republican coffers."

[sangh0]

10. Do you suppose

that was an opinion?

Imagine that! An opinion on a political discussion board. Will wonders never cease!

[ulysses]

14. "opinion" stated as fact?

Wow - the things you could justify saying that way...

[sangh0]

16. Sometimes, it's obvious

that something in the form of an assertion of fact is actually an opinion.

At least, to some of us.

[ulysses]

19. so, if I said

something along the lines of "sangh0 is a child molester", and then defended the statement as simply being my opinion, that's ok?

[prolesunited]

20. Well, by that convoluted line of thinking

It certainly would be. :silly:

[sangh0]

21. Go ahead.

Give it your best shot

[ulysses]

25. you're ignoring my point. Big surprise.

My point is not to label you a child molester, which should be obvious. (on edit: stupid grammar. "Obvious" that I'm not trying to make you out to be a child molester, not "obvious" that you're a child molester. :dunce:) My point is to ask whether there is any statement of fact too ludicrous or too unsupported by, well, FACT, to be justified by calling it someone's opinion.

A less personal example: would calling it an opinion justify the statement "the moon is made of green cheese"?

[sangh0]

57. Not ignoring it. You're very confused

My point is not to label you a child molester, which should be obvious

Right! It's obviously an opinion, which is why I don't mind if you say that.

My point is to ask whether there is any statement of fact too ludicrous or too unsupported by, well, FACT, to be justified by calling it someone's opinion

Who said anything about "justifying" it? I merely pointed out that it's no crime to leave something out (such as "IMO") when it's obvious. Pointing out the obvious to the oblivious rarely does much good.

A less personal example: would calling it an opinion justify the statement "the moon is made of green cheese"?

It doesn't "justify" it, but it's obviously wrong. If someone wants to defend that as their opinion, I'll still laugh just as loudly.

There are reasons to think that Republicans are helping Dean. There's no reason to think the moon is made of green cheese.

[ulysses]

59. let me know

when you're interested in a rational argument.

:hi:

[sangh0]

78. Sure

just let me know when you're no longer easily confused

[sangh0]

80. Rational argument?

Is that your subtle way of saying i should discuss this with someone besides you? :-)

[ulysses]

103. no.

It's my way of saying that, much as pointing out your obfuscations is good for cheap fun, it becomes tiresome quickly. It wasn't meant to be subtle. :)

I'm all ears if you're ready to have a discussion that adheres to some kind of reason. Otherwise, yes, feel free to spin and dodge with someone else.

[ulysses]

117. oh, btw

As long as you're here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=815672&mesg_id=819506&page=

[Forkboy]

128. Forget it Uly

this is one poster who will NEVER give an honest and straight answer.

[ulysses]

138. oh, I know.

There's just a certain satisfaction in proving that over and over again. :)

[sendero]

115. Don't hold your breath...

... waiting for that to happen.

[prolesunited]

71. Just to help you out here

There IS an actual difference between a fact and an opinion.

FACTS
A fact is a statement that can be checked and proven through objective evidence. This evidence may be in the form of the testimony of witnesses, agreed-upon observations, or the written records of such testimony and observations. The statements of fact among your friend's comments are that he went to a science-fiction movie last night, that the movie was about aliens invading Earth, and that the aliens had green skin and forked tongues. If you wanted to, you could check the truth of all these statements by questioning witnesses or watching the movie yourself. Following are some other statements that are facts--they can be checked for accuracy and proven to be true.

FACT: The Okefenokee Swamp is located in Waycross, GA. (This could be verified.)

OPINIONS
An opinion is a statement that cannot be objectively proven true or false. Opinions usualy express the beliefs, feelings, or judgments that a person has about a subject. Your friend, for instance, said that the movie's special effects were great and that the acting was terrible. These statements may be based on certain reasonable factor, but they cannot be proven. They are opinions. You might see the movie and reach very different conclusions.

OPINION: The Okefenokee Swamp should be drained. (Who says? This is an opinion.

And just in case you're still having trouble, you can find more here:
http://www.way.peachnet.edu/ismt/fact.htm

[sangh0]

77. Straw man

I didn't say there's no difference between a fact and an opinion. I said the opposite. I went even further. I said sometimes the differences are so great that you can tell it's an opinion even if it's phrased like a statement of fact.

[ulysses]

104. LOL!

I see a great future in politics for you. :D

[prolesunited]

106. I just gave up

Oh well :shrug:

How are you today, ulysses? :hi:

[ulysses]

108. sometimes, all you can do is laugh.

:)

Doing fine here - how about yourself? :hi:

[prolesunited]

124. I agree

I usually tell them they won and walk away.

I'm managing to keep myself amused. :D

[many a good man]

118. And there's two kinds of facts...

True facts and false facts!

I actually heard that line from an Israeli prime minister about ten years ago. I like it! But that's just MY opinion.

[prolesunited]

122. No dispute there

From the link I provided:

Other Points About Fact and Opinion
There are several added points to keep in mind when distinguishing fact from opinion.
Statements of fact may be found to be untrue (ESPECIALLY in science and mathematics! ed.)

Suppose you went to the science fiction movie your friend spoke of and discovered the aliens actually had blue rather than green skin. (Perhaps your friend is color-blind.) You would then call his statement an error, not a fact. Sometimes, then, in the process of checking out whether a statement of fact is true, you will learn that it is not true, that it is not a fact at all. It was once considered to be a fact that the world was flat, but that "fact" also turned out to be an error.

Opinions may be masked as facts.
People sometimes present their opinions as facts. Here are two examples:

In point of fact, neither candidate for the mayor's office is qualified.

The truth of the matter is that frozen foods are just as good-tasting as fresh foods are.

Despite the words to the contrary, the above are not statements of fact but statements of opinion.

[Jack_Dawson]

17. Republicans for Dean

July 03, 2003
Republicans For Dean

Real Clear Politics, a conservative political site, has joined
PoliPundit in trying to convince Republicans to donate to Howard Dean's campaign:

"Tossing a few million Dean's way to help propel him to the
nomination will be money well spent: the guy is flat out unelectable... So I'm off to Howard Dean's website to chip in twenty beans. I suggest you do the same. Political parties only commit suicide every so often, and if the Dems have decided they're
going to stick their head in the oven in 2004, I'm ready to pony up a few bucks for a chance to watch it happen."

[ulysses]

28. wow

1. You stated that some of Dean's "biggest contributions" have come from Republican coffers. $20?

2. This is the same general kind of smear as the "GOP funded Nader" smear.

[Jack_Dawson]

31. Exactly

Multiply that by God knows what and it starts to add up. Oh and some other democratic bastions:

Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean has raised $25.3 million so far, and has $12.4 million on hand. Among his top contributors are Time Warner ($61,000), Microsoft ($30,000) and IBM ($25,000).

[ulysses]

32. more opinion

or do you have a link for this one?

[Jack_Dawson]

47. I got your link right here

http://tinyurl.com/xm4w

[ulysses]

51. you stopped too soon.

Dean's own campaign staffers have contributed nearly $21,000 to their boss' campaign, making the group of them his sixth biggest donor.

Two of Dean's top five donors -- and 10 of his top 20 -- are groups of university employees. University of California employees attained the highest ranking of any organization, with more than $63,000 in contributions to Dean. Dean has raised money from the professors and staff of at least 450 colleges and universities. Those in the education field have contributed a total of $852,000 to Dean's campaign, behind only the legal profession ($966,000).

[solinvictus]

151. Dean

That's beer money compared to El Presidente's coffers.

[IronLionZion]

164. True we need to unite people here

and not employ the divisive black and white good and evil approach that Fascists use. There are many gray areas and many people who agree with some but not all of your views on issues. The way to slay the Big Bad Bush is to reach out to more people.

A good case in point is myself. I am basically a centrist who has a range of viewpoints on different issues that may seem liberal or conservative. I am often viewed as too conservative at DU and too liberal in my rural hometown. I've been called a fascist and a commie in the same day.

When you think about what anger can do it is really absurd to direct your anger at other people instead of a punching bag at your local gym.

[roughsatori]

9. It is harder and harder for me to believe that you are a Democrat

I started lurking when the board started and joined later and have read many of your posts. It appears that you hate the left more then Republicans and you frequently toss out what seem to be phony issues regrading Democrats. I do know that your view is growing here. You seem to echo many of the members who have joined in the last few months. But when you lose the election due to courting of the "moderate vote" please don't blame Nader.

You are not out of place here at all. I am. This board is hardly UNDERGROUND in any sense anymore. It is the centrist-aboveground.com where there seem to be more then a few members who make excuses for Republican ideology and revel in attacking the left.


You may really be a Democrat--but I am sick of the attacks on the left--the attacks on left-wing news sources-and the continual links to Freak-Republic, News-max, etc.

[poskonig]

12. You do make sense.

I didn't even know about the Walmart incident. The war in Iraq and the transferring of the tax burden to labor are what concerns me personally.

:thumbsup:

[jiacinto]

13. I have never linked to those sites

Why is it harder for you to say that I am a Democrat? Because I don't have a knee-jerk hatred for anything related to the military and that I didn't attack and say that the woman who got trampled at Wal-Mart deserved it?

[QC]

30. I don't see an attack on the Left here

so much as an attack on the kind of bourgeois leftism that you and I have discussed both on the board and privately. I think it's a fertile subject for discussion, given how freely epithets like "trailer trash" get thrown around here and how any attempt to discuss poverty seems to fall into the archives within a matter of minutes.

[KittyWampus]

67. I Am A Social Democrat Who Believes In Projecting A Moderate Image

to win over voters...

sort of like how Junior projected a moderate view while hiding a radical rightwing agenda.

By the way, 50% of the voting public votes GOP. Are you going to exterminate them or try and win them over?

Being judgemental will not win them over and I don't think you want to just get rid of them.

[durutti]

121. False advertising?

Isn't that kind of, er... deceptive?

[library_max]

70. I've reread the original post three times now,

and I still can't find any mention of Nader or any attack on the left.

I'm sorry if it bothers you that more big-tent Democrats are joining DU. It's making DU more representative of the actual Democratic Party. That's D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C, not R-E-P-U-B-L-I-C-A-N.

[JanMichael]

94. Apparently you didn't read the post you responded too though.

Carlos has a well known history of attacking the Left and anti-War people.

Just because you missed the other x,000 doesn't nullify the fact that he's almost pathologically anti-Left/anti-anti-war etcetera.

Later:-)

Oh and do "Big Tent" Democrats have any values or principles that we should be aware of? I may have missed the memo.

[GOPBasher]

82. He doesn't attack the left.

He attacks the far, far, far, radical, psychotically extreme leftists who hate someone for shopping at Wal-Mart. I personally have decided to boycott Wal-Mart, but I'm not going to hate everyone who shops there. My mother shops there. If she got hurt there and people said, "she deserved it," I'd probably take a bat to their head.

Having said that, it's just a small, small minority of the people here who are like that. I don't think he should write off the whole site because of a few people.

[library_max]

92. Did he write off the whole site?

I must have missed that too. Otherwise, I agree with everything you said, although I don't even think he was attacking the FFFRPEL so much as expressing dismay that they would attack a crime victim for shopping at a place they don't like.

[Catherine Vincent]

11. How was your Thanksgiving?

I was afraid maybe you left DU after that post in the lounge.

[jiacinto]

18. Good

I didn't leave. I just have spotty computer access.

[RedEarth]

15. jiacinto....I agree with you completely

There have been numerous times I have wondered if people on DU realize the main objective is to get rid of bush and not attack people who shop at Wal-Mart, Christians, soldiers, etc.... I have been a democrat and a Christian for 30 years and shop at Wal-Mart on a regular basis...not only because of the price, but also because of selection and convience. And, also shop at Target, Dillards, etc....

[salinen]

23. I have used at times the term

"baby killers." I hope it was clear that I was referring to the chickenhawks and not the enlisted people.

[library_max]

74. Yes, it's important to differentiate

between the bastards who start the wars and the poor souls sent to fight them. Let's not buy the Republican meme that opposing the war is being "against the troops." The troops didn't start the damn war.

[buddhamama]

22. do you care about the people or getting their votes?

you spend a lot of time demonizing a small number of DUers,because you're afraid they're gonna cost DEMs votes.

you have a habit of reading and thinking only what want to.

many of the same DUers, who may have stated a negative towards the military, are also concerned for them, would like to see our educational system/funding changed so it wouldn't be necessary for young people to join the military to get an education. i could go on...but DUers, heck, the world,it is not as black&white you'd like it to be. people care, DUers care. maybe not in the manner you like, that you'll have to deal with. but, they do care, and not just about garnishing some votes.

one last thought, respect is given, it can't be beaten or shamed into people.

[cmd]

24. Good post, Carlos

You understand where America is at this time. We have to appeal to those people if we want to stop Bush. It will take years to rebuild what we have lost.

[jiacinto]

yeah it will

thanks

[IrateCitizen]

26. Carlos' anger knows no bounds!!!

Repent, or he will smite you with lightning and sulfur from the heavens! Ye gods!

Seriously, Carlos -- do you EVER get tired of this stuff? I'm not saying that bashing a woman for shopping at Wal Mart was a good thing -- so don't even imply that. But why bring it all up again. I didn't log on at all over the entire holiday and didn't even know the thread existed. But hey, thanks for rehashing it all for me.

As for attitudes in the military, I could tell you of the full-time supply sergeant in my old unit who said to me once, "Ahh, sir -- you'll feel better after you kill a couple of ragheads." That kind of attitude is more prevalent in the military than you might think. Take it from someone on the inside. Dehumanization is commonplace, because it's psychologically easier to kill someone you don't think of as human. It's really quite sickening.

But I don't necessarily blame that sergeant, or others that think like him -- even though I dressed him down COMPLETELY after he made the comment, and since we've know each other for several years, I even told him that I pretty much lost all respect for him. What I blame is the fucking SYSTEM that trains people to think like that. You want to get mad at something? Don't get mad at people who misplace their outrage toward those who are conditioned by the system itself. Blame the system that can actually turn them into killing machines, and remove their humanity in the process -- only to cast them aside like worthless pieces of trash after their usefulness has run out.

Now THAT is something to get yourself truly "angry" about.

[ulysses]

29. it gets better, you know.

Personally, I'm waiting for the tirade about how all us nasty liberals are defending the actions of terrorists, murderers, pickpockets and graffiti artists if we demand human rights for Guantanamo prisoners or oppose the death penalty.

[IrateCitizen]

33. He'd rather point his sword inward at his own ranks...

... than join against the enemy that is attacking us all. :eyes:

[jiacinto]

45. I think that that definition is more for the Greens

They are the ones taking the sword inward.

[library_max]

79. Nice accusations.

Do they have any basis? Or are you just making things up to attack jiacinto for?

[ulysses]

105. sure do.

I'm not going to search the archives for every instance in which Carlos has fretted and railed over leftists who "support the terrorists" (i.e. oppose the human rights violations going on at Guantanamo) or "support the criminals" (i.e. oppose the death penalty), but I believe he posted on the sniper death penalty thread in GD two or three weeks ago, if you'd like to search yourself.

[library_max]

125. Well,

I just spent half an hour reading all the threads jiacinto posted on in the last week. I found one on which he got pretty heated with another poster about blaming the troops for the war, and some about legislation to help disabled children and about finding candidates to replace Republican governors. Unfortunately, I don't know any way to combine an author search with a keyword search, and of course any GD thread two or three weeks old is going to be in archives.

I can't say definitively that he never said any of that stuff, but I'm not finding it. Anyway, if we're going to hold old posts against each other forever, we might as well give up on getting along at DU. It might be more productive to address what a poster is saying on this thread.

On edit: . . . which is what I should have said in the first place. My bad.

[ulysses]

135. I suppose it might.

It might be more productive to address what a poster is saying on this thread.

On the other hand, asking people to ignore the long history Carlos has here attacking progressives, and doing so in the same language the right wing uses to the same purpose, is pointless.

Here's the death penalty thread. Over 300 posts, so it'll take a while to load.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=728336#728351

[ulysses]

148. the Cliff's Notes version

I just think too many people are too willing to stand up for criminals.

Post #26.

[Wonk]

137. Here's that thread for you, Ulysses.

"I think I what say" - jiacinto

[ulysses]

139. thanks, Wonk

:hi:

[Wonk]

142. Oops, didn't notice you'd posted it already in #135 while I was looking.nt

[Forkboy]

140. Jeeebus...how'd I miss that fun fest?

:shrug:

[jiacinto]

36. What I get mad at

I get mad at those who DUers who say that "we don't support the troops".

[IrateCitizen]

37. I want you to define that term, Carlos!

I want you to tell me, in specific terms, what it means to "support the troops." Because, I'll tell you honestly, when I hear that term all I hear is empty jingoism and blind nationalism.

I'll await your response, since I have seen you use it in similar fashion before.

[thebigidea]

38. it means... uh... er... wearing ribbons! And flags and stuff.

And saying how you "support the troops" - even though you're not actually supporting them in any appreciable way.

[jiacinto]

39. Ok

Not call them all baby killers. Not attack them for going and demanding that they go to Ft. Leavenworth or be courtmarshalled.

[IrateCitizen]

43. Don't define with negatives, Carlos -- you're an educated man.

Define with a description of what it MEANS.

[jiacinto]

46. That's my defintion of what it means

Also trying to resolve the war as soon as possible and make sure that VA benefits aren't cut.

[thebigidea]

49. why would you want the war resolved as soon as possible?

Don't you know that the Iraqi people WELCOME our glorious troops, and that it's important for national security to have bases in Iraq for decades to come? Why aren't you supporting our troops as they liberate the oppressed Iraqi people?

If you don't support the Iraq war, you don't support the troops. Retreat is impossible - we MUST stay to protect FREEDOM ITSELF.

[jiacinto]

66. I didn't support the idea of the war

What's your point?

[buddhamama]

48. yes- and tell how you have expressed your support

n/t

[Wonk]

53. Ok, I just searched GD and the archives (past 2 weeks) for "baby killers"

and found only four threads, including this one where you're the one who used the term.

Here are the other three:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=786449
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=786449
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=766124

In context, in one of them the term is specifically directed at *, and the other two threads are about the Vietnam war (I didn't read the threads in their entirety).

That having been said, I'll let these pictures from Iraq speak for themselves.
http://www.cbc.ca/deadlineiraq/

[thebigidea]

56. ugh...looks like something out of DAWN OF THE DEAD

I guess Iraqis don't "take" to freedom very well.

[jiacinto]

61. Expand it

I've seen posts call the Iraqi resistance "heoric" when they attacked US soldiers. Look since March and you'll find plenty of those posts.

I strongly suggset you try googling further back into the archives.

[KG]

62. they are heroes for taking up arms and defending their country

when are you going to do the same?

[jiacinto]

64. Do you support the Iraqi resistance then?

Are you an Iraqi sympathizer?

[KG]

73. I sympathize with any people suffering under military occupation.

iraq for the iraqis - all occupation forces out now!

oh, and by BTW - my youngest brother is a army reservist, and a nephew is a marine. so don't get on a high about how i don't care about 'Patriotic Soldiers' ok?

edit - if you wanna know where i stand - read my sig.

[jiacinto]

83. Ok fine

nt

[library_max]

88. Whoa, wait a second.

How did we get from "I don't support the idea of the war" to "Are you an Iraqi sympathizer"?

The logic of the occupation, last time I checked (it changes a lot), is that we are trying to rescue the Iraqi people from the evil terrorists who are trying to put Saddam Hussein back in power. That would make the Bush administration "Iraqi sympathizers" if you believed it (which I don't).

There's something to be said for crushing the attackers if you believe that they're all Baathists, al Qaeda, or other representatives of the Saddam regime or foreign terror groups. But if, as I believe, they are the native resistance, what's the reasoning? Do we have a better right to be in their country than they have? Remember, we invaded without provocation, on the logic (as of 6 pm Dec. 3) that we were helping the Iraqi people themselves.

And just to make it clear, that doesn't mean I'm blaming the troops for shooting back. Again, it's the leaders who refuse to restore sovereignty or turn it over to the UN who are at fault, not the troops. But why are we not supposed to sympathize with people who are fighting for their own country?

[KG]

93. gutteral accusations, veiled threats, feigned outrage, asspertions

typical debating tactics of loyalists and true believers in a cause that is failing.

[Q]

99. "Iraqi sympathizer"

- Jesus...your posts could come right out of FReeperVille. What could be wrong with 'sympathizing' with innocent Iraqis being wounded and killed? You must think that every Iraqi deserves to die because they're standing in the way of their own 'freedom'.

- Bush's* war in Iraq is illegal. That makes him a war criminal. Once you accept that truth you'll be on your way to a better understanding of the world's resentment toward the slaughter in Iraq.

[JanMichael]

114. Do I send them cookies? No. Do I fully understand why they've chosen...

...to resist US Occupation? Fuck yes I do.

Are you an Imperialist War Pig Sympathiser?

[Wonk]

65. You have access to the search engine, too. Do your own damn search. nt

[kentuck]

72. i didn't see anything about "baby killers"??

What post was it in? Discussing Viet Nam war is not automatically calling everyone a baby killer, is it??

[jiacinto]

87. look closer

I've seen posts that call the Iraqi Resistance "heroic".

[prolesunited]

127. First you say

people were using the term "baby killers" as your reason and then when someone calls you on it and PROVES you wrong, you try to redirect the argument.

I love your "debate" tactics. You can't simply redefine the terms mid-stream.

[KG]

44. that's for 'Patriotic Soldiers' to know and you to find out!

:eyes:

[QC]

27. Excellent point.

Scorn for the "great unwashed" is a sure loser for Democrats, not only because it drives away the people who should be our base, but also because it strengthens the GOP talking point that we, and not they (the handmaidens of big money), are the real elitists. Hard to argue against that when we have our own very loud minority doing everything they can to confirm it.

I think the problem, Carlos, was revealed in an income poll someone posted a few weeks back. The majority of those who responded were quite affluent by anyone's standards, and in my experience this is true of the American Left in general. We have a thoroughly Bourgeois Left in this country now, and many of its members genuinely cannot imagine that there are many people for whom joining the military is pretty much the only way to a decent job, a college education, etc.

[Ripley]

34. I think you are being the elite one.

Claiming only you know what a true Democrat is. You seem to think there is a rulebook that should be followed to the letter by liberals. That is simply wrong in a Democracy. I'm not a Democrat. This site does not require that. This site also does not require that each poster agree with smarmy cliches in order to stay off of the "arrogant or elite" list.

[dpibel]

35. Wow, that's a big ol' tar brush you got there

FWIW, my bona fides, lest you dismiss my thoughts as those of a low-post newbie: I've been reading DU since shortly after the 2000 selection; I've written some articles which were run on the DU front page. I just don't post very often. I have read many, many posts from Jiacinto, so I am not simply reacting to this one in vacuuo.

That said, let me try this:

It seems to me that you tend to zero in on posts representing a minority viewpoint, and use them to make broad generalizations about the population of DU.

I read the Wal-Mart trampling thread(s). What I saw mainly was this: a reaction to the absurdity, nay insanity, of the concept of a group of people being so hell-bent on getting a cheap CD that they are willing to trample a woman into unconsciousness.

Do really think that's laudable behavior? Do you not agree that it represents something problematic?

I'm not going to dig out that thread and reread it. I'll take your word for it that somebody on that thread denigrated the woman herself, as opposed to the group insanity. It's possible that two did. But the overwhelming majority did not. For you to say that the whole thread was devoted to bashing the victim, and then to say that this represents the majority opinion on this forum is simply intellectually dishonest.

Can you truly not see that it's possible to criticize the activity (stampede shopping) without dissing the woman. Or even that it's possible to suggest that her participation in the stampede may have been dubious but that she did not deserve to be trampled? This does not seem to me even a particularly subtle point.

Similarly, do you deny that (1) there are some bad apples in the military, just as there are in society at large and (2) that the enterprise in Iraq has at least an air of criminality about it? (Actually, I think you disagree with (2), and I suspect you might even deny (1), but I don't think either position is defensible.)

I think you can come up with a couple of people who post here who condemn the military in toto. I think you are sorely overstating when you pretend that this represents the majority opinion.

When members of the military kill a group of civilians in Iraq, I think that's a bad thing, and I think it deserves condemnation. If you disagree, I seriously wonder where you're coming from. Do I feel that condemning such acts constitutes a full-on condemnation of every human in the military? I do not, and neither does the vast majority of posters to this forum.

Pretending otherwise is simply stating a falsehood.

I respectfully ask you to consider this:

What you are doing is dipping your brush in the tar of a few people who hold strong opinions with which you virulently disagree, and applying that tar to the entirety of DU.

May I ask: how does what you are doing differ, on any principled basis, with what you criticize?

You feel that these bad-apple posters are making broad and unsupported allegations based on rare instances. Isn't that what you do?

I think you identify yourself as a Christian (although I stand ready to be corrected). If I am correct, I urge you to examine the part about motes and beams.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

63. There Is Alot Of Condescension On This Board

to folks in Middle America; the proverbial red staters....

They have been criticized for loving Jesus, for loving their country, for liking to shop at Wal-Mart...

As somone who shops at K-Mart, Wal-Mart, and Target I can say Target is the most aesthietically pleasing, Wal-Mart is cheap and has a great selection ,and K-Mart is kind of lost...

The knock that "patriotism" takes on this board is off putting.... Knock jingoism.... knock ethnocentrism......knock racism..... but I don't see love of country as cause for ridicule......

As far as a foundation for a political strategy it's the pits....

[jiacinto]

90. Yeah it

is but the fact is that many of these posters don't respect mainstream values.

[dpibel]

107. Another swipe with the same brush

Edited for typo

Or is it a rhetorical flourish?

At first glance, I would read your response as referring to many of the posters on DU. If that is what you meant, then let's have some quantification. I reject the assertion that the majority of people who post here support the positions you originally complained about.

Of course, you have now slid the argument from those who celebrate shopper-crushing and call all members of the military baby-killers (specific and falsifiable claims) to "don't respect mainstream values."

You've also given yourself the out here of saying "many of these posters." Do you mean by that "many of the posters who say the things I'm complaining about?" If so, that's a bit of a tautology.

If you mean many of the posters on DU, then please explain:

1. Your definition of "many"

2. "Mainstream values"

I'd also be interested in knowing if you could (or would) address any of the points raised in my initial post.

For instance, here are some simple restatements to which you can respond with no more effort than a yes or no:

Do you believe that stampede shopping is a mainstream value?

Do you believe that killing civilians in a battle situation is a mainstream value?

[ulysses]

111. dpibel

you really need to post more. :)

[Isome]

109. What are "mainstream values"?

Respect for the sovereignty of other countries... is that a mainstream value? Respect for the rights of others to live their lives as they see fit, with WHOM they see fit, while worshiping as they see fit... are those mainstream values?

Can you explain your position without the use of empty and/or nebulous phrases?

[Wonk]

147. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-common-practice.html

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-common-practice.html
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html

I've posted these for you before...

Take two minutes to actually read them, ok?

[dpibel]

120. I guess I missed that part

I will grant you that there are some knock-down dragouts between the religious and irreligious on this board. Those, however, generally start with a criticism of the religious right's meddling in other people's lives, and quickly descend into tit-for-tat personal arguments between a tiny handful of the usual suspects.

I take it that you think that criticism of religious meddling in civil affairs constitutes criticizing people because they love Jesus? In the flame fests that arise here around those issues, the rocks are just about the same size on both sides of the issue, and flung with equal vigor.

On the subject of Wal-Mart, I respect the fact that you've made your personal peace with shopping there. But I do hope you can understand that some of us may have some strongly held opinions that there is something very wrong with Wal-Mart's business model and purchasing practices.

Do those questions sometimes get stated with a broad brush? No doubt. But it's still a minority opinion that Wal-Mart shoppers are proper targets of spite.

Although I do question how one justifies shopping there, knowing what Wal-Mart is all about. I'm much more forgiving of people who don't have access to the information that's available here.

I'd be interested in knowing your definition of patriotism. There are many here (me included) who believe that the highest form of patriotism is saying this country is wrong when we believe it is. I'm not about to say that the invasion of Iraq was legitimate because I love my country. Just doesn't make any sense to me.

I guess when I read the threads that tend to bring certain people out decrying lack of patriotism, I mostly see exactly what you've said is OK: criticism of jingoism, racism, ethnocentrism. Also ignorance--you didn't include that on your list, so maybe you wouldn't approve of it.

But I don't see some great clot of America-haters here. I see people who think this country has great potential which is currently being wasted.

Finally, there's this, which you say, and which other fervent critics of the vociferous left say: What you complain about sure isn't any sort of election strategy. I just have this question, or challenge:

Please provide me with one instance where anyone on DU has ever said, "What our candidates really need to do is tell Americans Wal-Mart is evil/they shouldn't love Jesus/patriotism is bad."

I think that part of the point of this forum is discussing ideas. That inevitably involves differences of opinion. I don't think this forum is limited to the topic: "What is our electoral strategy."

And saying, "Well, that point of view won't get any democrats elected," constitutes very little helpful in a discussion intended to sort out different points of view.

[Isome]

101. The only WOW... is your post.

You have to post more often. That was such a well crafted response it made my eyes water! ;-)

[jiacinto]

112. Answers

1) I was referring to people who denigrated the woman and said "she got what she deserved".

2) I admit that are some "bad apples" in the military. But many posts here act like the military is filled with those "bad apples".

[KG]

40. still all about you, isn't it.

:eyes:

[CMT]

41. while I agree with your sentiments

especially regarding some of the comments I've seen from people who put down people who shop Walmart (and I'm speaking as someone who actively boycotts Walmart--the only store I do this with)I also have to say that it is by and large only a small number of people who make these types of comments on DU. I consider Walmart a dubious company and absolutely hate their tv commercials but I also understand that some people shop there due to economics. The people I, frankly, take issue with who shop at Walmart are people who can afford to go elsewhere and know how Walmart exploits their employees, puts small town America out of business, rapes the environment, and uses slave labor.

As to the military. I agree with you that many people who join the military do so certainly for educational advancement and to learn skills. I don't blame them for the policies of the politicians who don't have to serve and be put in harms way. But again, I think that it is only a few on DU who knock the soldiers. Most people on DU hate the war and supported our soldiers by protesting against a bad policy and wanting to bring them home.

[IrateCitizen]

42. Issues that concern me

- The steady erosion of the bill of rights
- Lying by governments to engage in wars of imperial conquest
- The rapid destruction of the environment
- Out-of-control corporate power
- The growing gap between haves and have-nots
- Trade practices controlled by corporations

Issues that don't concern me
- What a few people, whom I have never met before, might have said on an anonymous internet discussion board.

But hey, that's just me.

[kentuck]

50. Could someone pull those "baby killer" and "Walmart" threads back up?

I must have missed those? Was the tone of those as Carlos suggested or did someone, maybe two or three, make the comments he says? If so, I think it is unfair to paint everyone in the thread with such a large brush..

(edited for word omitted)

[Wonk]

60. See post #53 for the "baby killer" threads for proper context. nt

[Dr Satan]

52. instead of 10 paragraphs

you could have just said the only thing you care about is republican's perception of liberals.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

58. I'm A Liberal....

I think Carlos was referring to radicals.....

And I don't mean radical in the pejorative term but those who want to make fundamental change in the system... Radical comes from the mathematical term root and radicals want to make root change....


I don't like Bush's war but I still get all sentimental when they play the Star Spangled Banner and I think we owe a debt of gratitude to our vets...

As George Orwell said "gentle folks sleep peacefully at night because rough men are ready to do violence on their behalf."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. Yep

Most Americans like their country.,... They think it's special... We piss on them at our peril...

[jiacinto]

55. Exactly

nt

[buddhamama]

69. so you're breaking out the 'you hate America' BS

cause that's how it sounds to me.

how predictable.

btw, 'we're' not pissing on anyone.

we are THEM.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

81. You Should Have A Dollar

for every religious folks are stupid....

for every patriots are stupid....

for every Wal-Mart shoppers are phillistnes threads on this board...


I do think there are folks on this board who are alienated from their country... Hate is your word..... I prefer alienated because it means apart from....

[buddhamama]

89. apart- because they don't like what they see

people have reasons to be angry.

that is where the alienation comes from.

the same is taking place on the right too. the right is not immune from these feelings. the point of seperation is what alienates us.

if i had a dollor for...

you're not religious enough or the right religion, you're stupid

you don't wanna' go to war, you're stupid and support terrorists

why aren't you shopping, it is the American thing to do,
stupid.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

110. I Agree

I think the wingnut's "exclusive" thinking is awful too...


I'm searching for common ground....

[PVnRT]

68. Oh, jeez

The people whom you are referring to are few and far between. Is it your nature simply to generalize based on a couple of rotten apples?

As for arrogance and elitism, maybe you should look in the mirror before accusing others of it. Or maybe you've forgotten about how you lectured us "Indianans" about how Bayh really is wonderful even though you had, at that time, never set foot in this state.

[KG]

75. hyperbole is carlos' most used debate tactic.

[jiacinto]

85. Actually I have been through IN

I drove through it. Also IN will never elect Barabara Lee. But yeah, I forgot. Only Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, and Sheila Jackson-Lee can be "real Democrats".

[KG]

95. further hyperbole.

who'da thunk it?

[jiacinto]

Spare me

Those are the only acceptable Democrats here to many posters--and you know it.

[ulysses]

113. no prob.

[jiacinto]

102. Spare me

Those are the only acceptable Democrats here to many posters--and you know it.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

76. Who said any of that?

We should be trashing Walmart here, it's a disgusting evil corporation and should have it's charter revoked. Everyone here is WELL aware that it's nearly impossible to shop anywhere else in lots of America.

And who here has said any of our troops are "baby-killers"? I have never read that on DU, do you have a link?

I think your post just repeats many of the worst anti-Democratic slurs, and I question why you posted it.

[GOPBasher]

84. You make good points, but

I don't think many people here are like that. I'm sure the vast majority don't laugh when a Wal-Mart shopper gets hurt, or thumb their nose at the military.

[jiacinto]

86. but those few are very vocal

nt

[GOPBasher]

96. True

[Q]

91. Once again..."jiacinto" takes a few comments/opinions...

...out of context and applies them to the 'radical left'...as he likes to call them. It's no surprise that this is the same tactic used by RWingers and the 'New Democrats'.

- We've seen this kind of stereotyping before...against minorities and anyone else refusing to follow lockstep with the New Democratic Conservatism.

- Using the same type of RWing Rhetoric...jiacinto loves to denigrate anyone to the left of Lieberman for their anti-war stance. He doesn't actually care if they've ever called soldiers 'baby killers'...he'll accuse them of it anyway because they're anti-war.

- I frankly don't give a shit if far-right jiacinto understands the 'left's' point of view.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

100. If I'm To The Left Of Lieberman, Gephardt, Dean, Kerry, and Edwards

but to the right of Kucinich, Sharpton, and Moseley Braun what does that make me?

[Isome]

116. Uhhhh... excuse me but...

I'm going to have to disrespect the sovereignty of your post and steal these words:

—I frankly don't give a shit if far-right jiacinto understands the 'left's' point of view—

I've been doing more than my share of cussing lately, and your use of an expletive indicates to me that you're trying to develop your own arsenal... possibly to use against me. For that reason, I'm going to have to demand that you relinquish control of your posts, or be prepared to be shocked & awed as I liberate the words containe within them.

[Q]

123. I'd be more than glad to respond to your post...

...if I understood what the hell you were trying to say. Pardon me if I've missed a great sense of humor.

[Isome]

131. You're excused...

It was my inarticulate way of agreeing wholeheartedly with your post and attempting to humorously use language analogous to the Iraq invasion. My bad... ;-)

[Q]

141. I'm a bit 'slow' tonight...

...but thought I would chime in on the lastest jiacinto hates leftists threads. It's funny that the RNC just released talking points that seem to reflect jiacinto's point of view.

- Others have said it...but there is indeed a 'battle' between liberals and conservatives within the Democratic party. Strangely enough...the main argument seems to be about whether it's better to lick Bush's* boots or oppose him and his policies with every fiber of our being. Many of us on the 'left' are getting very frustrated with the way the NeoDems are enabling and appeasing the Bushies. They don't seem to realize that they're making it easier for the Bushies to stay in office by not joining in the effort to make them accountable.

[Forkboy]

97. You're so funny

:hi:

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

130. No Carlos

Rude is shitting on a friend who needs a ride because you had to miss a football game.

Rude is your posts full of hyperbole,insults to the left,and plain old insipidness.

Rude is bitching because the people who are kind enough to let you live there aren't letting you watch "my shows".

Rude is accusing Braun of being an anti-semite because she dared to speak to a pro Muslim group.

Rude is telling someone "I'm not a faggot".

Shall I continue?

[DrWeird]

132. Don't forget...

kicking black people out of maternity rooms is rude.


Please tell about the "I am not a faggot" bit. That's one I haven't heard.

[KG]

136. oh! oh!

me, too! missed that one!

[Name removed]

145. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

144. I would prefer to let Carlos explain

he disclosed something personal about himself that I'm not sure I should repeat in fairness to him,but the crux of the story is that some guys were accusing him of being gay and that was his reply.

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

156. Note to others

notice he didn't accuse me of lying? Because he knows I'm not.

[durutti]

119. Agree with some stuff...

I was shocked over the Thanksgiving Holiday to see some of the posts where some members here literally attacked the woman who suffered injuries at Wal-Mart. I really was shocked. This woman, a victim of the madness of other shoppers, gets attacked here because she chooses to shop at Wal-Mart. We have no idea what her political views or her attitude. Yet some people here savaged this woman unfairly.

I am sorry, but I don't hate people who shop at Wal-Mart. Did it ever occur to you that in many rural areas it's the only store where people can shop? Or maybe this woman's budget was so small that maybe that's the only palce where she could shop? The level of condascending attitudes that I saw toward that woman is sad.

Maybe a lot of people don't understand the effects of Wal-Mart. Did that ever occur to you? Maybe people do and can't afford to shop anywhere else. But this woman harmed no one and people who had never met were making all encompassing denounciations of her. It just made me very angry.

I agree completely on this point. I grew up in just such an area. Besides, most people who shop at Wal-Mart are working class. Unlike (apparently most) DUers, many of them can't afford to shop elsewhere. No wonder DU gets called elitist.

Furthermore, no one's explained to me why Wal-Mart is so much worse than K-Mart or Target.

Secondly what angers me is the apparent lack of respect for those in the military. Maybe some of you will be offended, but there are some people here who complete hate the military and anything remotely connected to it. Their hatred seems to be knee-jerk. And I don't understand that either.

Here I disagree with you more. I don't hate anyone. But I do think that the U.S. is unjustly occupying Iraq, and that Iraqis have a right to resist. I wish that the administration would bring the troops home and that no one would have to die. I am not cheering every time an American soldier is killed. At the same time, I am not going to condemn Iraqi militants for defending their right to self-determination.

I was not in favor of the Iraqi war, but I don't think it's right for people here to judge those soldiers as being all "baby killers". They are just as much victims as everyone else in the situation, if not even more so. They didn't ask to be sent there, yet too many people here attack them and denounce them all. Are there some people who are "baby killers"? I am sure that there are a few soldiers who do meet that standard, but the vast majority aren't there relishing their jobs or taking pleasure in killing Iraqis. No military person I've met--even my right wing friend--takes pleasure in killing Iraqis.

I pretty much agree. Their officers, though, should be uniformly condemned.

How many of those folks who make the "baby killer" argument are willing to go to the brig or to Ft. Leavenworth for those soldiers? Are you going to support their families who are shortchanged? Maybe those folks joined the military so that higher education could be more affordable? Did that occur to any of those sitting behind their keyboards making these denounciations.

I absolutely agree. I attend college, but I acknowledge my position of privilege. At times, DU can be very classist.

As Democrats aren't we supposed to be reaching out to those groups? Those people whose budgets are strained and can't find work, aren't they the main part of our party? As for the soldiers, isn't it our job to make sure that they do return home as soon as is feasibly possible and that this war ends soon? Isn't it our job to make sure VA benefits are protected and that our men and women in uniform get the services they deserve? Isn't it also our job to make sure that Bush et al eventually find themselves accountable for their mishandling of the war and the decision to begin military action against Iraq?

Definitely! But in addition to all the things you mentioned, I morally support soldiers who actively resist -- by refusing to follow orders, by aiding the resistance, or by turning their guns on their officers.

On those two issues I see arrogance and elitism. And I don't understand it. I really don't. I don't understand how people expect to get votes by attacking people who should be part of our base.

You said it.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[chiburb]

129. "However, I really have been wondering where I fit in here. "

I've been wondering the same thing. I've read your posts for quite awhile, the political and the personal, and have yet to see how you DO fit in. I've seen numerous acts of generosity and kindness bestowed on you, in word and deed, and rarely seen a thank you to your online friends and supporters. I have never responded in any of those threads, figuring that the people who tolerate you must know more than me. I figured it isn't my place to 'call you out' or challenge your often Rovian rants, or to question just who the hell you are or why anybody should care... other than "that's what liberal Dems do".

But since you asked, maybe you don't fit in here. I'm sure I'll go on your list of "DUers that are out to get me" or "hate me", but don't flatter yourself. You won't see me in another Carlos thread again...

Oh: thanks for the break from the flame-fests!

[Isome]

133. Damn! That was a good post!! n/t

[HuckleB]

134. This is a huge gathering of folks.

The variety of perspectives and attitudes means that we are always going to run into people who shock us on some level. I'm with you when you point out the nasty nature of attacking this woman simply for shopping at Wal-Mart. I don't think that one can legitimately criticize Wal-Mart without fully thinking through why people shop there, and having compassion for those reasons. However, I don't think that criticism of Wal-Mart, in and of itself, is necessarily elitist. I think genuine criticism comes from a base and understanding of the effects of Wal-Mart on communities and small businesses that is anything but elitist. That doesn't mean all Wal-Mart critics are going to begin there, however.

I'm also with when you point out the ugly nature of those who call our troops "baby killers." I spent long hours arguing against such attitudes here and elsewhere on the Net, and with some friends -- something that truly shocked me. It can be incredibly discouraging.

Still, I firmly believe from my experience here at DU that those who blame the woman and disrespect military personnel are among a very small minority of posters. They might be loud, but ...

Take care.

Salut!

[jiacinto]

165. Criticism of Wal-Mart is one thing

Saying that the woman who got trampled "deserved it" is quite another.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

143. It's all a function of your interpretation

I was shocked over the Thanksgiving Holiday to see some of the posts where some members here literally attacked the woman who suffered injuries at Wal-Mart. I really was shocked. This woman, a victim of the madness of other shoppers, gets attacked here because she chooses to shop at Wal-Mart. We have no idea what her political views or her attitude. Yet some people here savaged this woman unfairly.

And there were plenty of people on hand to challenge the cold hearted remarks that were made in haste. All of us have made remarks that smack of generalizations at one time or another including you.


I am sorry, but I don't hate people who shop at Wal-Mart. Did it ever occur to you that in many rural areas it's the only store where people can shop? Or maybe this woman's budget was so small that maybe that's the only palce where she could shop? The level of condascending attitudes that I saw toward that woman is sad.

True, but you have also been critical of those who would boycott Wal-Mart in the past. It's a double edge sword. If people shop at Wal-Mart, they get low prices, low wages and stores that pay good wages and benefits fold due to inablility to compete. The only way to counter this is to cut their profits and growth and demand they pay a living wage.

Secondly what angers me is the apparent lack of respect for those in the military. Maybe some of you will be offended, but there are some people here who complete hate the military and anything remotely connected to it. Their hatred seems to be knee-jerk. And I don't understand that either.

Again, that is not the vast majority of Du'ers and it is their constitutional right to dissent even if it is unpleasant to hear.

As Democrats aren't we supposed to be reaching out to those groups? Those people whose budgets are strained and can't find work, aren't they the main part of our party? As for the soldiers, isn't it our job to make sure that they do return home as soon as is feasibly possible and that this war ends soon? Isn't it our job to make sure VA benefits are protected and that our men and women in uniform get the services they deserve? Isn't it also our job to make sure that Bush et al eventually find themselves accountable for their mishandling of the war and the decision to begin military action against Iraq?

It was a Democrat Bill Clinton who spent MORE on veteran's benefits and created greater increases than the Bush before him or the Bush after him. at what point does the military (who supported Bush) become responsible for their own predicament?

[9215]

146. Strawmen arguments

What's wrong with calling a spade a spade?

If the soldiers, or those who launch missiles from the safety of offshore ships kill babies then they are, bad as it sounds, "baby killers".

[Name removed]

154. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

157. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

158. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[prolesunited]

159. Wrong!

Mine made it to Andrew Sullivan, not a RW radio show. :P

[jiacinto]

161. I was talking about 9215

nt

[Name removed]

162. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

163. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

149. Wow, my first Jiacinto post...

"However, I really have been wondering where I fit in here. "

I have read many, many of your threads over the years and have wondered just that myself. I have always gotten the impression that you are conservative enough to be GOP and wondered just what is was that distinguished the two parties in your head so that you would make the choice of the Democratic party.

"I was shocked over the Thanksgiving Holiday to see some of the posts where some members here literally attacked the woman who suffered injuries at Wal-Mart. I really was shocked."

First, let me point out that is was YOU who used the word "some" when talking about the number of posters who "attacked" the woman for shopping at Walmart, yet you go on to imply that many more DUers support that point of view. There is something seriously wrong with taking the comments of perhaps a handful of posters in a community that represents thousands and slapping them all. Shame on you.

"I am sorry, but I don't hate people who shop at Wal-Mart. Did it ever occur to you that in many rural areas it's the only store where people can shop? Or maybe this woman's budget was so small that maybe that's the only palce where she could shop?"

I don't know many people here who "hate people who shop at Walmart". I DO know there are a lot of people here who hate WALMART and what it has done to our country so that too many Americans are forced to work and shop there because it is the only job in town/the only store they can afford. Walmart destroys communities and Walmart destroys workers rights and wages. THAT is worth hating.

As for those who criticized that wild display of consumerism, I can understand that. The whole thing -- the way Walmart acted and the way the shoppers acted -- was damned ugly.

"Secondly what angers me is the apparent lack of respect for those in the military. Maybe some of you will be offended, but there are some people here who complete hate the military and anything remotely connected to it. Their hatred seems to be knee-jerk. And I don't understand that either. "

Again you use the word "some" and again you imply that the sentiment mentioned is shared by many. Just about every member of my family has been in the military going back a few generations so I have loads of respect for the military in general. I am one of those who is sending packages to troops. But I will criticize the military when they -- be they brass or grunt -- do wrong. And there HAVE been some terrible wrongs going on over there.

"As for the soldiers, isn't it our job to make sure that they do return home as soon as is feasibly possible and that this war ends soon? Isn't it our job to make sure VA benefits are protected and that our men and women in uniform get the services they deserve? Isn't it also our job to make sure that Bush et al eventually find themselves accountable for their mishandling of the war and the decision to begin military action against Iraq? "

And just where have YOU been? What the heck have many, many of us here been doing? Writing and calling our reps, sending letters to editors, marching, marching and then marching again, trying to let the world know that having American soldiers over in Iraq is unacceptable, and against the best interests of BOTH sides. Get off your egocentric trip and OPEN YOUR EYES.

"As Democrats aren't we supposed to be reaching out to those groups? "

I would hope that, as a party, we reached out to everyone we can -- WITHOUT RELINQUISHING OUR DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES.

I fear too many folks think "reaching out" means "making ourselves more like them". Democratic ideals are strong and American. The RW has convinced too many that they are not.

Back to your questioning of your place here. The Democratic Party IS the big-tent party, from Barbara Lee to Zell Miller, so you'd better get used to hearing opinions that do not reflect your own.

Lord knows I've read enough of yours I don't agree with.

[Isome]

152. Another good post! kudos! n/t

[bluestateguy]

150. reply

I agree with some of what you say, especially about the military, however, I think the people here who denounce the specific soldiers are in the minority at DU, unless it means denouncing the small number of soldiers who commit real atrocities, not accidents where civilians are killed.

My objection to your remarks concerns Democratic strategy. Republicans have never been bothered by writing off entire segments of the electorate in pursuit of a more ideologically cohernet issue agenda. Democrats try to hard to be all things to all people, which leads to internal divisions, incoherency and depicts the party as panderers. It's time for Democrats to make some tough choices and write off certain segments of voters who will never vote for our candidates. We need to frankly tell Confederate flag waving, Christian fundamentalist, conservative white men the following: "I'm sorry, we really have nothing to offer to you and nothing to say to you. Our party simply does not want to represent you and your interests. There are other political parties in this country that can do a far better job at representing you than the Democratic Party."

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

153. I completely agree

They write off sections of their base and rely on old statistics in order to get this MIDDLE vote rather than GO AFTER AND REGISTER ON THE GROUND people who WILL be active if they give them something worth getting up for. I see a lot more disgust than apathy.

[IronLionZion]

160. True, but people get carried away sometimes

when they feel passionately about a cause and come across as assholes without meaning to. I'm sure nobody here really means any ill-will towards Wal-Mart shoppers, soldiers, CEO's, Republicans, or anyone else they supposedly "hate". Anger does things to people.

[Tinoire]

166. This is certainly an improvement

This is certainly an improvement over "Blacks are too lazy to register to vote" and the pity threads in the lounge.

On those two issues I see arrogance and elitism. And I don't understand it. I really don't. I don't understand how people expect to get votes by attacking people who should be part of our base.

Hmmm, were you standing in front of a mirror when you wrote that?

[Wonk]

167. This is the song that never ends

It just goes on and on, my friends
Someone started singing it not knowing what it was
And they'll go on singing it forever just because
This is the song that never ends
It just goes on and on, my friends
Someone started singing it not knowing what it was
And they'll go on singing it forever just because
This is the song that never ends
(etc...)

[Name removed]

168. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Moderator]

169. I am locking this thread.

Enough is enough.


DU Moderator