Thanks for playing the right wing's game

[Hep]

If you don't think the right wing wants you to pay more attention to them than to the left, you're crazy. To those of you playing into their hands. Thanks a lot.

[BootinUp]

1. Somewhat cryptic message there? n/t

stupid spelling error corrected..

[Hep]

3. Sorry, allow me to elaborate

The right obviously knows how to control the media, and therefore how to control the minds of gullible people. They know they can't use the same tricks they used in 2000.

They're hell bent on keeping us focused on what THEY'RE up to. DU'ers have been going to THEIR websites, giving THEM hits and then reporting their actions here. This is exactly what the RNC and the neocons want us to do.

They use confusion, they mix facts, they lie. All to keep us not only focused on them, but guesing what their motives are.

THIS IS THE ROOT OF THEIR CAMPAIGN right now. Right wing websites are not for right wingers. They're for us. The left.

[Cooley Hurd]

15. I'm more inclined to believe we're aiding and abetting the enemy...

...by attacking our own candidates. Yes, website hits do equal increased advertising dollars, but its helpfulness to the opposition is minor compared to the candidate bashing that we ourselves perpetuate. I'm surprised Rove doesn't send DU a thank you card...

[BootinUp]

19. It is a game

but I don't think you can simplify it down like this. The media is motivated by money. The republicans know how to use that very well. It cuts against them sometimes as well.

Also the whole patriotism and the flag thing is another issue the republicans play. Have you seen Clark talking about this? We need more of this on the Democratic side.

Lastly, the tax issue historically (since the 80's) has hurt the democrats. Clinton was able to appeal to a wide cross-section of Americans on economic policy. This is the model to follow now.

[KoKo]

21. Agree with you Hep! Thanks for bringing it up. Going over to FR

and brining comments back only serves sometimes to make us feel we are losing the battle and the same with posts about the latest Bush "talking points" released every day just to stir us up and make us feel he's "unbeatable." I think for the most part it's innocent in that many DU'ers want to know what the "other side" is doing against us, but sometimes the "glee" with which some of this is posted is suspect. Particularly the focus on Coulter and Tweety's latest ravings.

It's something we ought to be aware of, though, that we could be being undermined sometimes with some information. But, not assume that every post is someone trying to do "disinformation" on DU.

[curse10]

5. Very cryptic

:shrug:

[JohnKleeb]

6. indeed Kirsten indeed

:shrug:

[JohnKleeb]

2. I havent been playing right wing games

:shrug: so what are you talking about

[Hep]

7. If you haven't

then this doesn't apply to you!

They know who they are. And they're not supporters of any one candidate.

I firmly believe we have to NOT pay attention to what the other team is doing. We have to FOCUS on our game plan and execute it.
Sorry for the sports reference.

[w13rd0]

9. No, you haven't been...

...but others have been doing plenty of the legwork for the GOP. And I make that statement including those who find tearing down other candidates, even if its with lies and distortion, as more important than voicing support for their own...

[JohnKleeb]

11. shrug can I be honest here

I think it goes all ways, no group is completely innocent or guilty.

[Hep]

12. I made a point to say that

in my elaboration.

[w13rd0]

14. I agree...

...that's why I said what I said. Every "camp" has its...um...bad apples. Every candidate has a few supporters who see it as their mission not to ensure that their candidate gets the nomination, but that another candidate doesn't. I reject that kind of approach. It's an expression of utter contempt for a well-informed civic-minded participatory democracy.

[JohnKleeb]

17. I also reject the approach of saying people should drop out before a

primary happens. Its like a boxing match, youre telling a guy to withdraw before his fight even begins, its majorly condescending.

[Hep]

18. Very true

Every candidate has a right to fight until THEY decide to quit.

[w13rd0]

23. Not I...

...not a single primary vote has been cast, and whenever there's been a thread about people dropping out of the primary that I've seen, I've said as much. I've not advocated anyone dropping out...

[w13rd0]

4. Well, I myself am tired of reacting to Republicans...

...I don't care what they "fear" or what they "want". They fear many things, so what. Why should my actions be dictated by what they fear or want? Heck, maybe I should put up a webpage talking about how my "Democratic fear" is that Bush will dump Cheney and annoint Bruce Willis as his running mate, and the Rock as his campaign manager. Maybe they'll then run around going, "The democrats fear the Bush/Willis ticket! We need the Bush/Willis ticket!"

Pffft...

[Hep]

8. At least SOMEONE knows what I'm talking about

n/t

[grok]

22. Bruce willis?

I'd have more fear of * choosing Rice as his running mate. Granted, she up to her ears in baggage. But can you imagine the damage she could cause? Cut deep into our black/women constituencies. Even just a little bite into that could pretty much wipe out our chances of victory.

If you think it would be a stupid move on the Repugs part, particularly in the racist south, think again. They just ran an east-indian-american NOBODY against a fully qualified and respected woman for the governorship in Louisiana. and came damn close to winning! Better start digging up dirt on Rice.

But I think * will stick with Cheney.

Grok

[Cocoa]

10. sounds interesting...

but who are you addressing when you say "you", is this a message to the world from Hep? Or are you talking about something more specific.

[Hep]

13. It's a message to those

people who live by what the right wing is doing and saying. They know who they are.

I'm also urging everyone else to avoid making the same mistake.

[last1standing]

16. My belief is that they want to keep our primary up in the air...

and fire pot shots at the "bumbling democrats". How many times do you hear that we have no good candidates running from someone? We have several excellent candidates, but that doesn't get out.

Also, if we keep spending money attacking each other, we're just doing their job for them. Not much we can do as yet, but maybe soon.

[Hep]

20. They feed us the material

so that they can go back to their circles and say, "Look at how much they hate even each other!"

[last1standing]

24. Exactly.

The media today is merely trying to get Democrats to wound each other so that the repubs have an easier time finishing the job.

Why do we never hear about the lousy repub candidates in the primaries?

[salinen]

25. In a fight

the one who fights the dirtiest usually wins. We will never fight as dirty as the thugs! Would you lie to win? Would you kill to win? We are close to the end now. Thugs do what thugs want. Thugs own Washington. If you don't realize we are at the bottom, better not look down.

[Moderator]

26. Locking

This OM is inherently inflammatory, accentuating division and attacking the DU community itself. For the specifics ...

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

1. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include profanity, excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation. Inflammatory rhetoric should also be avoided.

3. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

4. If you wish to start a vanity thread (ie: a discussion thread in which the sole purpose is to share your personal opinion) you must state your opinion in a non-inflammatory manner which respects differences in opinion and facilitates actual discussion.

5. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator