Moderates calling Progressives "Communists", etc

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

Hey, all you DLC people, while you are calling Kucinich, and even Dean(?) Leninists, far-lefties, commies, etc, what are you going to say when the Republicans argue that the Democrats are a bunch of communists? Because, after all, you AGREE with them?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

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

[BradCKY]

2. That is soo black and white

Moderates like myself aren't going around saying the board is a bunch of communists. There are many people that are much more liberal than myself on this board. When these people run up against those of us on the center-left, there is BOUND to be some tension.

This party is for all democrats, not "progressives" who vote Nader because Kerry won't address their pet issue. People like that care little about the prospect of 4 more years of Bush IMO.

[GreenArrow]

17. it's not about "pet issues"

it's about the direction the country is heading. Someone or another is always posting on here about practicality or pragmatism. Voting for for a Kerry or, God forbid, Edwards, is about as practical as an alchoholic buying a liquor store.

[Evil_Dewers]

33. it's about the direction the country is heading.

The country is already in the toilet.

Thank you Ralph Nader and 2.7% of the American people who bothered to vote. Voting Nader again is as practical as pouring booze down an alcoholic's throat.

[GreenArrow]

41. "the country is already in the toilet"

so if the country is in the toilet, we should just let it go down the drain? In for a penny, in for a pound, I guess. Might as well go down the drain, and see where things end up.

Nader won't be getting any votes, IMO; he'll be on few ballots, and will drop out before November. Even if he stays, fear of Bush will prevent many for voting for him. And when all is said and done, a large majority of the fringe progressives will vote for the nominee, likely Kerry, who is going to win. And when he does get elected, the country is still going to be in the toilet; putting a little tidy bol in the bowl isn't going to change anything.

[Evil_Dewers]

44. Might as well go down the drain

That sums up what the Naderites and "real progressives" are all about.

Nader wants to destroy the village in order to save it.

[GreenArrow]

102. let's clarify

I think we agree the country is in the toilet, and in danger of going down the drain.

If Bush is elected, we will be going down the drain.

If Kerry is elected, we will still be in the toilet, and may or may not go down the drain. There's little chance that we'll be leaving the toilet.

"Might as well go down the drain" simply indicates that niether the Republican Bush, nor either of the electable Democrats are planning to do anything that will get us out of the toilet. Since either Bush or Kerry (less possibly Edwards) is going to be president, and since niether of them are going to take steps to get us out of the toilet, the logical outcome is that we will be going down the drain, though it is possible that Kerry may keep us afloat a little while longer. One thing is clear, however; Kerry will stink a lot less, and if you're going to be in a toilet, you take what you can get. I don't personally advocate going down the drain, but the majority of the country seems to be willing to do so. There may really be no other choice that people are willing to accept.

[Nadienne]

59. Y'Know, Nader wouldn't have gotten as many votes in 2000

If the Democrats weren't such wimps.

"Hey, vote for us, we won't do nothing for you, but at least we're not Bush!!"

[Evil_Dewers]

61. Nader wouldn't have gotten as many votes in 2000

How many votes would Nader have gotten if he didn't run in 2000?

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[Nadienne]

79. I voted for Gore

And I intend to vote for the Democratic Nominee, and wash my hands later.

And I have my eyes on the real cause for the theft of Gore's Presidency. Do you think Nader deserves all the blame?

If so, you deserve 4 more years of Bush.

[Evil_Dewers]

82. Nader deserves a lot of the blame, yes.

Gore deserves some of the blame for running away from Clinton and Clinton's record.

The Dem party deserves some of the blame for not kissing the ring of the "true progressives."

But Nader was the jerk claiming there was no difference between Bush and Gore. He basically claims that now, when he stated Gore would have invaded Iraq. Does he really believe that, because the prick is running again?

Look, everybody here knows what went down in Florida. Even "fools" like me. Ralphie just made it a whole lot easier for the Bush cabal to steal the election.

[Nadienne]

103. I suggest you use your anger

for something you can do something about.

One word: Diebold.

Do you think 2004 can't be stolen like 2000? Imagine a more wide-spread voter fraud. Imagine that it's believable because we rely too much on the corporate media for candidate information. Cutting each other down with the same faulty arguements that the Republicans provide (ie, Kucinich is a radical lefty) is exactly what makes Kerry vulnerable. You think public opinion can't turn on a dime?

Stop wasting your time bashing "lefties". The real problems of 2000 can be repeated, even if Nader drops out...

[Evil_Dewers]

107. Stop wasting your time bashing "lefties".

I am a lefty. I just didn't drink the lefty kool aid.

Bush will blast Kerry as being a huge liberal who is soft on defense, even though the guy actually went to Vietnam (unlike Bush, who went AWOL from the guard). What do you think Bush's campaign would do to a dove like Kucinich? You don't play to the left to win an election, you fight tooth and nail for the middle, then govern the way you like.

I know all about Diebold. Quit being so condescending to me.

[Nadienne]

118. My whole point

is that is is a waste of time to b*tch about Nader because:

1) Nobody can offer concrete proof what kind of effect he had on the 2000 election - the most anyone can offer is "this expert said this, and that expert said that." I've heard believable arguements that voters for Nader and supporters of Nader would have excercized their protest vote by staying home, and that some Democrats would have voted for Bush as a protest instead voted for Gore because of Nader.

2)As you have admitted to knowing, Nader wasn't the only cause of Gore's loss. The presidency was stolen, illegally. Electronic voting machines make this scenario even more likely. All Bush and his thugs have to do is make it look close.

3)Bitterness towards Nader and his supporters will irritate progressives and will underline a big reason for supporting Nader in the first place: Democrats are using our needs to get themselves public office. As long as we keep needing what we need (ie, as long as Democrats continue to protect the problem and say, "But at least I'm not a Republican") we will keep getting nowhere.

End of Rant

[Evil_Dewers]

132. Bitterness towards Nader and his supporters will irritate progressives

"Progressives" are already pissed off. But so am I. I am a practical liberal, but the "real progressives" would call me a neocon since I'm going to vote for Kerry (you know, Bush lite?) Real progressives view Kerry as a moderate or as a CONSERVATIVE, just like the rightwingnuts view Bush as a moderate or LIBERAL!

I ain't gonna blow 'em anymore. They know what a vote for Nader means.

*End of rant*

[Zhade]

130. AMEN. I cannot believe the ignorance regarding 2000.

Nader made the margin slightly closer in 2000, which made it slightly easier for the thieves to steal the election.

Focusing on Nader instead of the coup is foolish, indeed. Sets up the coming theft so easily, as those who ignore history enable its repetition.

[CTLawGuy]

36. thanks to the DLC

the Democrats control exactly zero branches of government.

Well done!


The Republicans and George W. must be really moderate if they have so much electoral success...

wait a minute...

[jonnyblitz]

3. I will get in their face just like I would a freeper.

[el_gato]

4. the right embraces it's "radicals" while the left shuns it's "radicals"

and that is why we always lose

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. There's a reason for that

Because assholes like Limbaugh have made the word "liberal" into a 4 letter word. This needs to be reversed, post-haste.

[redqueen]

16. It won't be reversed under the leadership of a Democrat

who cringes at the very mention of the word.

[Freddie Stubbs]

39. The right does not embrace David Duke or Pat Buchanan

They were shunned, and one of them even left the Republican Party.

[redqueen]

67. They don't have to!

They can say whatever they want during elections because those voters KNOW that once they take power they'll work to outlaw abortion, implement a theocratic gov't, etc...

On the other hand, the DEMOCRATS have learned (thanks bill!) that no matter HOW they campaign, they'll still GOVERN RIGHT!

If democrats pandered during campaigns but governed left we wouldn't be having this discussion!

:grr:

[wyldwolf]

119. That is why we always lose???

Where the hell have you been?

[meegbear]

5. Posts? Links?

Sources?

We wouldn't want to call you liars as well.

[jonnyblitz]

9. right here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=418590&mesg_id=418590

[meegbear]

13. Thanks bud ...

I will investigate.

[Iverson]

6. now now

If you penitently, humbly, mutely agree that the centrist of their choice enjoys a proprietary claim on your vote, they will temporarily cease denouncing you.

You can't get 100% of your agenda all the time, you know.

[quinnox]

8. I haven't seen it

I know I am not as far left as some here, but never called anyone a commie!

[salin]

29. I've seen it on many occaisions

not from you - but from others. Tends to be a list: far left fringe, socialistic communists.

I always find it humorous - as whenever anyone confuses socialism and communism, it demonstrates a lack of knowledge (two very different systems)... and the blur/slur itself sounds like it came off the radio. Hard not to read it as anything but a self-disclosing statement - and given the context of where it is made... a tad bit humorous.

But that is just me. Who isn't fringe or far left... just a traditional liberal. But - who when those statements get made - tends to be included in the cross hairs... as the statements are so broad/generalizing and that, too... I find humorous.

[Evil_Dewers]

35. but never called anyone a commie!

No one was called a Commie.

The person who started this thread distorted what was posted.

[blondeatlast]

122. I believe the OP refers to a thread from yesterday that was

posted, locked, then reposted immediately with nary a change in text.

[blondeatlast]

124. He isn't regferring to you. I suspect he is referring to this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1182969

[blondeatlast]

121. There are two I know of, one is a newbie, the other

may be the reincarnation of our beloved Carlos.

[Zynx]

10. I'm not that far left and I supported Dean.

A lot of his supporters were quite moderate.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

12. true, which makes it all the more pathetic

that Dean and Dean fans are being called "far left liberals" and Leninists and the like. In fact, it sounds like it's straight from the GOP playbook - but being posted on DU by "moderates" who are "DLC supporters".

[Evil_Dewers]

22. that Dean and Dean fans are being called "far left liberals"

I voted for Dean. I gave him money. Yet you claim (falsely) that I labeled all Deaniacs as far left liberals.

You are disingenuous at best.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

37. I'm not talking about you, or to you

unless you fit the description. do you?

[Evil_Dewers]

42. I'm not talking about you

Oh really?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=418590#418731

WhoCountsTheVotes (1000+ posts) Tue Mar-02-04 10:32 AM
Response to Original message

28. red-baiting progressives?


commie! lenin! oh brother, for a minute there I thought I was at Free Republic. try to win without us, okay?

---

Original post:

Evil_Dewers (682 posts) Tue Mar-02-04 09:59 AM
Original message
Why do Deaniacs, Naderites, and Kucinichians threaten us?


I'm sick of being "threatened" by the Deaniacs, Naderites and Kucinichians. Hey, to cut your own throats to spite us (the Dem party and the American people) really is suicidal. Do whatever you want, but I don't ever want to hear you bitch about Bush again if he wins. Otherwise, you will just be hypocritical losers.




----------------------------------------------------------------------

I know some here have labeled the so-called "true progressives" as ignorant or delusional, but I don't call you that. I call the leftwingnuts "impractical"--just like I call the rightwingnuts fundies "impractical." Oops, I also call the rightwingnuts delusional and ignorant. Oh well, at least I am honest.

Why should we, the majority of Democrats, the Kerry and Edwards supporters, the DLC, the practical people, the grownups--be threatened by the small minority to kiss your ass, when it should be the other way around?

The leftwing fundies should hate Bush far more than they hate Kerry, yet the hatred here of Kerry and is appalling. I'm really sick of being called a sell-out, a loser, not a true believer, a DLC shill, etc. by the leftwingnuts.

I don't share Lenin's and Nader's view that things need to get much worse before they get better. Things are already much worse right now. And the actions and views of the so-called progressives are helping to guarantee that our lives will not get any better--only worse.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

88. uh, did you read your post?

just curious? Yeah - in that thread, I was talking about your comment - in this thread, frankly - what's your handle again?

[jonnyblitz]

14. his supporters were anything that his detractors said they were

at any given time. The Deanophobes can't make up their minds.

[RogueTrooper]

11. Because they are intellectually incapable

of anything more than name calling.

[Evil_Dewers]

30. Because they are intellectually incapableof anything more than name callin

LOL. Yeah, equate all the non "real progressives" with Limbaugh.

[RogueTrooper]

34. Sir

I am a centerist and my politics are moderate and I have many political differences with those farther to the left. It does not mean that I cannot stand f**kwit "moderates" who trash talk socialists, liberals and other progressives because they do not have the wit to contstruct a descent argument around their beliefs. As a moderate these fools make my job, as a political campaigner, harder. I have no time for them and no time for their idiocy.

[IrateCitizen]

43. And you, sir, are a "centrist" that has this progressive's respect

Just from what you said in your post.

It does not mean that I cannot stand f**kwit "moderates" who trash talk socialists, liberals and other progressives because they do not have the wit to contstruct a descent argument around their beliefs.

It's sad that constructing coherent arguments in support of your beliefs is so not in vogue anymore, and that trash talking and ad hominem seems to be accepted for debate nowadays. At least it's good to see people with whom I would likely have several political disagreements still trying to buck the trend for the better.

:toast: Cheers to you, sir!

[Iverson]

86. I echo the sentiments of Irate_Citizen in response.

:toast:

[Vladimir]

15. i love the name calling

I love it I tell you. Everytime I see Kucinich/Dean supporters get called commies it brings a smile to my face. The dual absurdity of people thinking that commie is an insult and applying it to moderately left-of-centre political doctrines has me in stiches.

Especially Dean. Dean a communist. Excuse me while I piss myself laughing.

V

[MuseRider]

28. My feeling exactly.

It would sound desperate if the situation was desperate for them but I think it is just uninformed at best (Dean?).

[RichM]

45. This is a great comment!

Thanks! I really appreciated that.

[Ysabel]

18. DLC is not moderate...

the RIGHT is calling progressives "far-lefties", "commies", etc...

edit - clarifcation - anyone who says these things is on the right...

edit edit - further clarification - rather - anyone who uses these terms as a put down...

- i love communists, the far-left, etc...

edit edit edit - 600 - whoo heee hoo ha...!

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

20. you are but on example

Kerry fans were smearing lots of people as "commies" because someone was in the IWW two days ago. It's a reoccuring meme, straight from the Newt Gingrinch handbook. I was surprised to see DLC "moderates" spreading it.

[Evil_Dewers]

27. you are but one example

You lie and distort. I never called "Deaniacs" Commies. As stated before, I voted for Dean in the primary and gave him money.

I used Lenin and Nader in the same sentence and you ran with it.

I am not a DLC moderate. Clinton wasn't a liberal, though he was branded by the right wing as one. Clinton was a major disappointment to true liberals.

Your implication that I am a DLC "moderate" who is using Newt Gingrich's playbook sickens me.

You make me want to not be associated with the so-called "progressives" on this board who would rather piss and moan about Bush in the dark and lament that 98% of the country who don;t agree with them won't submit to their ideals.

[Iverson]

31. a look at some evidence

"Your implication that I am a DLC "moderate" who is using Newt Gingrich's playbook sickens me."

Denial noted. Here's your writing.

"Why should we, the majority of Democrats, the Kerry and Edwards supporters, the DLC, the practical people, the grownups--be threatened by the small minority to kiss your ass, when it should be the other way around?"

You've just implicated yourself. Perhaps you aren't a very clear writer. I can't think of a better defense at the moment.

[Evil_Dewers]

32. You've just implicated yourself.

No, I am part of the majority of Democrats who support Kerry/Edwards.

The DLC doesn't represent the majority of Democrats, though Clinton and I think Dean were part of the DLC.

You are correct, my writing wasn't very clear in that post.

[IrateCitizen]

40. Bill Clinton is the DLC's poster boy

Dean used to be a member, but I'd say it's safe to say that he let his membership run out based on the way the DLC wolves came after him prior to the primary season.

And just to stir the pot a little bit, you are fully aware that John Kerry is a member of the DLC, are you not?

[Evil_Dewers]

46. you are fully aware that John Kerry is a member of the DLC

Yep.

But the so-called progressives here claim Kerry might as well be a member of the RNC.

But that won't stop Bush from blasting Kerry as the "most liberal Senator in the Senate" and "to the left of Ted Kennedy" and call him that "liberal Senator from Massachusetts."

You know, "real conservatives" don't consider Bush to be a conservative. I know, it sounds funny, but they hate the way he spends like a drunken sailor and he has done little to assuage the conservative Christians' social concerns. He calls Islam a religion of peace, proposed an amnesty program for illegal aliens and signed a $640 billion Medicare drug program, etc...

Tell an extreme left winger here that Bush ain't a conservative and they'd laugh at you. But to them, Kerry is a moderate or Bush Lite.

[IrateCitizen]

47. Why must you continue to generalize and misconstrue?

But the so-called progressives here claim Kerry might as well be a member of the RNC.

Would you please clarify exactly what makes someone a "so-called progressive"? Because, as someone who considers himself to be a progressive, I can only assume that you are talking about me when you paint with your broad brush in such a manner.

By repeating such statements over and over again, I'm not certain what your agenda is, but I am left to assume that it is to repeatedly bludgeon over the head all those who don't agree with you, or who might express some dismay over certain positions that John Kerry has on certain issues.

[Evil_Dewers]

54. Would you please clarify exactly what makes someone a so-called progressiv

Sure. A so-called progressive is one who claims to hate the policies of president Bush but will vote for Nader anyway or claim they could never vote for that "war-mongering" Kerry because the Dem party is ignoring their "needs."

A so-called progressive is a protest voter, sort of like a "true conservative" who votes for the Constitution party because "Bush is ignoring their needs."

A so-called progressive would rather be "right" and out of power (a GOPer in the White House and a minority party in the House, Senate, Supreme Court) than "compromise" just a tad and be in power. Compromise is for wimps.

My agenda is to tell the so-called progressives to do whatever they want, as long as they don't threaten us Kerry supporters. I'm not going to beg for their votes. Why should I compromise to appease their fringe ideas? Some of them won't compromise to appease me. It seems they would rather have Bush in the White House. They gave us Bush the first time (or at least made it possible for Bush to steal Florida and the election) and threaten to do it again.

They only hurt themselves when they hurt all of us.

[sangh0]

87. what makes someone a "so-called progressive"?

When they call themselves a progressive, but they obsess over the past and think change should be revolutionary, and not evolutionary.

[IrateCitizen]

93. Would that also apply to obsessing on the present...

... and thinking change should be "revolutionary, and not evolutionary"?

Because, by that definition, perhaps the most progressive public official who ever lived would be considered a "so-called progressive".

http://www.fightingbob.com/aboutbob.cfm

I have always defined a progressive as a person who is willing to confront the deep, underlying problems in society and propose bold solutions to those problems. This is contrasted with liberalism that proposes the more evolutionary, "nibbling around the edges" approach. It is for this reason above all others that I have come to identify far more with the progressive label than the liberal one.

But, I guess I could have been wrong all this time, and that I'm actually a radical revolutionary instead of a progressive??? I guess that Fighting Bob could be considered the same?

[sangh0]

99. I wouldn't say Folette was obsessed with the present

IMO, it half the present, half the future, with the past and the present informing his course of action, not dictating it.

And it's one thing to have a goal of radical change; It's another to expect radical change to come from an election.

[IrateCitizen]

111. On that much, I agree completely

And it's one thing to have a goal of radical change; It's another to expect radical change to come from an election.

Like I've said before, electoral politics is mostly about choosing the candidate who only represents a LESSER impediment to your goals and ideals.

On another note, I'd sure like to know who this "Folette" guy was. I'm familiar with a "LaFollette", but "Folette" is a complete mystery to me. ;-)

[sangh0]

112. My bad

And yes, the past, the present, and the future should always be kept in mind. HOwever, there are people who call themselves progressives whose decisions are made solely on the basis of how someone voted on a small number of bills. Sometimes on the basis of only one bill. No consideration is given to any other factor. "I can't vote for someone who voted for......." or "He won't change the system in a fundamental way"....

IMO, those people are not progressives. I think of them as regressive.

[rucky]

21. ...

I know some here have labeled the so-called "true progressives" as ignorant or delusional, but I don't call you that. I call the leftwingnuts "impractical"--just like I call the rightwingnuts fundies "impractical." Oops, I also call the rightwingnuts delusional and ignorant. Oh well, at least I am honest.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=418590&mesg_id=418590

[Vladimir]

25. the real irony is

that most communists (as in members of a communist party) I know outside the US are hoping to hell that people in the US vote ABB in November.

V

[maxanne]

24. and you call yourself

a former Dean supporter. ROFL

Dean never pretended to be a liberal. I heard him speak 3 times in my area - and every time he specified that he was not a liberal.

[Evil_Dewers]

38. and you call yourself

a former Dean supporter. ROFL

---

And you claimed I used blow up dolls for sex. Why should I care about what you think, because I don't?

Dean quit. He never won a primary. His campaign blew $40 mil and ended up $400,000 in the red. I moved on (progressed). You haven't (status quo, conservative).

Stop stalking me.

[maxanne]

49. don't flatter yourself

Last I knew, this was a message board. Therefore, one can reasonably expect people to post messages. Is everyone who replies to one of your posts accused of being a stalker?

While I would not presume to tell you to stop flogging the dead horse of Dean's campaign, since it gives you such pleasure - I would ask that you stop calling yourself a former Dean supporter. You've been a member since July 2003, and never posted in support of Dean.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

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

[maxanne]

62. prove me wrong

show me a single one of your posts in GD04 that supports Dean.

[Evil_Dewers]

65. show me a single one of your posts in GD04 that supports Dean.

The search function doesn't work for me since I didn't send in my 20 bucks last quarter.

[maxanne]

70. well, I searched

and came up with zero.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

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

[Bozola]

92. Hmmm?

[Evil_Dewers]

75. prove me wrong

I shouldn't have to prove you wrong. You are the one making the accusation. Search all the other topics besides GD04 and then get back with me.

On second thought, I'm putting you on snooze. You will be my first. Goodbye.

[Evil_Dewers]

71. Is everyone who replies to one of your posts accused of being a stalker

No, just you. Do a search of GD04 and find a post in which I claimed someone besides you was stalking me.

[maxanne]

77. no thanks

no need. You began posting in GD04 in February, in fact you only posted a few times on the board before that, in September and October. You didn't mention your disgust with Dean supporters then.

You may apologize now for calling me a liar.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

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

[maxanne]

80. does this mean

I don't get an apology???

:eyes:

[Name removed]

83. Deleted message

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

[maxanne]

85. easier just to come clean

and say "I never was a Dean supporter." It will cleanse you and set you free.

:)

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

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

[Forkboy]

96. lol

tough day :crazy:

[Name removed]

100. Deleted message

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

[Iverson]

26. Let's explore this.

If, in your mind, the treatment of the left by a hostile center is an impermissible topic, then I hope that you hit the alert button after your scold, along with providing a coherent rationale.

[Evil_Dewers]

48. the treatment of the left by a hostile center

A thread I started dealt with the poor treatment of the majority (center) by a hostile left. That thread was locked by a moderator.

This thread is still open. I did hit alert since this thread is a continuation of the previous (locked) thread. Instead, my post #19 was deleted for calling the starter of this thread a name because he/she started this thread and in post #19 I claimed that this thread violated the rules of DU. The starter of this thread now claims he wasn't talking about me. Yet a link to my initial thread has been posted here.

The extreme left is overrepresented on this board with regards to the general population, and with regards to the Democratic party. I used to consider myself a flaming liberal, until I found this board. I am considered a centrist here by some, even though I agree more with the views and voting record of Dennis Kucinich than I do with the views and voting record of John Kerry.

[IrateCitizen]

50. That's rich!

I used to consider myself a flaming liberal, until I found this board. I am considered a centrist here by some, even though I agree more with the views and voting record of Dennis Kucinich than I do with the views and voting record of John Kerry.

You agree more with the views and voting record of Dennis Kucinich, yet you feel the overwhelming need to trash his supporters (ALL of them by association) as somehow being disloyal, uncompromising leftists. :crazy:

Am I the only one who sees a disconnect here?

Does not compute. Error. Does not compute.

[maxanne]

51. you are not alone

he claims he was a Dean supporter, too.

[Evil_Dewers]

63. he claims he was a Dean supporter, too

See post #56 above:


Evil_Dewers (690 posts)

56. don't flatter yourself

You have posted "and you call yourself a former Dean supporter" to me several times in several threads in the last week...

[Evil_Dewers]

60. You agree more with the views and voting record of Dennis Kucinich

Yes I do.

However, many DK'ers have felt the need to label me when I point out that it is not likely DK will pick up any delegates today. When I point out that DK doesn't have "electable" tatooed on his forehead, they tell me to fuck off.

When I call them impractical, and they call me an idiot.

DK has as much chance of getting the Dem nomination as right wing darlings Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan and David Duke had getting the GOP momination: 0.0000000003%

[rucky]

52. It's much less frustrating to focus on issues

than trying to make sense of factions & labels.

[Iverson]

84. It raises the question.

Do you suppose that the manner in which one presents a case is meaningful?

[RichM]

23. This is actually a very juicy subject. The relationship between DLC

Democrats & the Kucinichite/progressive faction is indeed very much like the relation between the Republicans and the entire center-left spectrum of non-Republicans. The DLCers even use the same language as rightwingers in dealing with us, contemptuously calling us the "loony left fringe," etc.

And it's wonderfully ironic, that the DLCers themselves will soon be exposed to exactly the same treatment they are now dishing out. What's mainly being reflected here is the self-contradictory nature of the DLC Democrats. They are partly tethered to rightwing ideology, and partly opposed to it. They want the votes of antiwar progressives, but don't want to halt the war machine. They want to appease rightwingers by setting forth pro-war candidates, but need to criticize Bush's handling of the wars...thus appearing to be both for & against Bush's wars at the same time. As indeed they are.

DLC Democrats are riddled with inner contradiction. This provides true rightwingers, unencumbered by such contradiction, with plenty of vulnerable targets to shoot at.

[West Coast Democrat]

53. Where did anyone get the idea that Dean is far-left?

I've never accused anyone at DU of being a "Commie," but I have seen some posters here using communist symbols, etc. That probably isn't the best way to avoid being called a "commie."

[Ysabel]

55. what about women...

who wear short skirts...?

[West Coast Democrat]

57. What about it?

[Ysabel]

58. my point is...

your attitude towards those who use symbols - is similar to those who claim that a woman who wears a short skirt is to blame when she is raped...

[West Coast Democrat]

68. If there's one pet peeve I have

it's when people use incorrect analogies to try to prove their point. Don't be ridiculous.

[Ysabel]

73. i disagree...

i think it was correct...

i think you are wrong...

p.s. please don't tell me how to be - thank you...

[West Coast Democrat]

81. As I recall, you were telling me how to be

I'm just offering that making false analogies only hurt any point you're trying to make.

Please demonstrate how this is a correct analogy:

Using Hammer and Sickle Symbolism = You support Communist ideals

is the same as:

Wearing a Mini-skirt = You must want to get raped

[Iverson]

90. the crash of symbols

Comrade, what we need is a five year plan for symbol usage reduction. Since this is a volunteer effort, it will strictly be from each according to his abilities. Our goals and outcomes statement will result in everyone getting necessary symbol-overload reduction and relief. That sounds too much like jargon, so let's just say to each according to his needs.

We'll have this problem licked in notime!

[West Coast Democrat]

95. If I wear a mini-skirt it is because....

a) I want to show off my legs

b) because it's a hot day

c) I just feel like it

d) all of the above

If one likes to frequently use Hammer & Sickle symbols it is because....

a) they like the ideas of Communism

b) they want people to think they like the ideas of Communism

c) they want to get attention

d) all of the above

[Ysabel]

105. i went out...

unfortunately i forgot something and i need to go out again...

i'll get back to you - if i remember and / or have time...

off to pay the rent...

[Ysabel]

114. okay i'm back...

you left out *this part* of what you said:

quote:

...but I have seen some posters here using communist symbols, etc. That probably isn't the best way to avoid being called a "commie."...

unquote...

your reading comprehension and understanding seems to me to be inadequate - perhaps i can spell it out to you:

*this part* of what you said...

seems to me similar to this:

..."I have seen some women here who wear short skirts - that probably isn't the best way to avoid being raped."...

------------

or called a whore or a slut - and by the way - if anyone thinks that i missed the several slut and whore comments that were tossed around DU the other day - i did not - although the moderators seemed to have missed them - anyway - i'm not going to do the mods dirty work - oh well - crap - back to the argument at hand...

-------------------

i did not tell you how to be - you told me how to be...

i did not say "same as"...

i did not say "="

i said "similar"...

[West Coast Democrat]

162. But what if the person claims to actually be a Communist?

....the person using Communist symbols in his/her post?

Seriously, it's not a leap of logic to assume that someone calling him/herself a Communist and using those symbols might actually be a Communist, is it?

And even after reading your explanation, there is nothing in your analogy that makes the slightest bit of sense.

[Ysabel]

171. alright...

perhaps my statement was a bit much - perhaps your statement was as well...

in any case - calling a person (who states that they are in fact) a communist is not the same as calling a person a "commie" - the latter is most often used as a put down...

edited - to add the part in parenthesis...

[genius]

64. I was watching a tape of last Thursday's debate and Larry King

called Universal Health Care "socialism." King was booed by the audience. The audience cheered Dennis's response. I guess voters at large are tired of these labels.

[jsw_81]

66. Kucinich isn't a communist

But he is a far-left radical who would get trounced in November.

[IrateCitizen]

74. You can present a case for the electoral forecast...

... but to label him a "far-left radical" is just plain inaccurate. Emma Goldman, radical? Yes. Dennis Kucinich? Progressive but certainly not "radical".

Unless, of course, you would like to present a series of several examples to support your claim as to how he IS a "far-left radical". Of course, I won't be holding my breath....

[mdguss]

89. It was a certain "progressive"

Poster who put a DLC avatar image on his profile and then went around calling the his other progressive "friends" communists. Yeah, I think people know who I am talking about. We never called any of the progressive candidates communists. What we did was call a certain poster on his immature antics and putting words in our mouths.

Don't believe everything you read--sometimes it's wrong. So I think the point of this post is dead wrong and way off base. The "progressive" can't beat us at the ballot box, so he resorts to putting words in people's mouths.

[IrateCitizen]

97. Instructions on how to respond to threads

1. Display the message to which you wish to respond.

2. Click "REPLY" on that message.

3. Type your response, and hit enter.

What you have done is respond to my post, even though it has absolutely nothing to do with your response. It's confusing and, to be honest, a little irritating.

[mdguss]

98. No actually what I have done it reply to the thread:

And it ended up at the bottom of the post because your's was the last post. Anyway, I hope people will stop beleving other who PUT WORDS in moderates mouths.

On edit, I clicked reply at the end of the posts. What's the difference? It would've ended up in the same place had I clicked reply at the top of the post. I generally like to read all of the posts, so sometimes I click reply at the bottom of the post.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

101. actually, a few days ago a poster was hounding another

around from thread to thread, calling them a communist since they were the member of some activist groups like Food Not Bombs.

As for me, if anyone cares, I am a MODERATE SWING VOTER, also a member of the DLC. I tend to be socially right of center and economically left, balancing just about at the center. A quick perusal of my posts will prove this.

[mdguss]

104. No The Facts Show

You gave a buck to the DLC and then went around claiming to be its newest member. While doing that you called a whole bunch of progressives and progressive causes "communist" or "communist sympathizers." When in fact you are really a progressive--and a true one at that.

You're going around intentionally putting words in people's mouths to belittle those who you disagree with. And you have the facts wrong: the DLC is economically right of center and socially left of center. There's nothing wrong with your points of view, but you joined the wrong organization if you want a socially right and economically left organization.

These tactics are truly worthy of Karl Rove and George Bush. Get a grip and check the facts before you start going around accusing moderates of McCarthyism--and even if you don't say that, that is the intent of your posts. You want people to think: moderates calling people communists, those bastards.

When, in truth, you can't argue with us on the issues, so you come up with phony incidents and personal attacks aimed at us.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

106. Do you read minds? Did you get my bank recepits? Or is your post a lie?

"You gave a buck to the DLC and then went around claiming to be its newest member. While doing that you called a whole bunch of progressives and progressive causes "communist" or "communist sympathizers." When in fact you are really a progressive--and a true one at that."

Excuse me? You obviously cannot back ANY of this up.

"You're going around intentionally putting words in people's mouths to belittle those who you disagree with. "

Excuse me? Can you back this up?

"And you have the facts wrong: the DLC is economically right of center and socially left of center. There's nothing wrong with your points of view, but you joined the wrong organization if you want a socially right and economically left organization."

Excuse me? I never claimed that the DLC was socially right and economically left - perhaps it was harder to read that I thought, but I pretty clearly was referring to MYSELF. My reasons for joining the DLC are my own, and your ridiculous speculation about the kind of organizations I want to join are just that - ridiculous speculation.

"These tactics are truly worthy of Karl Rove and George Bush. Get a grip and check the facts before you start going around accusing moderates of McCarthyism--and even if you don't say that, that is the intent of your posts. You want people to think: moderates calling people communists, those bastards. When, in truth, you can't argue with us on the issues, so you come up with phony incidents and personal attacks aimed at us."

What a beautiful example of psychological projection! I'll let your words, and the reaction of the "moderates" on this thread speak for themselves. Nothing I could do could put them in a worse light.

[mdguss]

108. You know what:

I should call them and have them refuse your donation. You know what else, another poster said it was a buck, and you didn't dispute that. You posted the e-mail thank you that was sent to you from the DLC on this very forum. A sad attempt to accuse me of spying when in fact you posted the receipt on this very forum.

But now you whine when other people are catching on to your shameless shenanigans. If you look back threw the posts and archives, there's a thread where you didn't dispute that it was a buck. Of course, you constantly hit alert on moderates responses to your threads...so some of those posts have been deleted, but it was a buck--and on the night of the donation--you didn't dispute that it was a buck. Your original thread was locked because it added inflamattory and wrong positions to the DLCs platform. I'll eventually find the links that prove what I am saying. You're no moderate, and I am tired of you trying to put words in our mouth.

On Edit: I can't prove it was you that hit alert, but many moderates had their posts deleted in that long argument with you. Only you can know the truth on that one.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

109. you're going to call the DLC and have them refuse my donation?

bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha :lol: thanks, best laugh I had all day! :) :) :)

"You know what else, another poster said it was a buck, and you didn't dispute that. But now you do--when other people are catching on to your shameless shenanigans. If you look back threw the posts and archives, there's a thread where you didn't dispute that it was a buck."

It's true - I didn't bother to refute the lies that what's his face was saying - at some point, you just have to let lunatics go on until they give up.

"Of course, you constantly hit alert on moderates responses to your threads...so some of those posts have been deleted, but it was a buck--and on the night of the donation--you didn't dispute that it was a buck."

This is of course, a total lie, and you have ZERO ability to back up any of these spurious and untrue accusations. In fact, were this England, I'd sue you for libel.

"You're no moderate, and I am tired of you trying to put words in our mouth."

I am a moderate Democrat and member of the DLC. If you don't like it - TOUGH. Besides - am *I* making ridiculous claims about YOU - or are YOU the one pretending to read my mind and know my campaign donations?

I said it before - you're projecting. Get a mirror.

[mdguss]

110. The Original Thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=293945#293980

Enough said.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

113. thanks for that

I invite all interested readers to read my thread, which was this statement by me:

"There is a stereotype that the Democratic Party is a party of liberals with liberal ideals. Nothing could be further from the truth! The Democratic Leadership Council is NOT liberal - they are a concerned group of moderate, centrist Democrats who are elected leaders. They are assoicated with the New Democrat Network, also not liberals. Here's some of their positions:"

Along with a copy and paste from their website. Why this is a bad thing, I don't know!

[mdguss]

115. Because You Edited:

Their positions and put your own positions into something you claimed was their opinions!

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

116. false, again, as usual mdguess

Obviously I'm allowed to post my own opinions aren't I? In that thread I COPIED AND PASTED from the DLC website! I was giving them publicity? And you still attack me?

Is it really ME that you're angry with, mdguss? Deep down inside, don't you think you're really mad at ... well, someone else? ;)

[mdguss]

117. Yeah, I'm still pissed at Ralph:

NT

[nolabels]

91. I joke with them at work all the time

The ordinary Joe probably don't even know what real communists are. Public school systems are such a failure for at least teaching people about politics. I call my a communist in joking at the work. At first they were astonished, later after they figured out that I was B.S.ing them, then they became a little more interested about my political takes on things. See communists are good for some things

I may not be a model student or any kind of model at all for that matter but at least I know which end is up

[wyldwolf]

120. Probably because there is/was a faction of Dean supporters here..

... who ARE admited communists and Lenin apologists.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

123. name one

please? just one. I know there is some guy name Sean something that is a real Communist, but he's voting for some third party guy (not a communist) from what I remember.

Who are the Lenin apologists? I'd *really* love to hear that one!

[wyldwolf]

126. Gotta edit this

Don't want to be accused of calling out another DU'er.

http://www.radiosubversion.com


Admitted communist. Anti-labor, too. But Dean supporter.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

142. anti-labor? you are being EXTREMELY deceptive, wyldwolf!

I remember this - you accused him of being "anti-labor" because of criticism of trade unions in the preamble to the IWW. That's extremely deceptive - one, you're saying he's anti labor due to one essay, and TWO - the IWW *IS* a labor union - what, self-hating labor?

You are doing a GREAT disservice to the DLC by smearing progressives, however misguided they may be (since the USSR and the Communist threat is long gone, I'll give commies the benefit of the doubt and consider them woefully misguided progressives.)

[wyldwolf]

147. On the contrary...

He said outright that he agreed with the essay. The essay is anti-labor union. Labor unions represent labor. It really is that simple.

Perhaps he just didn't understand what he was endorsing?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

153. false, the essay is not anti-labor, nor anti-union

http://www.iww.org/

Let everyone judge for themselves. I've read it, I know the history behind it, and the idea that the IWW - one of American's most storied labor unions - is anti-labor or anti-union is just laughable, and cannot be taken seriously.

[bushclipper]

160. Looks anti-labor to me...

or at least against the best interests of labor.

[Desertrose]

125. I vehemently disagree about "commies & Lenin apologists" here....

thats quite a label you have comeup with.... but either way it way....I'm sure that very soon we will not be welcome here on DU by all the other "real democrats"?

So much for the big tent...more like lockstep if you ask me......

Peace
DR

[wyldwolf]

127. doesn't matter if you disagree

There are people here who are Lenin apologists, Milosevic apologists, etc.

Admitted communists. Its a fact.

[maxanne]

129. I have yet

to see a single Lenin apologist.

And the former DU poster you refer to is anything but anti-labor.

All in all, one seems like a lonely number, when there are thousands of members here at DU.

[wyldwolf]

131. he is anti-labor..

"The trade unions foster a state of affairs which allows one set of workers to be pitted against another set of workers in the same industry, thereby helping defeat one another in wage wars. Moreover, the trade unions aid the employing class to mislead the workers into the belief that the working class have interests in common with their employers."


http://www.iww.org/stand.shtml

Of which the DU'er in question is a member of...

Then, you have your handful of Lenin and Milosovic apologists who subscribe to writings of Michael Parenti - as seen here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=586040

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=478777

[maxanne]

133. the point is

what, exactly?

I'm a member of a historical society, and I'm not old. I'm a member of a coalition to end homelessness, and I'm not homeless. I'm a member of a gay rights group, and I'm not gay.

Do you know the aforementioned poster, personally? Have you ever discussed labor with him?

[wyldwolf]

135. yes...

... I've discussed labor with him.

[maxanne]

136. and he told you

he was anti-labor?

[wyldwolf]

137. He was shown the excerpt and agreed with it...

...and, since the excerpt is anti-labor - and he agreed with it - then that is an admission of anti-labor.

But, say, now that we have that part settled, why not address the Lenin and Milosevic apologists in the threads I showed you?

In all seriousness, you can't have read every thread on DU since it's founding.

You obviously missed the admitted communists and Lennin/Milosevic apologists.

[maxanne]

138. I get it

if someone disagrees with your POV they are an apologist.

Again, let me get this clear - you did say you know Mr. Radio Subversion, personally?

[wyldwolf]

139. no, not at all...

However, if someone agrees with Michael Parenti's views on Milosevic and Lenin, that makes them a Milosevic and Lenin apologist because that is what Parenti is.

I have "discussed" the matter in depth with the DU'er in question and have a clear understanding of his positions.

[maxanne]

141. So when I asked

"Do you know the aforementioned poster, personally? Have you ever discussed labor with him?" and you said "yes" you were only telling half the truth.

It must be nice to be so black and white in one's positions. So everyone who agrees with Paul Begala once is a Democrat? Everyone who agrees with Pat Buchanan a time or two is a right wing neocon?

[wyldwolf]

143. post #137 clarified my position but isn't it interesting that...

..you're tryin to dodge and divert from the original point over whether I know the DU'er in question personally?

So funny.

[Bozola]

165. Please clarify...

Are you refering to the "communist" or the "Lenin and Milosevic apologists" here?

[wyldwolf]

167. It was clarified in post 126

[Name removed]

140. Deleted message

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

[wyldwolf]

146. Oh, a personal attack. Out of ideas, I see.

and I never said the communist in question was a Lenin and Milosevic apologists.

I made a point that there are communists and Lenin/Milosevic apologists here. And there are.

[Bozola]

164. Personal attack? It's called a CLARIFICATION

you were not clear enough in distinguishing between the individuals.

[wyldwolf]

168. it was a personal attack. Reread your last line

[Name removed]

144. Deleted message

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

[wyldwolf]

148. yes, anti labor

from my link:

"The trade unions foster a state of affairs which allows one set of workers to be pitted against another set of workers in the same industry, thereby helping defeat one another in wage wars. Moreover, the trade unions aid the employing class to mislead the workers into the belief that the working class have interests in common with their employers."

Of which the person agreed.

[Iverson]

150. totally decontextualized

The trade unions to which the writer refers occur within a context of cutthroat capitalism, from his or her point of view. It follows that the writer supports labor, but not necessarily the existing situation of labor unions.

To warp that into "opposing labor" is either a result of tabloid thinking or disinformation.

[wyldwolf]

151. just going on what the Du'er said...

...and, like I implied, perhaps he was just a communist wannabe.

[Iverson]

154. that's no answer

The words have meaning and a context.
I spelled it out for you.
Reread.

[wyldwolf]

157. obviously the DU'er didn't know the meaning and context

I specifically asked him if that is what he believed.

"yes"

Do you think Howard Dean takes an anti-labor position like that?

"no, and I don't care."

Obviously he saw it as anti-labor and admitted he differed with Dean on it.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

156. no, the trade unions the IWW are talking about are from 1920

this is just such amazing crap I'm honestly surprised. We all do hit and run, we all like the firey rhetoric - this is just too stupid for words.

I give up.

[salin]

145. two things

first a handful of people out of thousands... is not quite how your posts seem to read.

second... there is something very discomforting about reading this to the point of hunting things down... so... mcCarthyesque.

"I have in my hand a list....."

Sorry but I find this whole tangent of yours is both misleading, and a bit discomforting.

[wyldwolf]

149. Now where did I say "I have in my hand a list"?

You're misquoting me. Talk about mcCarthyesque.

Surely you know what "a handful" means?

:eyes:

[salin]

152. perhaps not clear...

saying the tactics were reminiscent of McCarthy... the quote was of McCarthy... just the sort of icky feeling that watching reading cast off as I read it. So for what it is worth... when you go on this bent - targeting a few.. chasing it down to "prove" ... then making the charges sound much more broad than a couple of people... that to some non-communists, non-socialists... but just plain old traditional liberals... it comes off as rather mccarthyesque.

[bushclipper]

155. He was asked to go on this "bent"

He was specifically asked to name one admitted communist on DU and challenged that there were no Lenin and Milosevic aplogists.

Should he have just said, "no, you're right, there are none, what was I thinking?"

[wyldwolf]

158. hey, thanks!

[salin]

159. maybe start with

not making a sum total of less than five folks out of many many thousands be refered to in ways that make it sound like we need a witchhunt.

the rest followed from that point.

[wyldwolf]

161. I was asked to name 1, so I did...

I was challenged that there were no Milosevic and Lenin apologists on DU. I showed that there was.

Any notion of "making a sum total of less than five folks out of many many thousands" is your problem entirely.

[salin]

166. except of course

that others seem to have reacted the same way... so maybe we - at each of our different computers... just had some similar vibe thing and all happened to get that same impression...

or perhaps that message was sent be it intended or not.

[wyldwolf]

169. or perhaps

... someone didn't read the entire exchange in order before making the call.

[Ficus]

128. Communists! RUN!!!!!

Oh my god COMMUNISTS! I hear they eat little children.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

134. In the days leading up to the MN caucuses

I've been buttonholing every peace activist type I see about voting for Kucinich.

ALL of them are furious at Nader, and none of them will be voting for him.

[Hippo_Tron]

163. I DONT call them communists...

I support Kerry and have since the beginning of the primaries but if Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich were the democratic nominee, I would be 100% behind either of them and not just because I'm ABB.

[Mick Knox]

170. Socialism is Communism with a shave - BLAH - Long Live Democrats

Here's to the Party of the GREAT Fighters - FDR, Truman, JFK

The party of freedom and civil rights.

Allowing ourselves to be marginalized as wimps, ultra left, and socialist have cost us DEARLY. House, Senate, and WH.

Lets get back to the party I am a life long member of. The party of true fighters.