Some here want Bush to bury Kerry. Why?

[Evil_Dewers]

Because many here are still in the anger phase.

However, some have moved on to the denial phase "Dean/Clark/Edwards have just suspended their campaigns. You wait and see. It ain't over 'til July."

Fewer still have moved on the bargaining phase, "DK needs to stay in it so he can demand some platform changes at the convention."

To those who have reached the final stage of acceptance, "I will vote for Kerry because he's the nominee," I salute you.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

1. Perceptive post.

[Evil_Dewers]

2. Thanks.

But nobody else is responding to it. :cry:

[HFishbine]

5. Of course

you discarded your critical thinking when you failed to ask, "Who here wants Bush to bury Kerry?"

[Evil_Dewers]

11. you discarded your critical thinking

Have you been reading some of the posts here by Dean and Clark and DK supporters? Heck, read some of the posts in this thread.

[HFishbine]

21. Assignment completed

I've read all the posts in this thread, as you recommended, and I still don't see a single one where anybody is hoping for Bush to bury Kerry.

[KoKo]

29. Evil_Dewers is hoping he/she will "snag one" eventually.

So far, know one is biting.

[info being]

104. Not sure what you mean by "snag one" but I support Evil_Dewers

[Feanorcurufinwe]

31. Why would I ask a question I already know the answer to?

[HFishbine]

85. Oh I see

If you know the answer, then you are an accomplice in the ruse. Thanks for clearing that up.

[BL_Zebub]

Some of us just see through the media bullshit

And realize that a candidate who has spent three years voting for most of Bush's agenda can't debate Bush.

Also a candidate who is branded as an "extremist Massachussettes liberal" (despite his Bush enabling) doesn't have very good chances.

So that leaves us with the question of why the party machine went out of their way to manipulate the system so the weakest candidate emerged the nominee.

That doesn't mean we "hope" Bush buries him. It means we fear it's inevitable :evilfrown:

[Evil_Dewers]

8. Media bullshit

Hmmm, Kerry spent most of the last three years voting for Bush's shit?

I guess that explains why JFK was recently rated the most liberal US Senator--because Bush is a liberal.

So now we deal with the charges of "Extremist Massachusetts Liberal."

But the good progressives here tell me Kerry voted for most of Bush's shit and claim Kerry ain't a liberal. Only Dean (LOL) and Kucinich are liberals.

It seems Kerry is viewed as weak only by the assholes who supported somebody else in the first place.

[BL_Zebub]

27. Nice to know that the DLC now considers me an "asshole"

because I had the nerve to exercize my constitutional rights and vote for somebody other than their chosen sacrificial goat.

[Evil_Dewers]

35. Nice to know that the DLC

Not nice to know you consider me to be the DLC.

But hey, nice to know a "Democrat" like you considers Kerry to be a sacrificial goat.

[BL_Zebub]

40. Sacrificial goat was a figure of speech.

Throw in "lamb", or "cat" or "bunny rabbit" if you prefer. The result is the same. The Republicans controlling this party (DLC) are throwing the game so they can be much closer to their goal of destroying the Demoncratic Party by merging it with the GOP. Can't have 2 parties in a fascist state, after all.

[Evil_Dewers]

45. The Republicans controlling this party (DLC)

Wait a second, are you claiming the DLC used Diebold to manipulate the Democrat primaries so that Kerry could lose to Bush?

Is there a tinfoil hat smiley?

[BL_Zebub]

55. I wasn't claiming that at all, but if you insist.... it's not a bad theory

There are certainly documented cases of Diebold "errors" with the machines on Tuesday. Maybe they were fucking around with them all along?

And yes, there is a tinfoil hat smiley :tinfoilhat:

[info being]

107. It seems that only Kerry supporters think everyone else is an asshole.

[sangh0]

12. Sounds like the denial phase

"Only my candidate could beat Bush*. Kerry is going to lose"

[BL_Zebub]

32. Wrong you are, Oh, ye of interchangeble vowels

Dean would have beat Bush easily, for sure. But I also believe Clark or Edwards would have beaten him as well. Bob Graham might have done well, if he had stayed in the race. So that's 4 of the initial 10.

[sangh0]

36. Denial

Dean would have beat Bush easily, for sure.

Dean couldn't get a majority of Dems to vote for him, but BZ just knows Dean would have gotten the Repukes and Independent to vote for him. I didn't know that R & I's didn't like tax cuts, war for profit, and religion in politics.

[Old and In the Way]

90. That's called counter-intuitive thinking Sangh0.

Do you recall how Karl Rove dreaded facing Dean in the GE? BZ bought the KR spin. Or perhaps he's just being a good team leader who restates the now-inoperative meme.

[sangh0]

91. No, I don't

remember how Rove dreaded facing Dean. I remember Rove hoping Bush* would be facing Dean. And the rules prevent me from saying what I think of an individual poster

[Nazgul35]

139. weren't the Kerry supporters in that phase

from Aug. - Dec.?

:shrug:

Or are those memories to painful to remeber...

Personally, I'd be a little less cocky about our chances in the general election, since the media already destroyed this candidate six months ago...he was only able to re-emerge because the media was busy destroying Dean during that time....

[KoKo]

13. "Evil_Dwers" and" BL_Zebub?" The Dark forces are at work on this Post .

:eyes:

[MercutioATC]

I don't think people here want Bush to beat Kerry.

I DO think that there are plenty of people who realize that Kerry, while he will most likely will be the nominee, is NOT yet the nominee and they resent having their candidates dismissed before the end of the race.

I don't understand the issue here. There are rules that determine when it's over. It's not over according to those rules. Why try to claim differently?

[Evil_Dewers]

25. Is Dean still running for the Democratic nomination for president?

No. So I dismiss him.

Is Clark running? No, in fact, he endorsed Kerry.

Is Edwards running? Nope. He quit yesterday.

Is Gephardt still running? Nope, he quit and endorsed Kerry.

Braun quit. Lieberman quit.

If you are a Rev. Al or DK supporter, by all means, speak out and vote for your candidate. Because those two are still running.

But the other candidates aren't running. They suspended their campaigns, or quit.

And I'm sick of all the whining, excuses, denial, insults, anger, etc...from the supporters of the candidates who are no longer campaigning for the nomination.

[MercutioATC]

60. Are we speaking the same language?

Why do you have a problem with abiding by the rules and waiting until your candidate has actually won to declare him the winner?

Oh, and:

"And I'm sick of all the whining, excuses, denial, insults, anger, etc...from the supporters of the candidates who are no longer campaigning for the nomination."

Just as we're sick of the "get on board NOW" posts from the Kerry supporters.

I'll "get on board" when and if I damn well please, thank you.

[Evil_Dewers]

73. Deaniacs were telling everyone to get on board in January.

And last December, and last November, etc...

They kept fantasizing here about a Dean/Clark ticket.

They bitched and whined that all the other candidates should just drop out and give Doctor Dean a free ride of smooth sailing all the way to the convention.

The supporters of other candidates were called stupid, and the Deaniacs shouted from the mountaintops that us Dems needed to be united against Bush, so get on board the Dean love train or move over and get the hell out of the way or be run over by the Dean love train.

[MercutioATC]

99. I'll admit there were a vocal few that did that, but not most ...

...and certainly not me. The same can be said of any camp that found itself doing well in a poll.

I find it interesting that you resented the behavior so much in others but feel free to mimic it yourself.

[Old and In the Way]

96. Ahhhh, the operative conditional phrase: "if I damn well please"

Why won't I be shocked that, when the time comes that the race is over by your rather silly definition, you'll be telling us you just can't support the nominee?

[MercutioATC]

98. "My silly definition"? Enough delegates is a "silly definition" of a win?

I'm curious. What's your "serious" definition of a "win"...one that would really mean the race was "over"?


I've always stated that I'd vote for the nominee in the GE. That hasn't changed. I just prefer to wait until an actual nominee is decided upon.

[Old and In the Way]

137. I know, you'd prefer to handicap our obvious nominee by

pretending the race is still ongoing. It's not. You can continue to promote an idea that only benefits Bush and his re-election, I just don't know how you think this benefits our Party's chances in November. Or maybe you know it doesn't.

[MercutioATC]

143. Again, what's your issue with waiting until a nominee is selected?

By definition, Kerry is the frontrunner, he's not the nominee. Why does that bother you so?

[Old and In the Way]

93. Why do you persist in kneecapping the Democrat's nominee?

You acknowledge that Kerry will most likely (I'd say 99.9999999% certain) be the nominee...so why are you trying to kneecap our chances by refusing to acknowledge that he is the nominee? Of what possible benefit is it for us to pretend there is still a primary race on, when we should be uniting behind our candidate and focusing our efforts in beating Bush in November?

[MercutioATC]

100. It's not "kneecapping" the nominee if he's NOT the nominee yet...

...which he isn't...which is my entire point. If he gains enough delegates to secure the nomination (which is how one actually becomes the nominee) I'll have no problem accepting him as the nominee.

Until then, he's just the frontrunner.

[Old and In the Way]

138. Meanwhle, you'll continue to kneecap the obvious nominee.

Humor me....explain who you think has a chance to beat Kerry and how that candidate will get the votes to pull it off. Since you are so intent on proclaiming the race "not over", surely you must have a reasonable scenario of an alternative outcome that you can share with us.

[MercutioATC]

142. I think Kerry will be the nominee. My point is that he's NOT yet.

I don't agree with demanding that Democrats "get in line" before a nominee is chosen. What's your problem with waiting until the required number of delegates are committed and we have an actual nominee?

[Old and In the Way]

148. Simple.

A day lost in fundraising and organizing is a day that can't be recovered.

[MercutioATC]

152. Organize and fundraise all you want. Just don't say he's the nominee.

Kerry can raise money for Kerry. The DNC can raise money for the eventual nominee. I have no problem with that.

[Old and In the Way]

150. BTW, you didin't answer my post.

[MercutioATC]

151. I most certainly did.

I said that I believe that Kerry will be the nominee. I'm not taking issue with people having that opinion, I object to people stating this opinion as fact. The process exists for a reason. I'm simply suggesting that we wait until we have an actual nominee.

[Old and In the Way]

159. So there's no good reason to wait except to give the Republicans

an advantage....nice!

[MercutioATC]

160. Wait for what??? Fundraise and campaign all you like. Who's telling

you to wait?

I'm just pointing out that Kerry isn't the nominee yet.

(I said as much in Post #152)

[MercutioATC]

3. Dupe

[KoKo]

ROFL! Definitely Dupe. n/t

[Champion Jack]

4. It could be because these individuals

Came here from another web site, one that starts with a "F".
This is pure speculation of course.......

[BL_Zebub]

38. Purely speculating....

There may be someone who fits that description all over this thread. And he doesn't have horns and a tail.

[Old and In the Way]

97. Would it end in "c"?

Pure speculation, too, on my part. ;-)

[KoKo]

6. Ah....Evil_Dewers.......is dewers us evil...with the "stages of grief" to

burn into our foreheads. Or perhaps a tattoo on our palm for easy reference as to which stage it is would be a handier reminder. ;-)

[sangh0]

9. Sounds like the anger phase

:-)

[KoKo]

19. Ahhhhh.......it's the "humor" faze, where one just laughs hysterically....

they forgot to put that in the "Stages." It's a well known fact that psychologists have critiqued the "Stages of Grief" for leaving out the well known human emotion of "laughter is the best medicine." ;-)

[madfloridian]

7. Oh, good grief.

.

[Dhalgren]

10. Why are you so afraid of Kerry's chances against Bush?

It would appear that you are so worried about Kerry v Bush that any, slight deviation from loud songs of praise for the presumptive nominee causes you to wet your knickers.

[sangh0]

17. The anger phase

"Those evil Kerry supporters won't let me talk" even though no one is stopping you.

[Dhalgren]

22. No one is stopping me from talking.

I just think it is rather silly to be getting you underwear in a bunch because everybody isn't falling into line with The Candidate, yet. Take a deep breath and repeat after me, "I won't be afraid. I won't be afraid. I won't be afraid". There. Better?

[sangh0]

28. You seem obsessed with underwear

and I go commando. I don't understand where you've gotten the idea that I am upset by any criticism of Kerry.

The ones who are afraid are the ones who seem to have a compulsion to portray their "plight" as dire when the truth is, they can't take the criticism for their irrational desires and demands. They are the ones who need to project their fears onto others.

[Dhalgren]

41. Hey, don't knock undies ( they're like swimsuits, only not)!

You seem to be in denial regarding your fear of the upcoming Kerry v Bush contest, why is that, do you think? It seems that the more shrill and insistant that those Kerry supporters with The Fear deny their Fear, the more they attack others who seem less fearful. The Democratic Party has (it would appear) chosen Kerry as its Man In November - so what's the problem? I think Kerry will soundly beat Bush in November(I think a dressed up pine stump could beat Bush in November). Why the consternation? You gotta believe! Right? Kerry is Electable! Right? So relax, enjoy the show, the rest is all downhill (meaning easy - not deterioration) :hi:

[sangh0]

70. The denial of fear is the result

of an abundance of confidence.

[CTLawGuy]

103. the whole MO with Kerry is FEAR

"Vote for Kerry (in the primary)or we have no chance of beating Bush."

Vote for the IWR because you are afraid of being called a liberal.

Support the bush tax cuts because you are afraid of swing voters not liking you.

Don't support the MA court ruling on gay marriage, becuase you are afraid of the religious right.

"Vote for Kerry because Bush is so horrible!"

Let me tell you, swing voters and independents do not hate Bush, and will not respond to a "Im not Bush" campaign.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

43. Why ascribe feelings and motivations to other posters?

Why not instead, advocate for the things you want? Is there something you are in favor of? Let's hear about that, instead of your biased perception of other posters on DU.

[Dhalgren]

49. Well, the poster in question said

that some folks on DU wanted "Bush to bury Kerry". Now, that to me, ascribes a whole lot of stuff on other Duers without any backup, at all. Then the same (and others) poster started ascribing stages of denial to all sorts of folks for no apparent reason. So I started to think about why that was so, and a good explanation was "fear". He (and They) fear for Kerry's chances in the fall and so are pre-emptively blaming folks for his loss. The Fear will getcha every time. Just stop being afraid and voila it will be o.k. See?

[Evil_Dewers]

52. "Folks" "Stuff" "Fear" "Denial" "pre-emptively" "getcha"

Reading some of the words you used in your post #49 reminded me of listening to a canned 'Bush war on terruh' speech.

[Dhalgren]

59. You bet! Now, I'm Bush!

Man you got quite an imagination, just don't let it get the best of you - burn outs are a terrible thing. Oh, by the way you have no argument worth the debate. You r resorting to calling me Bush is just indicative of that. Lighten up, November is a long way off. Oh, and if you want to debate about something substantive, you'll need to get better at it. :hi:

[Evil_Dewers]

62. I didn't claim you were Jorge Arbusto, Che.

I just pointed out that you write like * talks.

[Dhalgren]

65. Cool. But I swear, no pretzel has ever kicked my ass! Really!

.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

56. I missed the part of your answer

where you describe what you are advocating for, and why accusing people who say they are not afraid of being afraid advances that cause.

[Dhalgren]

63. The poster says that the argument that people are making

regarding the efficasy of supporting one or another candidate was various forms of "denial". I simply trotted out the idea that calling these arguments "forms of denial" was just a way of dealing with his (or their) fear. One dab of psychobabble is just as valid as another - right?

[sangh0]

72. You mischaracterize my post

My post wasn't about the efficacy of someone's post. I criticized those who claim Kerry can't win while supporting a candidate that lost.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

77. You still haven't said

what you are advocating for, and why accusing people who say they are not afraid of being afraid advances that cause.

[DinahMoeHum]

14. Methinks the Nothing-But-The-Best-For-The-Oppressed

syndrome has hit them big-time.


:evilfrown:

[MaineDem]

15. Give them time

If people want to accept the nominee and vote for him, fine. If not, nothing I write on an anonymous web site message board is going to change their minds.

I believe the Democratic Party will come together in a way not seen in a long time. I have complete faith in us.

The grieving and fractionalization are SOP for a primary fight.

[Demobrat]

16. I don't want Bush to bury Kerry

but I do expect it, so I'm in the "How do I make it through 4 more years?" phase. For me right now the answer is to work to insure a Democratic majority in congress. Not that it will help all that much, but maybe it will slow down the atrocities somewhat.

[sangh0]

20. Denial

"Only my guy could have beat Bush*"

Kerry gets the votes, but it's some other candidate (who couldn't even get enough Dems to vote for them) who can beat Bush*

[Demobrat]

23. I'm the one in denial?

ROFLMAO.

[KoKo]

26. Sangh0 wasn't talking to you.....she's reminding us all of "Grief Stages"

just going through the thread picking off posts to remind folks what stage of Mourning they are in. No need to take it seriously.

[Dhalgren]

24. BOO!!!

Just kidding, it's alright. Didn't mean to scare ya'.

[sangh0]

34. Projection

Kerry wins across the board, your candidate was defeated, and you think *I'm* afraid.

Demorats are pumped. The turnout at the primaries doubled and tripled in some states. Primary voters across the demographic board are declaring their support for Kerry and even Republicans are announcing their support for the Dem nominee.

Yep, I'm scared and you have every reason to be calm

[Demobrat]

39. Gee, they stayed home in droves in my state (CA).

Kerry is a pompous bore guaranteed to insure that the apathetic remain that way. Get used to it.

[Dhalgren]

46. Then how come I am calm and your all in a fuss?

Relax, Sangy, just put it right out of your mind. It really will be O.K. Honest, it will be.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

58. Why can't you make a post without insulting your debate opponents?

It doesn't look to me like you have anything to say other than ascribing feelings to other DU posters.


If I'm wrong, please show me I am wrong by advancing an idea or advocating a position. Thank you.

[Dhalgren]

68. These posts were started by

ascribing motivations, and insulting ones at that, on other Duers who have try to advocate for one or another of the candidates. Now, all I am doing is using the same device to question the motivation and "denial" of the original poster and his/her advocates. Why is it o.k. for one group to be labelled "in denial", but not another? If all we can do is dismiss legitimate discourse as varying degrees of "denial", then this is what you get - just as good as you gave.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

75. So you are doing what you think is wrong because others did it first?

[sangh0]

79. If it were really "legitimate discourse"

people wouldn't complain that "any and all criticism of Kerry is met with flames" because they'd realize that any and all criticism and support of ANY candidate is met by flames from those who disagree.

It's DU. No one gets to post without being subjected to criticism

[CTLawGuy]

106. in the GE

no one is bombarded with fear mongering messages about "electability".

So called electability is the only reason that chunk of Democrats moved from Dean to Kerry. Exit poll after exit poll showed most dems agreed with Dean on the issues.

[in_cog_ni_to]

18. I've NEVER

read ONE post that said what you are saying. Not once has ANYONE on DU EVER said they want Bush to bury Kerry. Please give me a link to a post that says that. Thanks.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[HFishbine]

50. DISINFORMATION ALERT

An archive search for the post cited above comes up empty. Of course, I'm sure there's a reasonable explaination for that (not that one has resorted to lies to support an unsustainable claim, so stop saying that) and I'm sure a link will be provided in short order.

[sugarcookie]

51. I did a search too...

Just wanted to check out the thread. No search results found.

[Evil_Dewers]

61. An archive search reveals deleted posts?

[Nadienne]

74. If that's the case,

You have a very impressive memory.

[sugarcookie]

78. I wanted

to read some more posts by "Ralph Nader". I'd just like to see who's camp he is in. If he supports his "namesake" then I am not surprised he said it.

[HFishbine]

83. Digging deeper into the pit of mendacity

More dissembling?

So the post was deleted huh? Hmmm.

And there is no Ralph Nader in the members list.

And there was no thread on Feb-26-04 that had a post #185 in reply to a post #103, much less a thread with a deleted post #185 in reply to a post #103.

It's pretty damn sickening and very illustrative of a poster's respect for other DUers, not to mention his or her self-respect, when one resorts to posting fabricated information.

Of course, one could still provide a link to the thread... or lie some more. (There's a third option too, but I doubt an apology is coming.)

[Evil_Dewers]

86. I apologize...

The purpose of this thread was to out the Kerry haters who really do wish Bush buries Kerry. There were no takers who voluntereed to out themselves, though I suspect a very small minority of radicals here actually do hope Bush wins because "things will get better only after they get much worse." This was Nader's view in 2000.

Since no one here seems to publically advocate Bush burying Kerry, I ask that the Kerry bashers STFU and concentrate on bashing the real enemy (Bush).

I really thought my fellow DUers were bright and would immediately realize that Nader post was a joke.

I guess I should have put some smiley faces on the end of it.

When some here accepted it at face value as the truth, I ran with it and asked "deleted posts turn up in an archive search?"

There is no Ralph Nader member, though there is a ralphnader with 0 posts.

All you had to do is ask me if that was a real post. I would have told the truth. Though it did sound like something the real Ralph Nader might say. LOL.

HFishbine, sorry for "coercing" you into doing all that tedious searching for nothing.

[HFishbine]

92. Bull Shit

I was almost surprised when I read the subject line "I apologize" until I read your "apology" and it became clear that you had no intention of coming clean until you were backed into a corner.

Which still leaves us where we started, your assertion that some here would like to see Bush bury Kerry is nothing more than the inflammatory, unsubstantiated rhetoric of a cowardly mind. But then again, I could be joking.

[Evil_Dewers]

109. Bull Shit--it became clear that you had no intention of coming clean

And I suppose you think you backed me into that corner. LOL.

I could have just ignored you.

I was just kidding with you--on the square.

Hey, if I ever need to replace my assistant to do searches on the internet, I'll keep you in mind.

You did a bang up job. But then again, I could be joking.

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

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

[Evil_Dewers]

116. I have never ever placed someone on ignore

Place yourself on ignore.

[in_cog_ni_to]

53. Post a link to that particular thread, please? n/t

[Dhalgren]

54. You got one post

that (may have) said this and that's sends you into this tizzy? Just relax - Kerry will win in November. Just believe it - and maybe do some yard work or something - just to get it off your mind for a while, eh? That's the ticket! :)

[HFishbine]

84. It's not even a real post - it's a fabrication

I know, I know, hard to believe.

[Evil_Dewers]

87. No shit? Read post #86

HFishbine (1000+ posts)

83. Digging deeper into the pit of mendacity

(There's a third option too, but I doubt an apology is coming.)

---

Evil_Dewers (815 posts) Thu Mar-04-04 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #83

86. I apologize...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=432938#433763

[KoKo]

37. I haven't either, but "Evil_Dewers" and "BL_Zebub" have a file on it...

Now that you've asked they will post the links on this thread. ;-)

[blm]

33. Personal vanity. They swore Kerry was a loser for a year

and that he was no different than Bush and that he was a wuss.

They were wrong. They were told they were wrong. They mocked and berated those who disagreed with them, and now they can't admit it to themselves because of personal vanity.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

48. Bingo!

[jmoss]

42. I'm in the aw, shucks phase; with JRE "suspending" his campaign

just say "no" to the idea of 4 more repub. years!

[DoNotRefill]

44. Maybe they're looking to 2008....

and a certain senator from New York....

Hey, I don't know, it could be.... :evilgrin:

[pacifictiger]

47. the obvious infiltration posts

attempting to use divide and conquer tactics scream so loudly.

[Nadienne]

122. Very obvious.

I agree.

[Evil_Dewers]

57. C'mon, nobody here wants to admit they hope Bush buries Kerry?

Then STFU and quit bitching about Kerry.

[MercutioATC]

66. I think Kerry's what's wrong with this party, but I still hope he wins.

Kerry's not my choice by a longshot, but Bush is still worse.

...and I'll "bitch" about Kerry all I like.

[sangh0]

76. And we will bitch right back

Free speech is a bitch. It goes both ways

[MercutioATC]

94. I don't care if you bitch, just please try not to misrepresent opinions as

fact.

Bitch away

:)

[CTLawGuy]

108. except your bitching

risks losing votes for your horse...

welcome to front-runnerdom.

[blm]

82. Lawmakers who root out govt. corruption are what's wrong with the party?

Oh, I forgot. BCCI, IranContra, CIA drugrunning and illegal wars in Central America never happened.

Kyoto Protocol efforts didn't happen either.

[MercutioATC]

95. Yes, they did. So did the IWR, NCLB and the Patriot Act.

I didn't say he was a Republican, I said he was what was wrong with the party (which, IMHO, is the tendency over the last few years to vote for popularity rather than ideology).

[Old and In the Way]

114. Yes, you use 3 stinking votes set-up by Rove to force the

voting that happened. I don't feel like rehashing the reasons why the votes occurred or why Kerry/Edwards, as the only US Snators in the race voted as they did. I will accept that, if they had voted against, they would have been painted as far out, out-of-step terrorist appeasers....and we'd lose in November. Much better to let you disregard his 20+ voting record and play Karl's game here. I'll gladly shitcan a few "lefties" who disingenuously use those 3 votes to back their position and take the voting middle who will view these votes as "anti-terror".

Bush played the "moderate" card in the GE and has taken as on a far right bender. I'll gladly let Kerry play the same card and, when elected, restart us back on a progressive road to recovery.

[MercutioATC]

130. The votes showed a lack of strength of character.

Better to be "painted as far out, out-of-step terrorist appeasers" and explain why the vote was the right thing to do than vote FOR Rove (and Ashcroft) and give them what they want.

Oh, and by the way...you're "shitcanning" more than a few "lefties"...

[Old and In the Way]

136. You don't understand my definition of "lefty" then

And don't mistake finesse for lack of strength of character. I'm sure you'd like to blame Kerry for Bush's war, but this Democrat ain't buying it.

[MercutioATC]

141. So sending kids to war is now "finesse"?

Yes, Bush would have done it without Congressional approval, but giving him that approval is indefensible. How does finesse enter into this?

[Evil_Dewers]

146. but giving him that approval is indefensible

Dude, Bush or whomever is controlling him (Cheney, Wolfie, Rumsfeld) decided to invade Iraq. Unless Congress declared war against Iraq--and they didn't (and the constitution states only Congress may declare war), Bush could have wiped his ass with the House Joint Resolution and ignored Congress and whatever House Joint resolutions they send him.

What really pisses me off is that any Dem who voted on the so-called IWR was screwed no matter how they voted. Kucinich voted nay, and the anti-war voters rewarded him with a whopping 18 delegates so far.

Gephardt, Edwards, Kerry and Lieberman voted yea. Kerry has 1500 delegates. Had Kerry voted nay, Bush's smear machine would have painted Kerry as weak on terruh and defense, scarred by Vietnam so much that he's now a pacifist pussy, and not fit to be commander in chief.

Another thing that pisses me off is that people like Clark and Dean didn't have to vote, since they weren't in Congress, so they could claim moral superiority without actually formally going on record.

[MercutioATC]

154. I agree that it was a no-win vote politically. However,

voting by principle was what I would expect. Most of the Democrats didn't do that, they took the politically safe way out. I have an issue with that, because I think it only aggravates our most serious issue as a party - our apparent lack of identity. We say we stand for things like education, civil liberties and responsible foreign policy and then most of our legislators vote for right-wing legislation like this.

[Old and In the Way]

149. Bush did that.

Nice support of Bush, though...he appreciates your help here.

[MercutioATC]

153. And who gave Bush Congressional approval? Kerry, among others.

Actually, I'd think Bush would appreciate people who encourage their Democratic legislators to vote with him by not calling them to task when they do.

[blm]

115. Those Dems who wouldn't support Kerry during his investigations

and who supported Reagan and Bush's illegal covert actions and wars are the Dems who are wrong with the party. And ESPECIALLY the ones who for years supported the deregulation of the energy industry.

[MercutioATC]

131. Oh, THEY'RE the problem and not the Rove and Ashcroft appeasers?

I'm not denying Kerry's past record, but he did what almost every other Dem did in the face of opposition over the past few years...he sacrificed principle for politics. That's why I say he's what went wrong with this party...we lack a clear identity and he's one of the legislators who helped blur the line.

[blm]

133. Joe Conason disagrees with you.

He said Kerry was the only Dem substantively attacking Bush in August 2002. Carville echoed that sentiment in Dec, 2002.

The media didn't allow him to be heard much.

They saved that mic and stage for another, more entertaining candidate that wouldn't damage Bush as much as Kerry.

[MercutioATC]

134. And I care, why? Plenty of people disagree with me, including you.

I stand by my assessment. Those votes were cast for political gain, not principle. I want to hear Kerry address them.

[blm]

145. Tough. Kerry gains the White House and YOU will still be crying.

You sure as hell cared NOTHING for every calculation made by Dean. Nooooo....Dean was always being "pragmatic" or "honestly just changed his mind"....hahahahahah. From Deregulator to Reregulator. From proNAFTA to antiNAFTA. Against AWB and then for AWB. No political calculation there, eh? hahahahahaha.

[MercutioATC]

157. He's never been pro OR anti NAFTA

He supports parts of NAFTA and would seek to change others. His position on gun legislation is the same. He agrees with a ban on assault weapons, but not when the ultra-liberals attemps to ban semiautomatic weapons along with them.

That's the point. Dean is pragmatic. He doesn't deal with generalities, he expresses exactly what he agrees with and what he doesn't. I'd much rather have a President like that than one who is inflexible or dogmatic.

[AntiCoup2K4]

101. Since the Bush Criminal Empire is bigger than ever, we can say that Kerry.

..didn't root out shit.

[blm]

112. He EXPOSED them and where you?

Where was most of the Dem party? Were they backing up Kerry? Were YOU? Were YOU protesting?

Kerry had more obstacles than anyone in history and damn few pitched in to help.

Blaming Kerry would be the act of an ignoramus.

[AntiCoup2K4]

135. I've been protesting against these fucking bastards since I was 14

When I saw Reagan take the oath of office the very same minute those hostages got released from Iran, I knew something was very, very wrong. And the more I know about the Bush Criminal Empire, the more I despise the traitorous bastards. However, if I happenned to be in the US Senate, I think I would have done a damn sight more than just "protest against them".

Unless, of course, I was bound by an oath which prohibited me from doing anything to harm the people involved.

[blm]

144. And YET you blame the ONE man who did the most to expose them?

How strange.

You do know that he had the FBI sicced on him and every rightwing news source trying to discredit him with planted stories, while he was exposing Reagan and Bush on BCCI, IranContra, CIA drugrunning and their illegal wars in Central America...and you STILL blame Kerry for not doing ENOUGH?

Where was his back up in the Senate and Congress? Working on dirty song lyrics?Where was his back up in the streets protesting the obstacles that were being put in his way?

Almost everything YOU know about the Bush Crime Family today comes from Kerry's work or has its roots in it.

[AntiCoup2K4]

155. Let's take the current 9-11 investigation for an example.

Everybody got their hopes up when Thomas Kean hinted that the Bush Fraudministration hadn't done enough to prevent 9-11, and expected the ax to start falling on a few heads at Team PNAC. Well, as we all know, that didn't happen, despite the expectations, and as usual the right wing was left with their usual reply to everything: IT'S ALL CLINTON'S FAULT!!

However, what many people do NOT know is that Kean was chosen specifically for this job because he CAN'T truly investigate the BCE's involvement in Al Qaeda, due to a major confilict of interest. Kean is a business partner with one Khalid bin-Mahfouz in Delta Oil, a firm which just happenned to be involved in the Caspian Sea pipeline deal in Afghanistan. As if that weren't bad enough, Bin Mahfouz's sister is married to none other than Osama Bin Laden!

Yep. The guy Junior picked to investigate 9-11 is the business partner of Osama's brother in law. Pretty convenient, huh.

What does this have to do with Kerry? Nothing directly,though some of his campaign advisers were also involved with the pipeline - but that's another story. Kerry is a member of Skull & Bones, whose members are bound by a lifetime oath which they are told must supercede all other loyalties, including the oath of office taken by elected officials. So while Kerry made a big show of investigating the BCE, he was bound by his oath not to do anything that would harm Poppy, or any other Bonesmen in the Bush Criminal Empire.

So due to this glaring conflict of interest, Kerry simply is not qualified to bring down the BCE, because he is sworn not to.

[KoKo]

69. "STFU and quit Bitching about Kerry???" Who here is Bitching?

Why don't you get busy and give some links to posts. Then your argument will have some honesty.

[Indiana Democrat]

64. Because he's not PURE!

And he's not as irrelevant as they are. They want the Democratic Party to become as fringe/relevant as the Green Party.

[info being]

105. If we are so "irrelevant" why are you so upset by us?

Really?

[GumboYaYa]

67. Can you people just drop the arm-chair psychology and

self-satisfied smugness over Kerry's win?

The vast majority of us will be supporting Kerry regardless of who we supported in the primary. If someone has decided not to support Kerry, these types of posts will not change their mind. In fact, they will most likely have the opposite effect.

The only purpose to a post like this is to express smugness. It is really immature. Grow up and join the fight; stop spreading discord to satisfy your ego.

[Dhalgren]

71. Man! You are dead right!

.

[Evil_Dewers]

80. these types of posts will not change their mind

So you are saying these types of posts reinforce the infantile decisions others make?

You know what and whom I'm talking about. Here's some recent paraphrased examples:

'Well, I'll never vote for Kerry after what he and the DLC did to Dean.'

'I'm sticking with DK until he drops out, then I'm going Green. I could never support Kerry. He's just as bad as Bush.'

'I'm writing in Howard Dean's name in November.'

'I'm a Clarkie, and I'll never support Kerry. I could never vote for that man.'

[sangh0]

81. A bit contradictory

You urge us to drop the arm-chair psycologizing, and then follow itup by saying "The only purpose to a post like this is to express smugness...stop spreading discord to satisfy your ego."

My response - "You first"

[Dhalgren]

88. Oh, boohoo, boohoo

Kerry is your candidate and now you have buyers remorse. Well, cry me a river. Kerry can beat Bush - just have some faith!

[sangh0]

89. Well, someone could use some psychologizing!

.

[info being]

102. Please do tell us who here wants Bush to bury Kerry?

[sugarcookie]

110. See Post # 30

...but be sure to read the replies. The poster who started this thread just flushed his/her credibility.

[Evil_Dewers]

117. His credibility

Think of me as a benevolent Donald Rumsfeld--I will lie to teach you a lesson or if the lie is in the best interest of this forum.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

111. "To those who have reached the final stage of acceptance"

How wonderfully Orwellian of you.

TWL

[Evil_Dewers]

119. How wonderfully Orwellian of you.

Did you actually read Orwell since I believe you are misusing the term?

[maxanne]

118. I must be missing

out on the threads hoping for Bush to win. Have there been a lot of them? As many as the threads beating up fellow DU'ers for alleged failure to comply?

Beat em till they submit - a winning strategy for strengthening party unity.

[Evil_Dewers]

120. I must be missing out on the threads hoping for Bush to win

Nah, it isn't about Bush winning. It is all about Kerry losing.

There's a huuuuuuuuuuuugggggge difference.

[maxanne]

121. your original post

said some here want Bush to bury Kerry. Can you back up that ugly accusation?

[sugarcookie]

123. See post # 30

...but be sure to read the replies. The poster who started this thread just flushed his credibility.

[Evil_Dewers]

125. Read post #117

sugarcookie.

Man, I'm hungry. I'm craving a sugar cookie now.

It is a mistake to assume I had credibility in the first place.

[Evil_Dewers]

126. hey now, hey now, don't Dean, it's over, hey now, hey now

[Evil_Dewers]

124. Sure.

Read the posts of the "democrats" here who claim they cannot vote for Kerry in the GE because "he's a moderate," "he's Bush lite," "he's a corporate whore," etc...

Ask them who they think they will vote for (Kucinich write-in, Nader, Dean write-in, Clark write-in, whomever is the abyssmal Green Party lamb this go around) and ask if they think their protest vote will help elect George Bush.

Fuck principle, unless you want the Dem party to have the insignificance of the Libertarian party or the Green party or Communist party of America or the Constitution party or the Natural Law Party.

[KoKo]

128. You never provided a "Credible Link" to your Original Post! Where are

these posts? And, where are the posts here urging people not to vote for Kerry?

Dream on....this was nothing but "Flame Bait."

[Evil_Dewers]

129. this was nothing but "Flame Bait."

Ya think?

ROTFLMGDMFAO!

[maxanne]

132. again

for the comprehension impaired - you claim that people here want Bush to bury Kerry. You've presented no proo of that. You rambled on about those who don't support Kerry - but you have shown NO proof of anyone wanting Bush to win. You show no proof of Bush supporters here.

Hyperbole can be a dangerous tool, kinda like a boomerang sometimes.

[Evil_Dewers]

140. Ever try to catch a wooden boomerang?

It really hurts if you don't catch it correctly. Heck, it hurts a bit if you do catch it correctly.

That's why I don't even try.

This thread has served it's purpose and has led to some healthy debate (finally).

Nobody here wants Bush to bury Kerry. So please stop all the juvenile Kerry bashing.

I'm not telling anyone what to do--I'm just asking politely.

[maxanne]

147. I learned it

by watching you, Mr. Kettle.

[rbnyc]

127. I will vote for Kerry...

...in the GE. But I voted for DK in my state primary because primaries are for communicating values to party leaders. The reality you want me to accept is a little more complicated than with Kerry or against Kerry.

[RetroLounge]

156. Does anyone give a shit if you salute us?

I don't...

[Dying Eagle]

158. I will vote for..

"I will vote for Kerry because he is the best candidate" Me, Oct. 2003

"I will vote for Kerry because he is the best candidate" Me, March 5, 2004


get it...

[Moderator]

161. I am locking this thread.

Starting threads to "out" people is inappropriate and a rule violation.


DU Moderator