I guess I have no one left to believe in. John was my last reason to be a Democrat.It seems he too

[saracat]

is a lie.This is worse than John losing.

[asdjrocky]

1. I take exception at that remark saracat.

[Beaverhausen]

2. Sara - another repub in the white house would be the absolute worst thing

We cannot let McCain win this one. I'm hoping John is doing this for the good of our country.

[saracat]

5. I will not support Obama. I will work for downline candidates.

I see no difference between McCain and Obama. Sorry. I don't both are corporate Bush like creatures. And if Obama is the best the Democratic party can do, I have little respect for them as well.

[bpeale]

11. I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA

NEVER. my vote goes to Nader. and i frankly don't care what it costs the democratic party.

[Beaverhausen]

20. Believe me, I am with you. I don't like Obama either

but I don't think he would be as bad as McCain would be.

The whole system sucks.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

53. Saracat, I have been with you all along, since JE dropped out

You were giving voice to my thoughts and I was for the most part too bummed out to post on the subject. Remember we thought - KNEW - that he would NEVER drop out unless there were extenuating circumstances - we theorized it may be Elizabeth's health had taken a bad turn, or that he or his family were threatened, and to me at least was the possibility that he had been approached by one of the candidates to be their running mate.

I have HATED the threads started since then by "ex-Edwards supporters" telling of their conversion to Obama, and it made mw all the more staunch in my support for NO ONE. I have believed all along that the powers that be created this situation, where Obama and CLinton would be the only remaining candidates , in a seriously divisive battle, so that they could get away with stealing the election again.

Today though when I saw John Edwards standing there in front of those signs saying Change you can believe in, all of a sudden it meant something to me. I about started crying because I had a glimmer of hope for our country, for the first time in a long while. I DO think he will be the running partner, and if he is I can believe there will be a change in this country for the better.... Now if he isnt the running partner, I may go back in my hole. For now, though, I feel kinda happy... Just wanted to share that with you

[alteredstate]

161. Your words are wonderful

Lots of DU members supported a candidate who is no longer in the race. Now we must come together and unify the party. John Edwards' endorsement will give Barack Obama the push he needs to claim the nomination. I'm so happy that you have seen some light shining through the murky mess the primary race has become! I don't know if John Edwards will accept the VP slot, but no matter what he decides to do, his voice will be heard.

[cornermouse]

162. (sigh) again.

1. Obama is not yet the candidate. Trying to push and/or bully people in your candidate's name does NOT endear your candidate to them nor does it make it more likely that they will want to vote for him. Think about how would you feel if someone invaded the Obama group and started trying to push you into voting for Hillary.

2. I have not blindly followed anyone for the last 30 years. Why would I start blindly following you and Obama? And I'm not going to cast my vote for someone simply because Edwards tells me to.

[alteredstate]

163. I responded to eowyn_of_rohan's post

I don't think there's anything in my reply that suggests you should "blindly" follow me.

[cornermouse]

164. It's quite clear what you were doing.

It's also quite clear what you're not admitting to doing. Shouldn't you be sitting by your phone waiting for Obama to call?

[alteredstate]

165. Actually it's quite clear that you're wrong.

[cornermouse]

166. What's next?

Nanner nanner nu nu?

[Kittycat]

56. Great! Coat hanger parties for everyone then, right?

What is wrong with you? Get it together. I didn't like how JE was shut down by the media - or that he dropped out. But choosing to sit out the most important vote because you don't like that he endorsed the person that will be the Dem nominee is just bullshit.

After McCain appoints his judges to the lower courts and the SCOTUS - we'll remember to thank you. As will the young girl that gets raped by some freak, and can't do anything about it - or when his 100 year war plays on, and someone near and dear to your heart gets their draft papers... We'll thank you for being a true blue democrat - because when the time came, you decided to leave that box empty over pride.

No Saracat - I don't believe you'll actually leave that box unchecked. Why? Because YOU ARE a democrat first - and you're better than this. That blood runs true blue.

[cornermouse]

58. More browbeating from the Obama supporters.

More abuse.

[Kittycat]

59. I was an Edwards supporter as well.

I cheered him on, and never spoke ill of him. And I'm not browbeating, I'm speaking the truth - sorry if you don't like it. As a woman, sorry if I fear the thought of McCain getting to choose our next round of judges. Every woman should.

[cornermouse]

81. Obama hasn't come out of his closet to really support

abortion rights. On the contrary, that's yet another issue he has successfully avoided taking a stand on anywhere other than his official website. The coat hanger argument is a loser and for lack of a better colloquialism and if you have one that is better I'm open to suggestions you guys are, in effect, buying a pig in a poke.

[bpeale]

104. welcome to ignore

[Seabiscuit]

140. That's funny...

the poster you're addressing is the only "ignore" on my screen while reading this board.

[Two Americas]

187. no one should

No one should be a "Democrat first." That contradicts every principle upon which the party and the country were founded. It is just a label, coasting on achievements from the distant past. List the party's major achievements - they are all from the 30's. 40's, 50's, and 60's. That means that we have now had 40 years of the party drifting away from its principles and ideals, backing away from the battle for the people. The party left us, and it is a good thing that people start recognizing that. Attacking them and calling them disloyal is seeing things exactly backward. They are not leaving the party or being disloyal, they are waking up to the fact that the party has left us and is no longer loyal to the principles and ideals that are the only reason for being a Democrat in the first place.

We are resentful and critical of the right wingers when they say "my country right or wrong" or "America - love it or leave it!" in response to dissent. Why do the same principles not apply when it comes to party loyalty? I see many self-proclaimed Democrats who are more committed to their party than they are to their country, and more committed to their own feelings and comfort than they are to either. This is not politically healthy. It is an invitation to tyranny.

[SammyWinstonJack]

138. Obama reminds me of bu$h on many levels. And I am not happy about Edwards' endorsement of him,

either. x(

[Two Americas]

9. not sure about that

Not sure there is a connection, either.

Why does the right wing have so much power? They don't need to be in the White House, by the way. In some ways they can accomplish more from the outside, sabotaging everything and consolidating their power. The government is not the seat of power anymore, the corporate board room is. It is the weakness of the opposition that is the problem, whether they are in office or out.

For the "good of the country" always means for the "good of the few."

"The country" is the people. Saying that "sorry, the people lose, but it is for the good of the country" is nonsensical.

[saracat]

14. Exactly. God I feel like such and IDIOT! I certainly was taken in .Again. And personally.

John promised me he cared about healthcare. And he promised ALL those people in need.

[cindydivine]

3. Don't fret...

I know you are disappointed, but maybe this will help get everything back on track and we can shine the light on the GOP candidate...

I'm certain JRE has plenty more in store to keep us inspired.

[bpeale]

13. John just abandoned his message in my eyes. i no longer want to hear

ANYTHING he has to say. his words were meaningless. now is the time to find the candidate who means those words. and that candidate is Nader.

[saracat]

16. I don't think we have a candidate in this nation who means anything.

John pulled me back from cynicism and I was a moron. I actually believed him. And now he is endorsing "against" his OWN healthcare plan????

[bpeale]

17. i have absolutely no respect for him now. he needn't both to run

for dog catcher because i wouldn't vote for him now.

[cindydivine]

110. All this talk of soul selling... really??

[cindydivine]

117. All this talk of soul selling... really???

I understand that folks are hurt. I understand that folks feel betrayed. I understand that inspiration and trust are things that have to be earned… but, seriously, are we so juvenile that we cannot comprehend that sometimes things take place for the greater good? I, too, am bummed that Edwards endorsed, but I am certainly cognizant of the reasons why. Our party is ripping apart at the seems… hell bent of self destruction… with all of the passion that we feel, isn’t it best to take all of that energy and shine the light on McLame?? Or, should we keep just tearing each other apart and guarantee another 4-8 more years of this crap?

[Two Americas]

122. "hurt"

I find these characterizations of people as being "hurt" condescending and demeaning - a way to discount what they are saying by speculating about their emotional state. That is a subtle form of ad homninem attack - steering the discussion away from the message and onto the messenger. I also think that it is very destructive to personalize everything and make politics be all about how we each feel as individuals, what our personal choices and preferences are, what our emotional state may be. That divides us like nothing else does - much, much more than criticism of the party and the leaders ever could.

Your implication that people who don't agree with you are "juvenile" or that people expressing their opinions is "tearing each other apart and guarantee(ing) another 4-8 more years of this crap" are objectionable, as well. I happen to think that beating back the right wing absolutely requires that we have these discussions, and see no evidence that suppressing them is helpful in that cause.

What good does "shining the light on McCain" do? Does that win any votes? Advance any cause? Or is it just a tactic to discredit critics and suppress dissenting views? This is like avoiding and ignoring problems in one's own family by saying "look how bad the neighbors are!" It is false that there are those "focusing on McCain" and that this is good, and then those who criticize the party, and that is bad. The point of criticizing the party is to strengthen us in the fight against the right wing. Focusing on how bad the enemy is, and using that to suppress any discussion as to how we are failing in the fight, is not productive or constructive, let alone the only thing that we are to see as productive or constructive.

[bobbolink]

142. Calling people "juvenile" for being very understandably feeling betrayed is...

well, do you always resort to name-calling to "win"?

[cindydivine]

154. You are absolutely right...

Please know that I am not normally snotty by nature, and after re-reading my post I see that is exactly how I sounded. That was certainly not my intent and I hope very much that anyone I offended can accept my sincere apologies.

I mean nothing but the best in this forum and respect those that participate here.

[Two Americas]

174. thanks

That took some courage and humility. Much appreciated.

[bobbolink]

181. Thank you, cindydivine! And WELCOME to DU!

Your kind of graciousness is very welcome, indeed!

:toast: :bounce: :toast:

:yourock:

[saracat]

4. Sorry Rocky. But Obama is a farce and for John to endorse him is sickening.

I have to much respect for John's intelligence to think he is making an uninformed decision. Exactly what am I supposed to think about someone who endorses someone with Obama's background? I fouught really hard for John because I thought he cared about the poor and the middle class.This would seem to indicate the opposite to me. Perhaps I am wrong but the evidence seems to indicate something is either amiss or John doesn't share the beliefs I thought he did.

I feel he is slapping the voters in WV in the face as well as the nearly 8% who continued to support him. I feel like my face was slapped. I hate this feeling but it is honestly how I feel.

[MissDeeds]

6. I feel the same way, saracat

One more disappointment in a long, long line of disappointments. The WV voters who stood up for John yesterday must feel really let down today.

[flyarm]

91. i am with you gals all the way..i am disgusted..Edwards just sold his soul..

but my soul is not for sale.

you don't want to know the names i called Edwards last night..well it is not the last time Edwards lied..he lied when he said in SC that he was in it to the convention..and that is when he got another $1000.00 check from me..i spent a fortune going to Iowa and Sc for him..well fuck him..i wish i had given all that money to the poor Edwards talks about because he is now in my book a con artist..and i don't care who endorses..jesus could endorse Obama i will never ever ever vote for that cheater..and that con artist..there isn't enough money or reasoning for me to every support that crook! and Unlike Edwards..i can't be bought.

fly

sorry i won't be replying as i rarely ever come to DUOBAMALAND anymore..i just came to check how the edards folks were taking this..but i won't be back anytime soon.

[MissDeeds]

94. Good to hear from you, fly

I was thinking about you yesterday in the wake of all this. JE has proven to be just another politician. I thought he was a Democrat who would stand up to the status quo and would not fold like cheap tin foil. Apparently, I was wrong. Why couldn't he just maintain the moral high ground like Al Gore and stay out of it?

I would like to have heard the discussions in the Edwards' house over the past day or two. Elizabeth can't be pleased. Her silence speaks volumes.

[Two Americas]

7. and then there were three...

It will be you, ClericJohn, and yours truly. We will be the last three left standing. Watch the rest start falling now, one by one.

[Two Americas]

8. ooops..... four

MissDeeds.

:hug:

[bpeale]

15. your forgot me too Two Americas

[MissDeeds]

21. Thanks, Two Americas

Glad to be in such good company.

I am just stunned. I was determined to write John Edwards in for the GE, and had even convinced several members of my family to do the same. Now, I have no one to vote for. This is really the last straw. Tomorrow I will change my party affiliation to unaffiliated. There is no one left to believe in.

[balantz]

18. Hey!

I haven't fallen. I am disappointed.

But now that he has done this thing he might as well make the best of it.

I was already disillusioned. I think this whole thing is a farce and a sham. I would like to see the government overturned, so to speak.

I don't personally condone J.E. for his decision. But he made it. I have no choice but to believe that he is doing the best he can, whether I agree or not. He is deciding to operate within the broken system.

I am fucking powerless in all of this and have been sold down the river. Why should this maneuver shock me beyond a short feeling of bitterness and disappointment. I have bigger things to worry about. Like buying a gallon of expensive milk and a pair of shoes for my growing boy.

I hope you don't think you are the last noble hero standing or something!

[ClericJohnPreston]

65. I'll weigh in here and below....

I truly am in rarified company with Two Americas, saracat, bpeale, missdeeds and balantz, the latter understanding that this is all about the big "C" : CORPORATISM.

I have waxed on here at DU, what seems like a century ago, about Corporatism, the root evil of our political system. It isn't about people, it isn't anything but platitudes, empty at that, when Obama talks about the "people". The "People" are nothing but a collective of consumer assets, to be soaked and wrung dry, until there is nothing left, but a shattered husk. This is a modern feudal system, no more , no less.

We need a correction so severe, it will take nearly the complete disenfranchisement of voters, as politicians don't listen anymore. It will take complete disillusionment, when Obama serves his corporate masters, rather than the "people" he courts, so cynically.

I am a confirmed Democrat turning Anarchist. Sometimes, anarchy isn't such a bad word. My anarchy is to free the "people" from the tyranny of CORPORATIONS. They must be undone and their ENABLERS, our political parties and the "people" they so sorely use.

I'm frankly shocked by the level of NAIVETE on this board. Those who comment about McCain and the GOP, have merely bought into THE MATRIX, this illusion of difference between the Parties. Get this through your heads....THERE IS NONE!!!! As long as those who are pulling the strings, truly dictate the course of events, Parties don't matter, you will get corporate sympathetic judges. I already see that in the Federal Courts everyday.

WAKE UP "PEOPLE". DON'T BE DRONES!!!!!!

[Horse with no Name]

87. You won't see me falling for that crap

I know better.

[Donnachaidh]

95. I'm NOT falling -- and I'm outraged.

Even IF there was an offer for JRE to be VP -- is he really going to become the cleanup act behind the *anointed one*?

I won't vote for the cardboard cutout candidate. Even if JRE endorses him. This smacks of too many backroom deals.

[MissDeeds]

97. I t does indeed smack of backroom deals

Even the timing was orchestrated to have the most effect. Just after Obama got his butt handed to him in WV, the headline quickly became the Edwards' endorsement.

The "anointed one" is an excellent moniker. BO was picked (selected) to make the keynote address at the convention in '04, and then, after less than one term in the Senate, spends eighteen months of that term running for president - with the endorsement of some heavyweights like the Kennedys. We've had eight years of a president who was "selected" for us. Look how well that worked out.

[bpeale]

114. i'll be left standing too Two Americas

[Seabiscuit]

189. Four... I've been with you three every step of the way (even though I don't post here often).

I have no doubt you're all far more familiar to me than I am to you.

[ClericJohnPreston]

190. I know you seabiscuit

and never doubted your commitment to TRUE liberalism, or to the ideals of that label.

[balantz]

192. Hey, who is the fellow in the photo?

I hope I didn't offend you with my response the other day in the post below. I laugh a lot at things, even if they weren't intended to be humorous. It must come from a habit of looking for humor in things. A survival mechanism I guess.

I appreciate your true patriotism CJP.

[ClericJohnPreston]

193. Christian Bale

as Cleric John Preston, in an under-appreciated, but cult-followed movie, "Equilibrium."

I like the theme of the movie. A totalitarian regime being brought down by one it's former enforcers. It is a "V for Vendetta" type movie, with a healthy dose of liberating anarchy. It teaches a worthy philosophy, never to blindly trust authority, no matter how superficially benign. Question everything.

True patriots aren't blind lemmings or followers. That is anathema in a true Democracy.

[balantz]

194. I will check the movie out.

Thanks CJP.

Here's an old Edwards kick for the corporate boys in the house

:kick: :hide:

[Two Americas]

191. it's a movement!

Too bad none of us can count lol. I think we are up to 12 now or something Seabiscuit - well on our way to a million.

I follow your posts and they are very good and much appreciated.

[bpeale]

10. well, this dem will become an independent. John was my last reason

to be a dem too. i am completely through with the democratic party. the only candidate that addresses John's platform is now Nader.

[Greylyn58]

12. dupe...n/t

[Greylyn58]

19. I'm not happy about the endorsement

but I'm not going to throw John under the bus for doing it.

As much as I dislike Obama, the thought of another Repug getting into the White House frightens me more at this point. So I guess if The Big O is our nominee, I will simply hold my nose come November and vote.

I also may puke afterwards.

Right now my biggest concern is taking care of myself and nursing Sheridan back to health...and paying the honking big vet bill I now have.

Sigh.....

[bpeale]

23. i am NEVER holding my nose again when i vote, no matter what the cost

i will never again reward a democrat, ANY democrat, for bad behavior. NEVER.

[ChiciB1]

36. You Speak For Me... JRE Still Shines In My World & I Have To Believe That

what he's done is because he feels he can be more helpful on the "inside" rather on the "outside" looking in. I don't know and probably will never know, but I'm still voting for Edwards in November. Having said that, a THIRD PARTY is my fondest wish!!!

Perhaps it would be best if I said NOTHING right now because my feelings are and have been "raw" for so long!

[spooky3]

22. I prefer to trust and respect John Edwards

I don't know what conversations he has had with Obama and what support Obama has promised for the poverty initiative, health care and other things that are so important to JRE.

Regardless of my own preference for Clinton vs. Obama, I prefer to believe JRE that he is doing what he thinks is truly in the best interests of the country and in the best interests of defeating McCain.

I also respect the views of others here who disagree with me and draw different conclusions.

[Two Americas]

24. no problem

Here is how I see it - I can trust the motives and intentions of the politicians, or I trust saracat, MissDeeds, bpeale, balantz and the millions of people out there who have been sold out by the Democratic party.

The politicians, including Edwards, are "somebodies." They have wealth, they have power, they have status. That is the only reason to stand with them and turn our backs on the people - because the people are all "nobodies," including the allies here I mentioned, and who cares what they say? We should not have to choose - I would rather that we didn't. But we are being forced to choose.

The reason I first came here a while back was because I was seeing something extraordinary. Everyday people were listening to Edwards. People who normally ignored politics as irrelevant to their lives and their struggles were paying attention. They have all gone back to sleep now when it comes to politics, and I fear that this is just how the people who control the party want it to be. They will not be falling in love with Obama - what a cruel joke, what an obscenity. They won't be lining up against the people in West Virginia.

At that time I made a commitment, with my first post in this forum. I said that first and foremost I stood with the struggling and suffering and forgotten people, and all of those sliding into poverty and despair or a couple of paychecks away from catastrophe. Secondly, I stood for the traditional principles and ideals of the Democratic party. Thirdly, I stood with those friends and comrades who were fighting for those first two, and only after all of that did I have any loyalty to a political party or a candidate, and only so long as they too were committed to those things.

Toward the end of the Civil War, the soldiers had a saying. When they got a rah rah pitch from an officer or a politician they said "that won't play." They were all through with the false promises, with the emotional appeals, with the betrayals, and didn't want to hear any more "inspirational" speeches nor be given false hope nor told what they should believe, nor did they want to jump on any more bandwagons that were all fluff and no substance.

I say now to the Democratic party and those who insist on defending it and beating down all critics - that won't play.

[bobbolink]

34. .

:rofl:

[quakerboy]

61. And the Millions of people

Who would have felt just as sold out by Edwards and the party if he had instead given Hillary a second wind after WV?

I am a nobody. Yet only the ones you agree with count. So my belief that JE made a good choice, and that he probably had a very valid reason for making the choice he did, a reason that goes to the betterment of Nobodies like myself living under the poverty line will mean nothing compared to the discouragment of a few others.

[Two Americas]

69. you should be honest

Introducing Clinton and then personalizing it is not an honest response to what I said. It is just an attempt at re-structuring the argument, probably because you don't want to hear or accept what I said, not because you necessarily disagree with it. I imagine that you do agree with me, you just don't want to. It is more comfortable emotionally to hope and trust and seek the illusion of security in the herd.

You may want to believe that what is happening will help the nobodies, but you cannot make the case or you would, and all opinions are not automatically equally valid. You are free to hope. I am free to continue trying to show you that your hope is misplaced. Make your case. I will make my case.

You contrast my opinion - which you characterize as "discouragement" and therefore inconsequential and to be dismissed - with your opinion, which is based on hope that Edwards knows what he is doing and so we should just be quiet like good little children and trust that the grown-ups - the powerful and the wealthy - will take care of us, and then don't bother to support your opinion beyond that.That is not honest. You implicitly admit that your opinion is based solely on hope and trust. Even if my opinion were merely a matter of "discouragement" - and you haven't and can't make the case that it is - why is your hope to be accepted as more legitimate and valid than my "discouragement?"

[quakerboy]

70. You should be honest

You said you can choose who to trust. And you chose to trust a certain set of "nobodies". But you gave no reason why You would trust that set of "nobodies" over another set of "nobodies" who are traveling a different path. You set a false Dichotomy that it was "nobodies" vs "somebodies". That is simply not true. That is what I took issue with, and you have not addressed it at all.

The rest of your post is conjecture about what I believe, think or espouse.

[Two Americas]

73. it is quite simple

What I said was that the choice is between trusting each other first, or trusting the politicians first. Obviously, we could go around in circles here - you could say, as you have "well I am just a nobody, and I trust the politicians in this case, yet you say we shouldn't trust the politicians, so by saying that you are saying that you aren't trusting me and you are discounting me, so I guess you are just siding with only those who agree with you and you aren't really honest."

Let me give you an example of how your line of reasoning has been used historically: as an apology for union busting. The argument goes something like this - "oh sure what those union organizers say about getting our rights and everything sounds good, and they are saying they are for the worker. But I am a worker who likes the boss. Why isn't my opinion equally valid? I guess the union organizers are not really for the worker - because I am a worker. Why don't they help me get along with the boss? I guess they are only on the side of the workers who agree with them."

Now, that worker could argue that kissing up to the boss is a better way to improve the conditions of the workers than organizing would be, if that is what he believes. And the other workers could listen to and consider his argument, and no doubt reject it. But he doesn't do that, because he knows that it won't be successful. So he shifts the focus of the discussion - he tries to spread doubt about the motives of the organizers by suggesting that they are not really for the workers, because he is a worker and they are not supporting him in his pro-management views. Rather than argue his pro-management view honestly and openly, he tried to manipulate people with misdirection using an illogical argument.

In any case, that is one small part of what I said, which you picked out, mis-characterized, and then knocked down.

[quakerboy]

77. The basis of this

is John Edwards(somebody) endorsing Barack Obama(somebody). Over the Ops prefered choice(Somebody).


How does that have anything do do with your argument? This is not the somebodies versus the nobodies. This is the somebodys VS the somebodys, with us nobodies as a supporting cast. This is whether you prefer to work for boss A or boss B. That boss C prefers boss A has little or nothing to do with whether we unionize and get our rights.

[Two Americas]

78. false assumptions

You are assuming that it is all a matter of personal preference and favorites - personal choices and desires. That is not true for some. I wish it were not true for all.

You are assuming that everyone advocates for a candidate because they "support" the candidate - which means like or identify with or idolize that candidate. This is not true for all, and in particular I do not believe it is true with the OP.

You are assuming that all of us see ourselves as "supporting cast" to the stars, and that this is the only way to see ourselves.

You are assuming that democracy is like choosing our boss, rather than like union organizing.

My entire point is to encourage people to stop thinking in those subservient terms, regardless of which personality or celebrity they "like."

[cornermouse]

123. I would have strongly preferred that Edwards not endorse anyone.

[quakerboy]

124. I understand that. I empathise.

If his endorsement had gone to Hillary, I would be the one with that preference. But if I had been in the Edwards core, his endorsement that went counter my preference would not destroy my commonalities with the Democratic party. Nor would I post in support of that concept, with highminded but empty language aimed at reenforcing divisions that we create among ourselves.

[cornermouse]

125. There is absolutely nothing that irritates me more than

someone who tries to manipulate and use me. Find someone else to bully and harass.

[Two Americas]

130. awful, just awful

You say that "if his endorsement had gone to Hillary, I would be the one with that preference." That is so manipulative and dishonest. Cornermouse, and most of the other people on this thread were saying that long before he endorsed anyone. Yet here you snidely imply that it is only because of who he endorsed that people are saying that, and you admit that were the situation reversed you would be doing the same thing that you are criticizing others for doing. That demonstrates a complete lack of integrity.

Then you claim that for a petty reason - people not getting their preference - they have destroyed their "commonalities with the Democratic party." What an unwarranted slur on the others here. Just because people do not agree with you, and your notion as to what being a Democratic means, that does not mean that they are destroying any commonality. What is "commonality" anyway? Group think? By challenging group think - is that how we are destroying "commonality?" Your opinion as to what this commonality should be? By daring to offer dissenting opinions, and spoiling the unity of thought and feelings?

But now we have the fighting words, which I challenge you to defend - "nor would I post in support of that concept, with high minded but empty language aimed at reinforcing divisions that we create among ourselves."

Who has posted in opposition to "commonalities with the Democratic party?" Who has used "high minded but empty language" - could you define that please and have the guts to stand up and defend that statement? Then you say that you would not post this idea. You did not have that idea in your head before, nor now, so why would you post it under any circumstances? Some of us have had that idea in our heads for quite a while now, and have been continually posting about it. Your insinuation that people are posting these ideas only now because of recent events is false and malicious.

Why don't you challenge the ideas themselves - if you can - rather than talking about what is wrong with the people posting the ideas and speculating about their motives, and slandering them?

And now the supreme irony; you say that the remarks of others here are "aimed at reinforcing divisions that we create among ourselves." Yet, as I have shown, it is your remarks that are hostile and divisive, and you are the one posting about what you imagine the thinking to be of others - incorrectly. So who is it that is aiming at "reinforcing and creating divisions?"

[quakerboy]

146. I made an assumption

Apparently a false one, that it was due to who he endorsed that they regret the endorsement. I apologize. That was wrong of me.

On edit, thank you for pointing that out to me.

[Two Americas]

147. thanks

No problem. Saracat has been outspoken as a Clinton supporter, but has not proselytized or hassled any of us about that. I say she should be free to speak her mind here. She is no more or no less free to speak her mind or to criticize a candidate or declare a preference than anyone else is. My objection is to people coming here and trying to evangelize for a candidate, or tell others they are not free to criticize a candidate. As far as I am concerned, people should also be free to say that they are reluctant to vote for a candidate, or unhappy about voting for a candidate, without being called traitors or Republicans. A healthy democracy absolutely depends upon us being willing to make and to hear criticism of our politicians.

[tnlefty]

32. Thanks for stating the way that I feel much better than I

could. McSame just isn't an option for me and when Dennis dropped out, followed by JRE, I had to make a decision. I still voted for JRE on Super Tuesday and I listened and watched what the two left standing, who were always at the bottom of my list, said and did.

If Elizabeth made an endorsement for Hillary tomorrow I wouldn't trash talk her.

[spooky3]

47. The idea of a McSame Presidency overwhelms just about anything else, for me.

:hi: tnlefty

[Two Americas]

76. is it fear, then?

Is it mostly fear that is driving us? That is understandable, but should we let ourselves be manipulated by that fear? The Democratic party politicians don't share our fear. They are not personally impacted, they are not very motivated or aggressive in confronting the source of the fear - the danger posed by corporate domination as advanced by their right wing henchman in politics.

With the great danger, and the very rational reason to feel the fear we are feeling, is it not even more frightening to entrust our safety to those who seem so cavalier and indifferent to the danger?

We are not really being asked to support them, you know. We are being asked to suspend criticism for their performance - and it is their performance that is the problem, that is putting us in greater danger. We are being asked to get in line - or else the Republicans are coming to get us!!! We are being asked to exert no pressure on them, to say no critical word, to demand nothing in return for our support. We are also being asked to beat up on and silence our own should any of us dare to step out of line and criticize the politicians.

All of that is what scares me, not the Republicans.

[cornermouse]

82. I'm starting to wonder if its a nationwide do-it-yourself version of

Survivor or Big Brother.

[spooky3]

89. No, it's not fear.

I think we need to recognize the realities of the messiness of politics. Politics is a business of compromise. In addition to flawed candidates and a diverse electorate, we have a flawed system. None of this can be "cured" by one person or in one large step. However, the fact that there are flaws does not mean improvements, even substantial improvements, are impossible.

The first priority is to get someone in the White House who is a substantial improvement over the current squatter. While I would have preferred for that to be Edwards, for whatever reasons, he did not get enough primary votes. Either of our two remaining candidates is FAR superior to McCain.

We need to get more Democrats in the houses as well. Then work on the corporate power issue.

[redqueen]

101. Hear hear!

"I think we need to recognize the realities of the messiness of politics."

Exactly. No major reform... nothing that has benefitted the people... none of it comes from the top down. It's always bottom up. A charismatic leader helps, but the people have to do the heavy lifting.

:toast:

[Two Americas]

119. absolutely, I agree

There is far, far too little understanding about "the realities of the messiness of politics," the flawed system, flawed candidates, the diverse electorate, the need to compromise and the fact that no one person can cure the ills. You just described exactly the problems I see with what is happening and why I am objecting.

I disagree that the first priority is to install someone in the White House who is marginally better, Vote for the Democrat - I am not and would not tell anyone not to do that. That isn't the issue. What do we do in the meantime, what do we discuss? That is the issue. If everything between now and the day we pull a lever is going to be about pulling that lever - and that is what people are asking us to do: not merely to vote Democrat, but to have that control and circumscribe all of our thinking and discussion in the meantime. When we do that, we cause exactly what you are worried about - we ignore the the realities of the messiness of politics, the need for compromise, the flawed system, the need to compromise and the fact that no one person can cure the ills.See the problem? We are going in circles with that.

Saying that any of our candidates are far superior to the Republican candidate is not very meaningful. The Republican candidates are actually superior - they do a better job of serving their constituency, the wealthy and powerful few, then our candidates do of serving their constituency - the rest of the people in the country. Our candidates are not superior - this isn't a job interview. Our candidates represent a different constituency - or claim that they do.

Saying that the Democrats are better than the Republicans is like saying that the fire fighters are better than the arsonists. If the whole country is on fire, and the fore fighters are inert and lethargic, then actually the arsonists are better - at what they do. We would not excuse a fire department that didn't do its job by saying "at least they are better than the arsonists."

[medeak]

25. had to check in

and see what the militant Hillary supporters were saying...can't believe it...some of you people are not dems in my eyes..

[cornermouse]

29. I have voted democratic for the last 25 years.

I don't like Obama. Does that make me a not dem in your eyes? If so, I'll struggle to live with that burden.

[medeak]

30. I gave my vote to Hillary when Edwards wasn't viable

but have moved on...it's the bigger picture friend... and I have voted dem for 37 yrs.

I hate the Hillary haters and I hate the Obama haters. My own Mother is not voting for the first time in her 80 yrs. Will never understand the emotionalism here.

[cornermouse]

42. It's not emotionalism to see that Obama

doesn't have enough job experience for the position he's trying for, spends time talking vaguely about change but still manages to vote for funding for the war and talk favorably about republican positions on issues with occasional injections of "reaching across the aisle", and in spite of what his supporters think has never really had to face up to any really strong attacks on his issues or his character so we have no idea whether he'll be able to stand up to the attacks or not.

[Critters2]

62. "Reaching across the aisle"!! I hate that phrase!

And politicians who use it!! :banghead:

[Two Americas]

44. look out, here comes that "unity" we have been hearing about

I am not a Clinton supporter. Did you want to debate something? I would be happy to discuss anything with you. Or did you come here to attack people? Not enough ugliness in the primaries forum for you?

I don't see any "militant Clinton supporters" here and I know everyone pretty well. Challenging their credentials as good Dems is out of line - for any good Dem, that is.

[Inspired]

26. Remember that this is the John Edwards supporter group.

And I support him 100% in this decision.

[Two Americas]

46. no doubt

There is no doubt in my mind that a new round of attacks and purging will go on now, and that many of us will be but the latest people to be told to love it or leave it, and made to ne unwelcome in the party. For the time being, may we discuss our opinions while we still can? Or is there a big rush to purge us?

[medeak]

27. apparently you missed Edwards and Obama double teaming

Hillary in debates. Also new I hadn't heard tonight..Edwards turned to Obama in commercial and told him to "step it up"...

[TexasBushwhacker]

28. Two words - SUPREME COURT

No matter how bad you think Obama is, how inexperienced, how close he is to McCain in ideology, there is no way he would make the same choices for Supreme Court nominees. Stevens will definitely be retiring, and Ginsberg will likely retire in the next 4 years. With McCain in the White House, Scalia may go ahead and retire as well, knowing that he would be replaced with a younger version of himself who could assault our civil rights for another 20 or 30 years. Two, or possibly three new members of the SCOTUS; who do you want to choose them?

And then there's Iraq ..........

[cornermouse]

31. He supports school choice

and quite a few of traditional republican positions on issues. This is an empty threat for a lot of people.

[medeak]

35. close to McCain in ideology?

LOL!!! you have GOT to be kidding? Hillary and Obama's stands are nearly identical???? Pray tell can you back that up someway?

[TexasBushwhacker]

43. I was responding to Saracat, who said

"I see no difference between McCain and Obama."

I DO see a difference. Not as much as I would like, but enough that I will still vote in November for the Democratic candidate, be it Obama or Clinton. I'm in Texas, so how much of a difference that will make remains to be seen.

BTW, Rick Noriega has an EXCELLENT chance at giving John Cornyn a pink slip. If you want to support any specific senatorial candidates, please consider him.

http://www.ricknoriega.com/

[bpeale]

106. well, i don't see any difference either. both of them make me sick.

[Two Americas]

40. red herring

The Democrats could have stopped the last two SCOTUS appointees. This is a symptom of just how weak the party is when we have to fall back on the SCOTUS argument. Had we taken the stand that some of us are now ready to take a decade ago, we wouldn't be in this mess.

In any case, this is not really about how people vote. It is a charade. I have said for months that I will vote for the nominee - the lesser of two evils, just as we have been doing for decades - and one would think that would be the end of it. But it isn't, because the forced vote loyalty tests are a lie. No one really cares how I vote, they care what I say. "Vote for the nominee or you are helping the Republicans" really means "stop criticizing the Democrats, stop telling the truth." If you don't tell the truth no one asks how you are going to vote. When you do tell the truth, people try to shut you up even if you promise to vote for the nominee. The whole thing is highly coercive and suppressive, under the false flag of promoting "unity" and "beating the Republicans." People don't want to hear things that make them uncomfortable, and that is why they try to force these loyalty tests on us and use fear mongering tactics about SCOTUS and the like.

[bpeale]

105. AND WITHOUT THE RULE OF LAW WHO GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT!

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

[shimmergal]

37. i'm disappointed too; it upset me terribly.

My reaction came close to hearbreak.

But my response is not to be disillusioned with John, at least not yet. The speech he gave was so full of fire and passion, and so gracious---such a contrast to Obama's cool, COLD demeanor and his absolute refusal to tell us anything he'd try to do that would help ordinary people. I think it makes Obama look bad in contrast. And his supporters are one of the rudest bunch of people we're likely to encounter, with their boos interrupting JRE's speech. I just have to hang in there and trust that Edwards has valid reasons for doing it.

I also noticed that while he listed many good qualities of Hillary's, I didn't hear him say anything similar about Obama. All he said was refer to possible change "under President Barack Obama" a few times. Was this unconscious, or was he trying to get across a subtle message here?

What I'll do? I don't know. I've met Nader and there's no way I could vote for him, on a character basis alone. IF Obama picks either Edwards or Clinton as his VP running-mate, I can go ahead and vote for him. Who knows what the possibilities of that office might be, especially after Cheney has worked his evil magic? (Not that I expect either of them to do evil with it, but maybe to have a new measure of power.) If he picks somebody else, I won't decide right now, but just work for downticket candidates, esp. Dina Titus who has a real chance to replace the Bush robot Jon Porter in a neighboring district. And I'll wait and see what the polls are saying about Nevada close to the time. If my vote isn't likely to matter to the Democrats, maybe Gravel, on the slight chance that he pulls off the Libertarian gig.

WHY is Obama so obstinate about any concrete plans? It scares the hell out of me.

[redqueen]

102. deleted

[PresidentObama]

38. Stop whining because he didn't pick Hillary.

Just because he picked Obama doesn't mean he's a 'lie'

Get overself...

[Two Americas]

41. rude and insulting

I most strongly object to you saying that people are "whining" and need to "get over themselves." We have been remarkably free of snarky little adolescent put downs here, and your post sticks out like a sore thumb.

[Inspired]

45. No, what is rude and insulting is saracat accusing Edwards of lying.

If someone doesn't like John's endorsement to the point of calling him a liar, then maybe they should continue the sentiment on the Clinton supporters forum. Just sayin'......

[cornermouse]

49. saracat has been here for quite some time.

Since we are apparently checking credentials and bona fides now, where were you?

[Inspired]

79. Well until the end of January I was working my ass off for John Edwards.

I've been supporting him since the end of 2003. Do you want my credentials? I'm only a volunteer supporter but here's a list of some of the things I've been involved with.

Polk County Coordinator for the John Edwards for President Campaign.
Precinct Captain for 212 in West Des Moines, IA as well as captain for precincts 314 and 312 during the Kerry/Edwards campaign.
Member of the Iowa Women for Edwards.
I put in hundred of hours of volunteer time in Iowa, which included canvassing, door knocking, etc.
Captain of the Polk County Democrats chapter of One Corps.
I was honored to be asked to introduce Elizabeth at an event in West Des Moines. I assume I was chosen because I was so INVOLVED in the campaign.
I was in the first TV ad Edwards played in Iowa. Around a year ago. It is called We the People - Iowa. Go to YouTube and search for it.
I spent the day on Labor Day with a national ABC news crew. The campaign chose ME to be the Iowa representative. They were following me around as part of a feature about Iowans who spend a great deal of their spare time involved with politics. I even got to walk with John in the Labor Day parade as they filmed me.
I was given a VIP pass to be on the stage with Edwards many times, including his speech at the Iowa caucus. Again, I assume this was because I was so INVOLVED.
I participated in several focus groups.

The list really does go on and on. Where have you been?

**edited for spelling correction

[bpeale]

108. take your critical ass elsewhere. welcome to ignore. you have nothing to say

that i want to hear.

[Inspired]

151. What the hell are you talking about in your reply to my post

that was a reply to cornermouse? Do you think I give a crap if you put me on ignore? You aren't a part of my LIFE. Why would I give a shit? Especially when you make NO SENSE.

[bpeale]

107. by endorsing obama, john has shown that he cares not for the poor or working class

and that's wny i say he lied. to support someone who is NOT for the poor or working class means that your supposed values mean nothing. its just rhetoric.

[PresidentObama]

48. What's rude is Saracat's fake outrage accusing Edwards of lying.

Total bullshit.

[cornermouse]

50. You're wearing an Obama avatar...

[PresidentObama]

51. I'm a former Edwards and Clinton supporter. Your point?

[cornermouse]

52. I would think my point is pretty clear...

[PresidentObama]

55. ...Nope...Go on....

[cornermouse]

57. Leave saracat alone.

And quit trying to beat us into compliance.

[redqueen]

112. The point is ANYONE who supports Obama is demonized here.

And now that JRE has endorsed him, guess what...

[Two Americas]

120. slander

No one has come in here aggressively pushing Clinton and insulting and attacking people. Had they, they would have gotten the same reception that some Obama supporters have gotten.

Many of us are not Clinton supporters, but you and others are determined to make it an all or nothing for us or against us fight. By forcing every discussion into a for or against Obama argument, that frees you up to be hostile and suppressive and have an excuse for doing that. Ironically, your behavior illustrates and demonstrates exactly the thing you are supposedly arguing against.

[redqueen]

121. Bullshit. Once again.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=257x10044

[Two Americas]

54. I don't give a damn

I am going to defend saracat, and if you want to attack her do it out in the cesspool.

I do not think "lie" is a word that we should be forbidden to use about politicians - that word could have come in pretty useful over the last few years - nor do I think that supporting a candidate means worship them or idolize them or never utter a harsh word about them. Edwards said he was in the race 'til the end - many of us took him at his word. Should we not have? Then why should we know be cajoled to take any politician at their word? And if we don't take them at their word, how would that be consistent with your "speak no evil about politicians I like" doctrine?

Apparently, we are not to take them at their word, and yet pretend that we do - depending upon what is best for their careers; that is, if we worship them as idols. Some "support" that is. More like cognitive dissonance than support.

[redqueen]

111. "We have been remarkably free of snarky little adolescent put downs here"

Oh bull fucking shit.

Your best buddy CJP is an expert at them, but you don't have a problem with THOSE, do you?

:puke:

[Catchawave]

60. wrong forum....most of us wanted him to remain neutral

til the end. This has nothing to do with Hillary or her supporters.

[Creideiki]

68. Nah. I wanted him to pick "None of the Above"

I wanted him to get a good primetime convention speech that might shake the halls of power.

[Catchawave]

39. I think JRE just wanted Obama's

mailing list for his new Half in Ten and College for All efforts :evilgrin:

I'm trying to think of this endorsement helping John and his projects more than John helping Barry.

[PatGund]

63. You have my sympathy......

I went though a period simular to this when the person I wanted to run, (Gen. Wes Clark), not only didn't run but endorsed someone who I felt was a horrible choice.

But, because of the respect I had for him, I looked at his choice again. And while I still don't much care for Sen. Clinton, I decided I could vote for her if she got the nomination. Maybe not comfortably, but I could.

Of the ones running, Sen. Edwards and Gov. Richardson were my two favourites. Both of whom have endorsed someone I felt had good intentions but little experience.

Gov. Richardson's endorsement of Sen. Obama forced me to look at him again. He's not my first choice, but I did end up feeling he would be better than Sen. Clinton if he got the nomination.

Sen. Edwards' endorsement today has reaffirmed that feeling. And given me hope that the voices of those I felt would be better suited for the job will still be heard in an Obama presidency

I understand and sympathize with your disappointment. And I wish you well in your handling of it - even if I may not agree with the decisions you end up making.

Best of luck.

[saracat]

64. Thank you. I appreciate your understanding.

[ClericJohnPreston]

66. Just in case you missed my response buried above

I truly am in rarified company with Two Americas, saracat, bpeale, missdeeds and balantz, the latter understanding that this is all about the big "C" : CORPORATISM.

I have waxed on here at DU, what seems like a century ago, about Corporatism, the root evil of our political system. It isn't about people, it isn't anything but platitudes, empty at that, when Obama talks about the "people". The "People" are nothing but a collective of consumer assets, to be soaked and wrung dry, until there is nothing left, but a shattered husk. This is a modern feudal system, no more , no less.

We need a correction so severe, it will take nearly the complete disenfranchisement of voters, as politicians don't listen anymore. It will take complete disillusionment, when Obama serves his corporate masters, rather than the "people" he courts, so cynically.

I am a confirmed Democrat turning Anarchist. Sometimes, anarchy isn't such a bad word. My anarchy is to free the "people" from the tyranny of CORPORATIONS. They must be undone and their ENABLERS, our political parties and the "people" they so sorely use. This is a tall task. Most don't even perceive the truth of our economics.

I'm frankly shocked by the level of NAIVETE on this board. Those who comment about McCain and the GOP, have merely bought into THE MATRIX, this illusion of difference between the Parties. Get this through your heads....THERE IS NONE!!!! As long as those who are pulling the strings, truly dictate the course of events, Parties don't matter, you will get corporate sympathetic judges. I already see that in the Federal Courts everyday.

WAKE UP "PEOPLE". DON'T BE DRONES!!!!!!

[Inspired]

80. I'm not a drone and John Edwards is not a liar. n/t

[ClericJohnPreston]

92. Res Ipsa loquitur

:)

Case closed.

[Shakespeare]

169. Oh, I don't really think you're in a position to make that pronouncement.

A little odd for someone proclaiming to be an Edwards supporter.

[Lilith Velkor]

118. Welcome to the Black Bloc, brother

Remember to carry a bandanna soaked in apple cider vinegar in a plastic baggie - it helps when the gas blows your way.

Or, if you are dextrous, a potholder glove - so you can throw the canisters back at the cops.

[Creideiki]

67. Actually, I'm not a Democrat first

I'm a progressive first. I've got my core issues: education, health care, poverty, and civil rights. If the Democrats are going to put someone into the White House that will triangulate and veto from the Right any progressive legislation on those issues, then why would I support that person?

Now, I've got great downline candidates in the Democratic Party here, and will be supporting them 100%. Hopefully that's enough, because Barack's going to have to pick a serious progressive as his VP or it doesn't matter to me who's in office.

I can promise I won't advocate another presidential candidate here (edit: nor will I say a negative word here about the eventual nominee)--hopefully that will keep the "ban everyone who disagrees with me" groupies happy.

[earth mom]

71. I'm heartsick over this turn of events too. What I don't get is WHY NOW?

What is the hurry? Why is everyone trying to get this all decided in a nanosecond? First they push Edwards out as soon as possible, then they whine 24/7 about Hillary getting out when it's been a close race ever since Edwards left. Sorry, but kicking Hillary to the curb does NOT mean an automatic vote for Obama. NO WAY.

Anyone who is paying attention can see that Obama is all hype and totally full of it and a corporatist through and through. I'll NEVER forget how Obama praised the Reagan era. It made me sick to my stomach because the service economy Reagan envisioned has come to pass and we are ALL paying the price!

IMO, Obama is where he's at because of the media and Oprah. NO joke. Once Oprah put her seal of approval on Obama, the Oprah cultists came out of the woodwork and won't shut up and won't stop spewing the Kool Aid. I think it pisses me of mainly because Oprah didn't do squat to help Kerry in 04 when she so very easily could have. I bet she didn't do anything because she wanted Obama in 08, which makes me think she's nothing more than a calculating blankety-blank! If Kerry had been in office, how many lives would have been saved?! How many people wouldn't be caught in the horrific financial meltdown this country is facing?!

I am sickened by how this entire thing has played out and that people around DU who consider themselves politically savvy are actually chugging that Kool Aid along with the rest of the cult!

Wake up people-YOU'VE BEEN PLAYED!!!

Like ClericJohn said, the corporations are running the show, not the people!

I am SO pissed off! I really wish that I didn't give a damn about any of it anymore, but I do.

That Edwards jumped in to play the game of "politics as usual" makes this a very dark day indeed.

Et tu, John? :cry:

[saracat]

72. Absolutely right on.

[earth mom]

74. Thanks, I appreciate that!

:hi:

[saracat]

75. Well , we are not likely to be thanked by many!

Most aren't going to want to hear this and are mixing up batches of Koolaid as we speak. It is very sad.:hi:

[earth mom]

128. It is sad because we ALL lose.

:(

[cornermouse]

83. Yeah. That Reagan statement really upset me too.

I have extremely bad memories of the Reagan years and no wish to repeat them.

[MissDeeds]

84. Excellent post

You nailed it, TheGoldenRule. Thanks for this.

[earth mom]

127. I'm just so grateful that you're all still here!

:hi:

[ChiciB1]

88. As One Who Thought "Highly" of Ted Kennedy, John Kerry AND Tom Daschele....

you need to throw them into the fray as instrumental in where Obama is and how THEY manipulated behind the scenes to make this happen.

Ergo, my belief that "most" in Congress care little for THE PEOPLE!! Obama has been their "poster boy" since he spoke in 2004! It's just that simple to me! Here was a black candidate who spoke well then and roused the Party, not a strident black such as Jackson and Sharpton! He looked good and played well to the masses. There is MUCH blame to go around and some who I once looked up to have also "turned" on "we the people!"

Power & Money do much to corrupt the WHOLE system if used by the wrong people!!!

[earth mom]

129. Exactly-you hit the nail on the head! The entire system is corrupt.

They picked the candidates and the media sold those candidates to the public.

It's all a damn farce! :grr:

[kelligesq]

196. So many good posts to kick here :)

[waiting for hope]

85. saracat, I know how you feel -

I turned on MSNBC last night right as the news was breaking and my heart broke. I got on the phone with one of my One Corps buddies - she has worked on both of Edwards campaigns, been to his house a few times and is the one person that I trust that knows John best - my first words when she answered the phone were: "Did John do this the end the battle between the two in order for the party to be unified and move forward?" and I got an overwhelming "yes". I don't like it, I was starting to pull for Hillary for two reasons, her healthcare plan and her sheer tenacity during this race. But let's not kid ourselves, she at this point will not be able to get the numbers to work in her favor, plain and simple. Super Del's are jumping her ship and the previous undecideds are going Obama's way so even if this went goes to the convention, it will not go her way. The amount of outcry from the Obama supporters will be deafening if she gets the nomination and the damage that the party will suffer will kill any chances of a Dem win come November.

That said, I believe John Edwards to be a loyal Democrat and as a party leader, is trying to do the right thing. But, as my conversation went last night, my friend and I both agreed that if Obama and Clinton had any integrity, they would have stepped aside and let the person with the best progressive agenda step forward. That didn't happen and I still believe in Edwards, I think there is so much that goes on behind the scenes with power brokering, we may never know the true lay of the land here.

At this point and time I feel that my own personal involvement going forward will be concentrated on Progressive issues - I can not post positive Obama mania on this board or anywhere else for that matter but I will hold my nose and vote Dem come November for the prospect of having McSame in office scares the crap out of me, this county can not sustain anymore failed Republican leaderships and policies. Not to say that Obama could do any better but I hope he can live up to "The Promise" he lays out - after November I very well may switch to Independent for my trust in the two party system we have now is waning.

As long as I have known you have had an Elizabeth Edwards avatar - I wish you could still support her if not John - think about it...

[ChiciB1]

86. WFH.... My Sentiments Are With You And I Feel As You Do Regarding

"working for Obama" something I said a LONG TIME AGO. But neither was I going to "work for Clinton" either.

The decision Edwards made may have been to STOP all the crap we've seen here at DU and the tearing down of many other Democrats. I rarely post anymore but jumped in because of what happened yesterday. I won't turn my back on Edwards and am still receiving email from him. My thoughts are that he may have done this to be able to work on the "inside" rather than the "outside" to further his beliefs. I just don't know, but if YOUR NAME does not stay "in the news" MSM ignores you even more. John Edwards got the short end of the stick from the beginning and I'm sure many here at the Edwards Forum know and believe that. What those "behind the scenes" did to escalate the candidacy of BOTH Obama & Clinton caused me to disengage myself my political activism. What is going on in D.C., the Powers That Be AND the Media Elite have astounded me, so to have your voice heard perhaps "playing their game" is the only way to go. But since they "care not" what I think, I have no answers!

For myself, IT SUCKS and I have lost ALL TRUST in our Government. However, my thoughts about Clinton & Obama are one and the same... I can't support either and I'm FURIOUS that MOST in Government have simply decided that they sit on the throne and the people of America should follow along as so many did in the story of the Pied Piper!

All of it stinks, all of it seems CORRUPT and I lost HOPE many many moons ago. But regardless, watching John Edwards last night and comparing him to the "lackluster" speech that Obama gave after listening to Edwards simply re-affirmed my belief in the fact that AMERICA LOST A GREAT CHANCE in Edwards! It remains to be seen what will go from here regarding Edwards, but I still believe his "heart" is in the right place. It would be MY DREAM that he could start a NEW PARTY, but I know of no person who has been able to get enough momentum going to make this happen.

Folks, IMHO... we've been screwed, used and abused! I thought, given time that I would be able to be an activist for the Democrats again, but since 2006 and actions from "Blue-Dogs" seem no better, and are much to the "right" of my views. I suppose I won't be able to actually know where I go from here until I see what happens in November and even longer if it should be Obama! What either Clinton or Obama do or how they govern is going to determine whether I ever call myself a Democrat again. For now, I'm an NPA even though I've not changed that officially.

And to any of you who might think I should work at the local level... give it up! Where I live makes that ALMOST if not COMPLETELY impossible. Sarasota County sucks and runs roughshod over people who believe as I do. Even Democrats here are "Blue Dogs" or worse!

[waiting for hope]

90. America did lose here and I don't believe that

Obama will be able to deliver. I had a dream, and it died on Jan. 30th - I only hope that Obama made promises to Edwards that he will keep, if not, I will be part of any movement that decides to challenge the system that is broken. Over and over again I hear people I know saying that the way the system works, their voice isn't heard. What ever role John may play in a new administration, I only hope he will be able to be effective. If not, how does The Progressive Party sound to you?

[ClericJohnPreston]

93. Sounds good to me!

It is what I have been privately whispering about.

Don't underestimate that Davey Vs. Goliath effort, though.

This will be as hard as anything ever accomplished because of the entrenched system. This itself, would be "revolutionary". You have to overcome lethargy, indolence, laziness, even recognition of the problem. The masses have been weaned on self-deception for a long time and are dependant on it. "Waking them up", is your biggest priority.

You basically need for everything to tumble down and fall apart, infrastructure so badly undone, that everyone can now see it, even our blind drones. Only problem by then is, our "new" in our interest "security" ( BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ) will be looking to hold everyone in check. No one realizes how insidious, odious and complete all this BS has been for years.

We're in it up to our teeth. China and my girlfriend there are looking better.....

[balantz]

96. Does she have a sister?

:rofl: I fear we are doomed here!

[waiting for hope]

103. I think there are going to be a ton

of people "Waking Up" six months after Jan 2009 - and only "if" Obama wins the GE (I have my doubts on that one) - I do not see in him the ability to get things done, other than give pretty speeches. So many people are raving about his past experience but frankly, I think Edwards trail lawyer days trump Obama's any day. If it were not for my parents living so close to us, another country sure does look better to me too.

[ChiciB1]

116. Costa Rica Comes To Mind... But Out Of The Question For Me... I Have The

same problem as you... most of my family lives very close to me. But Costa Rica isn't that far away. And, my mother-in-law still lives with us... turning 96 soon!

I'm STUCK!!!

[ChiciB1]

115. I'm On Board With The Suggestion, However I Feel It's Going To Take

a significantly STRONG effort by the American people to even begin the process. I've made statement to my family and friends that if this continues and the NEXT four years don't produce ANY change, ALL Americans should rise up and STORM D.C.!

The APATHY is astounding and as time goes by, many will be in the "poor house" and unable to find their way to D.C.! As for now, writing to representatives or senators, or even demonstrating is essentially IGNORED. I joined in THREE marches in the past 2 or 3 years in D.C. and none got any real attention! That's what it's come to, and too many won't GET OFF THE DIME!!

In my area I was astounded to hear people talking about the money they got from the "stimulus package" as if this was really wonderful and how excited they were about the cash! It's a FRICKIN band-aid and they just DON'T GET IT! As long as they fall for the few crumbs thrown their way, nothing will change.

The real problem for me is that I have to live here and deal with the facts foisted upon me because of THEIR complacency!!

Many hoop and holler about "the change" we will see, but for now the only CHANGE I see is what I get back from my inflated grocery bill!

But a NEW PROGRESSIVE PARTY would be something that SHOULD shake up many many people, the question is HOW??? I'm not laughing about this or your suggestion because I agree with you, I just wonder if it will EVER happen.

[saracat]

109. I suspect that the Obama folks will one day have their hearts broken the way I feel mine was

yesterday. I thought John was "better" than this. At the end of the day, for whatever reason, he made a deal. It wasn't about who won or lost, or so John told us, but about the principle of the thing. Obama is corrupt.I did not expect John to endorse Hillary. I expected him to retain his integrity and endorse no one. I did not expect him to "sellout" whatever the excuse for doing it is.

I could care less about the so called "party unification". I can no longer trust Edwards and that is an enormous blow to me. It is like a death.As for Elizabeth, she supported universal health care as well. It seems that in the end, John didn't care about that either.

I am sure he had his reasons for this and perhaps he feels the ends justify the means.Maybe he feels he can do more about poverty.Maybe he feels he has a shot at AG. maybe he feels he doesn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I will probably never know why just as we will never know why he "suspended" but I can't afford to care anymore.

I have local races and issues to concern myself with. My husband has a campaign and I let my preoccupation with national candidates who don't give a rats ass for me distract me from my true purpose.People are losing their homes and jobs in my state.That is something I have to care about. We need good local folks of both parties to stop the hemorrhaging.

I no longer care who is President.I will not lift one finger to help Obama.

I wish John and Elizabeth all the best.I hope he acheives whatever he hoped to with his actions and efforts. As for me, he has taught me not to dream and my eyes are now open to the "gaming " of the system. I regret my lost innocense but I guess it was never really real.
Perhaps he did me a favor and I will now be more effective now that I no longer believe in fairy tales.

[AndyA]

98. It really doesn't matter to me that Edwards endorsed Obama.

I knew he would likely endorse someone, and since it would likely be either Hillary or Barack, I haven't really cared one way or the other.

My real issue with John started when he dropped out. No advance warning signs, no subtle hints that it might be coming, nothing. One day he was in it til the convention, the next day he was on his way to New Orleans.

I don't know what happened during that time, but he did a rather abrupt about-face and offered no explanation for it.

So, I knew this was coming.

Barack and/or Hillary will not make the sweeping changes this country needs after 8 years of Bushco abuse. They will be better than any Republican, but they will not turn things upside down and shake until all the rats are exposed, which is exactly what we need. We need to call out all the liars, corruptors, and those who take advantage of their position for personal gain.

In order to do that, we'll need someone who's "clean" with little if any baggage, and we aren't going to get that. We need someone who can call out the bullshit and put a stop to it. We need someone who will go on television and state it the way it is, like it or not.

If that happened, things would get bad for a while, but we would all be able to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

I know that isn't going to happen, now, so John Edwards' endorsement of Barack means nothing to me. He could endorse a rock on the coast for all it matters.

America had the chance, and we blew it. Again. :(

[balantz]

99. You are so correct AndyA.

You echo my feelings about this insanity.

[MissDeeds]

100. Mine too

We should have known something was up when Edwards went against his previous statements and abruptly suspended.

[Two Americas]

186. that is key

When Edwards reassured people that he was in the race for the entire primary campaign, NO ONE thought he meant "unless of course the other candidates are ahead." No one. He wouldn't have answered the question with a "yes" nor would any of us have been asking the question if that were the case.

It mattered to many of us that he was committed to staying in right to the convention. He had to know that it mattered, or he would not have kept reassuring us.

I don't think he is a bad person, and I don't think he is any worse as a politician than most of the Democrats. He is caught in the same trap we are all caught in, and prone to make the same errors. However - there is no way around the fact that he betrayed many of us, and betrayed us in a way and over a matter that was the worse sort of betrayal - disappearing us, disappearing our commitment, toying with us and pandering to us, and leaving us in exactly the situation we now find ourselves - isolated and under attack.

[balantz]

188. Spot on again T. A.

Keep reminding us about this, it is still sinking in. It is hard to accept how we were left with our jaws on the floor. We really admired the man and thought he had our backs to the end. WTF?!

[bpeale]

113. and i THIRD that motion AndyA!

[earth mom]

126. Yep, we waited 8 LONG years for this?! WTF?! What happened to Edwards being against status quo?

I feel SO betrayed by Edwards. :cry:

p.s. If Gore endorses Obama, I will really lose all hope.....

[balantz]

131. A Gore endorsement may just happen you know.

They are party loyalists.

Who will begin the next party? Us little folks?

Maybe losing hope is what needs to happen. Maybe hope is not what will help us to make real change.

[ClericJohnPreston]

132. Read above

It will take a nearly epic "revolution" to straighten things out. First, we have an enormous problem, going back well past Bush. The Corporatacracy reigns supreme, and 90% of DU, political savants, aren't even aware we live in a Matrix.

JRE is a perfect example of that. People are so twisted they are just as likely to say up is down or Obama has a healthcare program. They see an unreality.

Just above a ways I mentioned we require a COLLAPSE of the hopes/dreams mythology, which I'm laying odds wouldn't last a year, if Obama even gets close. Once the world goes to Shit, better hope the military is our side, if you want a little revolution, unh,huh.

The odds are long, but I'll put my faith in 100 good men/women to start this show the right way.

[balantz]

133. I try to see it as it is also.

Though I can't pretend to know the future, it is logical to follow through our present predicament to what you describe.

It will take a big crash of some sort.

Hoping the military is on our side is a very worthy hope. There may be factions that will go with the privatized, privelaged warrior-elite who will work for the security of the oligarchy. You can bet weapons of all sorts have been pilfered and stockpiled for zany's (and his kind) army.

I'm talking about a "necessary" (cough-cough) slowly unfolding of events with much tension, shifting loyalties, and holding backs, etc. Maneuvers that will be presented as being in our best interest...for the security of our nation. Remember 9/11? What will stop them from one-upping that show? These are fucking madmen! This is all about control and greed by and for the elite; the modern monarchy. When in history has the monarchy NOT acted in desperate and awful fashion?

This kind of reasoning and guessing is called tinfoil...Now that's living in a lemming matrix!

We are severely sold out!

My best guess is a worldwide series of events. It won't be complete if it doesn't all happen on that scale...including the revolution.

I know, wrong forum. I got my wick lit. Sorry to all those who are worried about simpler woes, like "My candidate left me!" Believe me, I truly sympathize. They are all leaving us.

[balantz]

136. O.K., maybe that's getting a little carried away.

And I sure hope it is.

But with things as they are in this world it does not seem terribly far-fetched to me for some big and awful shit going down in our near future.

I mean, where is our Democracy? Isn't this system set up for a complete fascist take-over now? They haven't done all this for a mere eight years plus of pocket-stuffing. No, there are bigger plans afoot. And we're worried about a shitty little farce of a cardboard government that doesn't do a GODDAMNED thing productive for our security!

If it weren't so fucking funny I'd laugh!

[Two Americas]

134. massive public support

It is almost impossible to see in the constrained and highly unrepresentative circle of the liberal activists and intellectuals, but there is massive support among the public for a radical overhaul of the system. Everything about the rhetoric and tactics of modern liberalism and the Democratic party is designed to keep that fact hidden from view. It is a symptom of the effectiveness of the propaganda, that in discussions about alternatives, as people weigh the assets and liabilities, the possibilities and potentials, methods and approaches - usually all laced with a feeling of hopelessness and despair - very rarely does anyone mention this stunning fact: 60% or more of the everyday people are already on our side. It takes an enormous amount of energy to suppress that and to silence the people - if we fell asleep at the wheel and stopped doing our gatekeeper job, within 6 months there would be a massive political movement against the system. Yet we talk as though it were the opposite - as though it would take some sort of enormous effort to get a political movement going. It is impossible to do solely because we have convinced ourselves it is impossible to do.

[Two Americas]

135. sure it could

All of the Democratic party politicians are caught in the same trap we are - worse, because they are personally comfortable and wealthy and not at risk. We have less excuse than they do, and we have more power and more responsibility, as well.

I can't hate them, nor blame them. It is our naive and child-like faith in them that is the problem, our insistence that we are supposed to represent and identify with and idolize them and promote their careers.

Nor can I hate or blame the people, which has become pervasive in the activist community.

Nor do I hate or blame the Republicans. They are doing what they always have done - advance the interests and desires of the wealthy and powerful few.

Who does that leave? Us. We are the ones who are failing, the ones missing in action.

[ClericJohnPreston]

137. 100% agree Two Americas

There are at least a handful of us, ACTIVISTS first and foremost, futurists who employ logic and the facts we see, ALL THE FACTS, not the superficial generalities, to arrive at the inevitable conclusions as to the path of this Nation.

We aren't looking necessarily at Obama or his wafer thin credentials and myriad inconsistencies, but at a system so corrupted it rivals the halycon days of Rome in decline. Bakstabbing, deal-making,loyalties rewarded over the interests of representative government, we are every bit in the modern version of the pre-1776 meetings in Philadelphia ( my hometown ).

The prices of gasoline are the new "Stamp Act", taxes as mismanaged and apportioned as the inequities of Ben Franklin's Philadelphia. Our Federal Governement, with it's deaf ears on ALL issues, as we are powerless to even stop a war no one wants, is King George's fiefdom.

Obama is a "control valve", a well-recognized mechanism for keeping things in check, MAINTAINING STATUS QUO, while giving people the APPEARANCE of "hope and change". Do you really think the controls in this Society are just saying, "hey, looks like we're deposed".

No, they put their man in, script the whole affair and the next couple of years are under control, while the structures are set up underneath to have the power to stifle any revolt down the road.

It is all so obvious. The fact that I look around and see people acting as if fantasy is reality, and reality a fantasy, is a testament to the brillant planning of those who pull all the strings.

There is no more to say, but sit back and watch it all go to predictable Hell.

[balantz]

139. You hit the nail CJP.

I can even easily disregard the insane and dire scenario I pictured above and still see a more complete fascist take-over. It doesn't have to be some huge catastrophe to slowly and insidiously bleed us of all our freedoms and wealth. This thing is already being done, and has been in the works for generations. Centuries even. As we can see this is a movement of monarchies vs. the little serfs. Here we go again, same story, different century.

And yes, when one is able to disengage ones emotions in all of this one can see that this government is for the most part a cardboard sham, and EVERY SINGLE DETAIL is well thought out by the monarchy (actually an oligarchy, a partnership of families and wealthy interests, same thing as a monarchy but worse, there are layers of them all over).

We silly masses of little people in a feudal system with all the loyalties we swallow are going down once again.

This time it is a worldwide epic struggle. The monarchies have seen the final prize.

Perhaps it the for final time. Who will win?

[balantz]

141. It's just f**king amazing to me that people still believe that the federal government

and politicians are actually working for us.

Even the good politicians know they have to abandon thier highest values to play the game within the existing system at all.

This sham, this illusory system, has to be drop-kicked completely. There really is no time to lose.

And here we are, still playing the game while the world goes to f**king hell.

on edit: Now I'm just talking to myself I guess.

"Don't listen to the madman over there, he has lost all reason! Now, where were we? Oh yes, what did Obama say? How about that Clinton? Did you get a load of that?! And Edwards did what? Wow! Things will really change now! McCain will be beat and the world will be in our hands and peace will reign forever and ever Amen! All we have to do is vote for the Democrat and everything will shift into peace and prosperity for all. Have faith in the (corrupt) system, it will all work out just fine!"

Ha! I just have to laugh at this illness we all suffer. It could truly be the death of us in more ways than one.

[ClericJohnPreston]

143. If recognition is a disease

I'll take it over "healthy" obliviousness all day. Here's hoping our disease is catching :)

PS You aren't talking to yourself my friend ;)

[huskerlaw]

144. Some of the responses in this thread make me sick

John Edwards is a LIAR now? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?! You were going to trust John Edwards to run this country, but you can't trust him with an endorsement? What a bunch of hypocrisy.

You love him as long as he does exactly what you want, but the second he does something you disagree with, he's a LIAR? What a bunch of bullshit.

And to those of you who are claiming that there's no difference between Obama and McCain, the exit door from the Democratic party is on your right. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.

Seriously. :wtf:

[ClericJohnPreston]

145. Thank you

for proving who you are.

Please tell me you are not a lawyer. You give new dimension to the phrase, fallacious reasoning. Do yopu go through the world everyday seeing only black/white with no gradation discrimination? Are you that thick, or just looking to irritate real Democrats, who remember when this was a LEFT-WING Party?

[Shakespeare]

168. For someone who's only been here since January, you've got a lot of nerve.

Husker (and I) have been here a long time, and we're both longtime Edwards supporters. Unlike some of the other people in this thread, we didn't turn on him like a jilted girlfriend when he endorsed Obama.

You're not fit to carry huskerlaw's water, and you should apologize for being such an asshat.

[ClericJohnPreston]

183. In your dreams

I just came back to the board after a visit home to find your so well opined and crafted vitriol. It won't ever stand up to mine, "asshat." See who folds first.

Apologize? Bwahahahahahahaha. In your dreams genius. Tis a shame your writing doesn't merit your lofty avatar. As for Huskerlaw? I called it right. He needs a waterboy to carry his message?

[psychopomp]

148. Are you going to still post flame-bait on DU against the nominee?

Now that you suggest that you have no reason left to be a Democrat?

Just wondering.

[bpeale]

150. i will. count on it. i have wanted my account cancelled for some time now

but it seems the only time skinner can find me is when he wants my money. he ain't getting that either.

[saracat]

153. We don't have a nominee as yet. And If I am displeased with whomever is the nominee I will

express that displeasure. I retain the right to be crical and it is not against DU rules. I will not campiagn "against" a nominee".

[cornermouse]

155. Obama is not yet the nominee.

I get tired of the lies from the Obama supporters. The Borg were wrong. Resistance is not futile.

[ClericJohnPreston]

157. The dreaded cultists are here

the asylum is invading.

Go back from whence thou came, NON-THINKER.

[Two Americas]

171. here is what I am wondering

Can anything that you disagree with or that makes you feel uncomfortable be declared "flamebait" and that then used as a justification for banishing and silencing people? How does that make you a "Democrat" and someone else not? They post some criticism of Democrats - that is their right and also a moral obligation for all of us. You recommend highly un-Democratic suppressive and tyrannical action, yet you say you are the real Democrat and they are not? Which of the two is posting inflammatory things - "flamebait?" Which of the two is truly opposed to the principles and ideals of the Democratic party? Who is the real Democrat?

Just wondering.

[Fox Mulder]

149. John Edwards is more of a Democrat than Hillary Clinton.

[bpeale]

152. WTF are you doing in this forum? your hateful bullshit doesn't belong here. *IGNORE*

[Fox Mulder]

158. Oh no. I got ignored.

I'm so gonna lose sleep tonight. :eyes:

[cornermouse]

156. What does that have to do with anything?

[Shakespeare]

159. After the news today that Edwards was holding out for promise of serious action on poverty...

...I think you should be ashamed of yourself for your attack on JE. He's proven himself to be honorable and thoroughly committed to ending poverty in this country.

Your post makes me sick.

[ClericJohnPreston]

160. Umm

Are you an Edwards supporter? Didn't think so. Go hurl your Probama garbage somewhere else.

[Shakespeare]

167. Um, YES, I am.

Try searching my posts in GDP. I'm not hurling any "Probama" anything--and I'm a little mystified by your attack.

[huskerlaw]

178. Don't worry, Shakespeare...

he accused me of being an Obama mole because I didn't agree with him. It's standard operating procedure for him

The next step is a personal attack on your ability to reason, just fyi.

[Shakespeare]

179. It would be most unwise of him to suggest that.

It's laughable that somebody who's been here for less than five months would question our support for Edwards. :eyes:

:hi:

[huskerlaw]

180. Isn't it?

but he's got an extra-special law degree from Philadelphia, so the rest of us plebes are supposed to bow at the alter of his intellect.

Or something like that.

:hi:

[ClericJohnPreston]

184. You attacked saracat

You're no Edwards supporter.

[Two Americas]

170. it is our duty

All of us have a moral duty and civic obligation to closely examine and criticize our leaders and politicians, and it is absolutely essential for a healthy democracy that we do that. Attacking critics and dissidents for daring to criticize wealthy and powerful people who are holding positions in the public trust is highly suppressive and anti-democratic.

They represent us, we do not represent them. We are not obligated to revere them or hold them above criticism or reproach, and doing so and trying to force others to do so is the direct and certain path to tyranny.

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

- Samuel Adams

[balantz]

172. Damn freekin' tootin' right!

I don't wear cozy wool over my eyes because I refuse to baaah with the sheeple!

ALWAYS QUESTION AUTHORITY!!!

The Democratic Party ain't no glee club to belong to.

It is our duty to investigate these leaders, no matter how much we may respect or like them.

It is our life and liberty we must defend!

[bpeale]

182. gee, i'm so crushed. and you don't have the right to judge me

[Two Americas]

185. look at it the other way

Were we to join together, see one another as allies, and fearlessly criticize our leaders - as the founders of the country intended us to do - would we not sooner see progress? You advocate a higher standard be applied to each other than to these political figures and are quick to defend and apologize for the rulers and quick to attack and malign your allies among the citizenry. That is the opposite of good citizenship - valuing and admiring and caring about wealthy and powerful strangers more than you do the person sitting next to you and with whom you have much more in common than you do with any politician.

This drive to bully everyone into line, and dismiss and ridicule all who resist that is more like a religious movement than a political movement. Granting a broad and liberal exemption from criticism for the rulers again and again, while being hyper-alert to any slight perceived flaw in each other and discarding and alienating each other over that, is a symptom of a population that is preparing to accept tyranny. It is the opposite of democracy.

A citizen should be ashamed of themselves for criticizing one of the rulers? Are they high priests or deities? I am ashamed that so few do criticize our politicians.

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

[Two Americas]

173. a humble suggestion

Rather than attacking and maligning saracat, bpeale and others in a supposed attempt at driving them back into the fold, why don't we all concentrate on the real problem...

...making the fold worth coming back into.

Do you really think that the critics here are the problem, and that you can beat up on them and accomplish anything?

It is really time for a serious wake up call. Do you want to be "right" - in a self-righteous way and spend all of your time beating on those whom you have decided are wrong...

...or would you rather go for results?

Being right is the consolation prize in politics. The right wingers don't waste any time on that, they go for results. You cannot go for being right and go for results at the same time, and it is a bad trade-off - the most destructive thing we could do to the fortunes of the party.

The critics are the canaries in the coal mine. Killing them will not save us.

The critics here are not the problem. This is nothing, absolutely nothing compared to the challenge ahead. Half of the eligible voters are so uninspired by the Democratic party that they don't even vote. And they would vote if we gave them anything to vote for. Millions of other people vote against us because of this self-righteousness and arrogance, and our insistence that we are right and everyone else is wrong. How are you going to bring those millions of people in, when you cannot tolerate even the mildest criticism of the party or your favorite candidate from your friends and allies, and take a "who needs 'em!" attitude, and utterly fail at making peace in the house of your friends?

Trying to enforce loyalty will never work.

Do you want to do what will work, or do you want to prove to yourself that you are right and others are wrong and the Hell with results?

[ClericJohnPreston]

175. Two Americas

We both see things exactly the same way. I await your PM.

[balantz]

176. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

I'm rollin' man!

That picture popping up was tops!

This whole thing is just too funny in its own dire way.

What a tragi-comedy we live in!

[balantz]

177. Oh, and if you are not being humorous my sincere apologies.

And I am onboard :patriot:

[Two Americas]

195. kick

Kicked and saved.