Tired of the negativity. Part II

[politicasista]

I know I wrote one last week about the negativity over Kerry and the DSM, but I am tired of people bashing Kerry while going gung ho over Conyers.

Like many of them, Conyers is one of my heroes too, but I don't elevate him by bashing Kerry, Obama or other good dems.

Some people act like Conyers woke up one morning and decided, "hey, I am going to be a hero today. I am going to investigate the election fraud in Ohio." :sarcasm: He has been doing this almost 40 years (or more). Same with Boxer. It's not like they and the Congresional Black Caucus decided to grow some balls (as they like to say) back in January 2001 and 2004. They have been doing this all their political lives.

I guess I am with wisteria on this. I am tired of the second-guessing of every move, every decision. I may not agree with them 100% of the time, but we don't know what goes on behind close doors. I am also tired of the infighting also.

I am in the Dems shouldn't attack Dems mode because that's why we lost and will continue too. I will say this again, we failed Kerry because of an disorganized party and believing the Rovian talking points/lies of the media period. :rant:

[JI7]

1. you are right, Conyers has been doing this for years

and it's actually insulting to just view him based on some of the recent things when he has so much more that he deserves credit for.

as for the attacks on Kerry i don't really care for most of those attacking him. They are willing to easily accept the right wing spin as long as it's against Kerry. but anytime there are reports of Kerry doing something from more reliable sources they undermine it and just continue attacking him and saying they need more proof. it just shows they have an agenda and are just looking for ways to complain.

[JI7]

2. for an example just look at Barack Obama

he gets attacked on DU also but he is very popular among the party overall. this is why you shouldn't worry too much about what people on DU think. and it's one reason why i mostly come on here to talk about things without putting up with the stupid conspiracy theory crap.

[beachmom]

3. Web probably not even representative of the Democratic Base

Only a minority of people read and write on blogs. I think a huge proportion of them are from the Anti-War Left, since they are so upset about the war and the MSM coverage of it. Although I have some sympathy to them, they're kind of like . . . well . . . the anti-abortion movement. They think all wars are wrong, that the U.S. only does evil, self-serving things abroad, and they villainize any or all Democrats that don't have as an extreme a point of view as them. They think they are MORALLY CORRECT, they see the world as black and white, they are not interested in analyzing the situation to find out the Truth. Instead they are only looking for facts that support their already foregone conclusions and disregard any or all facts that run to the contrary of their anti-war sentiment (like, say, Iraqis that are happy that we ousted Saddam Hussein). In short, they hate nuance just as much as the religious right. As an opposition group, they are great, pointing out injustice, hypocracy, atrocities, etc. But I NEVER want these guys running the government, because they are too naive, and don't understand that, for example, without oil, our economy collapses. I think you guys call them "Lefty Freepers", an apt phrase indeed. These people are great cannon fodder for Rush Limbaugh, et al, and sometimes they cost us elections (although probably not in 2004).

Anyway, this crowd HATES Kerry, because Kerry won't go far enough for them. So they've decided that he only used them for political gain in the '70s (ABSOLUTE bullshit -- anyone see that picture of Kerry in Butler's picture book where his wife is comforting him after the medal/ribbon throwing ceremony? It stopped me dead in my tracks). They equivocate Kerry's IWR yes vote to * himself taking us to war, even though it's apparent now that * lied and tricked Congress into voting for that resolution right before the 2002 elections. The whole war was scheduled around the political calender! But, no, it's all Kerry's fault.

So if you start thinking of these people as the left version of the 'pro-life' movement you will understand that there is no use in engaging these people. Their 'bible' is NO WAR. EVER. Go back in time and listen to their condemnation of the Kosovo War. They are unreasonable, and a little divorced from reality. However, maybe in person, they might throw a good party, write a good poem, play some nice music. Who knows. But in the coldness of the web, I find them to be anti-war fundamentalists.

[Mass]

5. I thing part of them are GOP plants as well.

Some people are so weird in their arguments that they do not make any sense, even as anti-war leftist.

[Mass]

4. Another reason that they systematically ignore

Conyer has a frame to hold the hearings. He is the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee.

All Kerry can do is to ask somebody else to hold this hearing, and this is what he is doing, apparently.

As for not having balls, he does, as much as Boxer, certainly. Boxer did not oppose Florida in 2001. She opposed Ohio, and I would guess this was with Kerry's approval. Since then, the two of them have basically held the same votes.

Certainly Boxer has voted against IWR, but she voted for DOMA.

[beachmom]

6. Good point on GOP plants

When I was describing these Lefties, they do sound suspiciously like a mirror image of GOPers. However, I can name one who is definitely on the Left. Armando at DailyKos. He only sees what he wants to see, and therefore, is intellectually dishonest. He also is verbally abusive instead of making good arguments.

Nevertheless, DailyKos remains one of the top left blogs and really top blogs in general in terms of traffic. Sigh.

[Mass]

7. Obviously, many of them are real dems

but anonymity on the web has a strange effect: some people become a lot more extreme than they are in reality because they find it more interesting.

This is why I do not take at face value some of the answers that I read. If you had to meet face to face with some of these people, they would act and talk very differently.

[wisteria]

8. Your right.

John Kerry serves as target practice for some of these people. No matter what is posted, they always have a negative comment. They are usually crude and ignorant of facts or they choose to ignore the facts. They're whole purpose is to attack Kerry. No other candidate promoted at DU receives the same vile treatment. Some candidates can do no wrong, they spin negative into positive. Kerry isn't even given the benefit of the doubt. I think theses type of people would be around even if he was our current president. They still would look for opportunities to bash him. Kerry isn't their style candidate, He is liberal, but too reserved. Kerry isn't the type that just leaps and let the chips fall will they may. He wants to check out the landing before he jumps, certainly the wiser of the two choices. Oh well another day another fight.I like to refer to myself as a Kerry Crusader?

[JohnKleeb]

9. Conyers first got elected to office when my mom was 5 and my dad 13

The man is a long time fighter for liberal causes, in fact he helped VVAW back in the 70's. Hes a great guy and he's had the balls for a long time, as with the CBS, its nothing new. I agree with you about being gung ho on other dems while at the same time spitting on the others, we should be proud of both Kerry and Conyers.

[TayTay]

10. I've said this before, but hell maybe I can again

I think it will turn out that 2004 WAS one of the most important elections of my lifetime. You can't just judge elections by who won and who lost. We now see the '64 election, a complete and utter landslide for the Dems and a repudiation of the RW as a turning point in the RW movement. I think 2004 shows signs of being the same for the left and the Dems.

All birthing pangs are painful. Rebuilding a political movement is very, very difficult. I think that the Dems that are leading the Party are well aware of the things that went wrong and that must be dealt with in order to get victory next time. Gov Dean has said the right things and he is beginning to put some muscle into a 50 state grassroots effort to regain a voice, a clearly articulated set of principles and an appeal to Dem voters to get involved. There has been a lot of clearly stated things that told Dems where they were weak in 2004 and where they were strong. We need honest assessments and a good hard look at how to translate what we all know our values and stands are into a platform that speaks to our natural constituency. I do feel that things are changing.

The Dems are a leftist (or center-leftist) party. That's who we are. But we encompass a very wide range of opinions. The challenge is always to get people to agree on a set of actions that might not give everyone what they want when they want it. The Rethugs have done this. We need to figure out how to do this. We can't jettison the lefty fringe. (We can't, believe it or not, we need them.) We also can't piss off the center, because we need them as well. We have to learn how to get along. That's the true challenge.