DU isn't as progressive and left-wing as I thought it would be

[Lord Byron]

And I think it's a bit disappointing. I see that most of the discussion follows usually what's given to us by the media. We're all against the war yeah. We're all a bit dismayed by the "New Economy." Most of you are socially liberal (I'm not very active in this regard as I think socioeconomic inequality is the main issue of our era). But I notice that instead of taking the fight to the rulers, we take their points and battle it out on their behalf. I notice that instead of talking about issues, we talk about personalities. There's also a hell of a lot of love for men and women who in the past have been the boys of the corporate class and have supported free trade agreements. But it's all okay, because they're "rock stars" and stuff.

So there's a lot of love for this sort of thing.

I can't put this any clearer: we the politically active segment of the population NEED to talk issues. We need to push these issues. We need to revolutionize the political discourse.

Enough of the Clinton vs. Obama nonsense. Don't support a candidate UNTIL he or she supports you. You owe them nothing. They owe us everything. We employ them.

I'm not looking to be pacified.

We need to push and push and push. And we need to unite, while keeping discourse and dissent civil.

Social progress doesn't happen unless we take the fight to them. Don't wait for the elite to give you a carrot without your asking for it. Don't expect "progressive" candidates to come to you. You have to bring them over to you.

We must agitate. Now.

[XemaSab]

1. Amen.

:D

[Just-plain-Kathy]

2. I second that Amen.

:pals:

[bdrube]

5. Double Amen.

[Kare]

125. Tripled

:thumbsup:

[marmar]

3. Extra butter, in the middle and on top, and a soy latte for me....

:popcorn:

[cynatnite]

19. I'll take some, but you can keep the soy latte...

:)

:popcorn:

[uppityperson]

4. Sometimes you have to wade through the (issue of the day) threads.

There are some good people here, good place to connect. There are disruptors and keyboard warriors also. Sometimes you have to find those you can work with, but there are lots of people here doing lots of things.

[illinoisprogressive]

6. It is not 1968. It's 2007

[Lautremont]

8. Good point. Agitation simply isn't in fashion.

Or did I misunderstand?

[Lord Byron]

2007 is even more of a reason

Do we really live that much better today?

[Warren Stupidity]

44. Brilliant point.

Indeed in 1968 such a statement would be idiotic as everyone would of course agree. However in 2007 such a statement needs to be made on a regular basis. It is not 1968, but not at all in the sense that you meant. But I am just wondering, do you think that the effort to overturn the kleptocracy began and ended in the 60s? Do you think there is anything particularly new about the situation we are in today?

[Lord Byron]

47. Exactly

Brilliant point, Mr. Stupidity.

The times are even worse today (well not the war, but economically speaking).

[malaise]

90. Bingo

Indeed it's always about socioeconomic inequality and destroying the system which creates and perpetuates it.

[WillyT]

94. Oh, I Don't Know... The Whole World Is Watching, Once Again...

Maybe it's actually 1966, and the shit just hasn't hit the fan yet.

:shrug:

[Land Shark]

117. Yeah there's more at risk in 2007 than in 1968

NEver at the height of the cold war did we torture or abuse OPENLY and under COLOR OF LAW making us a rogue nation.

Never in 1968 were we starting total climate disruption in the face with a blind administration.

we did not have an executive that claimed true dictatorial powers and ignored the laws of the people via "signing statements"

We did not have fundamental questions about the ability to have ANY valid elections with invisible secret vote counting, which goes way beyond minor issues about individual elections in Chicago, etc.

Those who've lived thru both this and the 60s eras often say (in my experience) that today is the darkest day of our country that they've seen in their lives.

That's what you meant by saying this is not 1968, this is 2007, right?

[Autonomy]

120. Despite what everyone else is saying

I think it's a good point. Don't believe that the war caused the rebellions of the '60s. Don't believe the agitators, the socialists, the yippies, the hippies, the SDS, or the Weathermen caused it. It was already a rebellious time, and Vietnam just fanned the flames.

2007 is not a time of large-scale rebellion; it's a time of consumption and apathy. We aren't changing that, regardless of how much we dislike it. Left-wing agitation would be, at present time, sturm und drang, signifying nothing. As another poster said, however, maybe it IS 1966. We'd need a draft to push things forward a bit, though, and I (who have an 18-yo nephew) do not hope for that.

[deutsey]

129. As Utah Phillips said: "The past didn't go anywhere. It's right here, right now."

"...that packaging of time is a journalistic convenience that they use to trivialize and to dismiss important events and important ideas."

[MadMaddie]

7. Perhaps you are reading the wrong threads?

I don't click on everythread. And some I do click on I don't particpate in.

Sometimes it doesn't hurt to take a break from the serious business that is at hand. We all know what's at stake.

I do agree with you on some items like the talk about Edwards house, and Hillary's looks are utter bullshit.

Most if not all of us don't have faith in the MSM, we are willing to do our due diligence in research and talk from personal experience.

We are also willing to ask some one to defend their position.

And at times, even I have issued an apology for offending some of my fellow DU'ers.

Many DU'rs attended the march this weekend. That is activism. This site is activism.

What I would like to see and particpate in is a huge gathering of all of our DU friends, to put a face to the names, to make human contact. I hope that we will be able to do this within the next two years.

[pitohui]

9. consider the size of the group

even granted that as "democratic underground," it skews left to pick up those voices who are not often heard in mainstream media, a decent number of democrats (and i might be numbered among them to a certain extent) would be happy if we were even a centrist nation, instead of an extreme far right one

when i look at us of a and then i look at the eu, i see that we are overall very much to the right of center of progressive western nations


we don't even have the basics like universal health care and we have the kooks who want to jump straight ahead and grant voting rights to baby seals (okay i'm kidding but you know what i'm saying) -- we don't even know what the "left" is in other countries, we think france is the left

the world being what it is, i'd rather get some of what is possible rather than none of what is possible

tearing down, say, john edwards, because he is not jesus resurrected is to my mind an example of how we screw up by demanding an utterly ridiculous standard of correctness

hillary, obama etc. support me a helluva lot more than karl rove, and rove is what we get when we go down the "don't support them unless they're saints" route -- nader anyone?

[NoSheep]

179. I always wondered how to spell that!

Good post.

[patrice]

10. Right! Issues. Issues. Issues.

Focussing on personalities perpetuates Oppression.

And there are people on this board who really promote Us vs. Them amongst Democrats and who appear to really enjoy ganging up on selected targets. It is best to stay away from them even when they turn it on you. Ignore. Don't let them win by engaging in their BS. Stay constructive for the issues.

[The Gunslinger]

11. Very true

The rightist media feeds the stories and people on the right and left run with it. Turn off the TV, Don't listen to conservative talk radio. The MSM should not be feeding the talking points to the country.

[JanMichael]

12. I agree and that's why I post so infrequently now.

Oh well. There was a time here when it was quite a Left and Progressive place...

[Iris]

13. glad to know it's not just me.

:hi:

[welshTerrier2]

21. a lost soul returns ...

i think things changed in a huge way during the 2004 primaries ... DU has since been infested with "candidate people" ...

[derby378]

14. Honestly, personality doesn't have a damn thing to do with my choice

Russ Feingold had me at "hello." But since he's not running in 2008, I gotta give it to Gore on environmental issues and global warming. Besides, he already won in 2000...

Clean air, clean water, snow on Kilimanjaro once again. That progressive enough for ya?

[davekriss]

59. It isn't left enough for me

I want social justice, equality of opportunity, brakes on the rapacious power of money. But I'll start with snow on Mt. Kilimanjaro. :)

[derby378]

107. Hey, that's cool with me, too

:hi:

[druidity33]

177. how about...

Using a system such as Time Dollars on a massive scale... a nationwide program. I keep mentioning Edgar Cahn (founder of the concept) and his book No More Throw-Away People, but no one has seemed at all intrigued by the idea. Also i agree about not talking as much about issues as we do candidates here. I'd like to see more of a thinkcycle.org vibe, like a collaborative design effort to actually provide solutions to our problems. Unless i go to specific forums, i get no news on environmental issues or poverty issues while searching the Greatest page (lately i spend very little time on my computer and have been mostly posting bits that end in n/t or K&R!)

:shrug:

but it's still my favorite "political" website... love you DU!


:yourock:

[Elwood P Dowd]

15. Hell Yea!

.... "love for men and women who in the past have been the boys of the corporate class and have supported free trade agreements. But it's all okay, because they're "rock stars" and stuff."

I can't believe how many on this board simply ignore that. Look at some of the Bill Richardson posts. Do they not remember him in Congress? The bastard lied, jumped in bed with Newt Gingrich, and sold us out!

[Timbuk3]

16. K&R'd that one

Lotta good that'll do.

The guy's right.

I give it an hour, then we'll be back to attacking the other side instead of setting the agenda.

And if you're wondering, I'm no better than anyone else about this.

Attacking is easy. Leading is work.

[ThomCat]

17. It's a matter of what you consider important.

I've read some of your posts and almost been convinced that you're a conservative. You don't come across as a progressive on social issues. But different people focus their efforts and attention in different areas.
:shrug:

Edit for spelling.

[uppityperson]

28. Thank you for the idea. Indeed.

peacekeepers. snort.
Edited to change "suggestion" to "idea" since it gave me an idea.

[ThomCat]

35. I didn't make any suggestions.

So I'm not sure what you're talking about.

[uppityperson]

45. I changed my post to more accurately reflect what I meant.

I wrote in haste and have been having difficulty finding the right words this last yr. I got an idea to look at other posts from what you wrote. (I hate my brain's problem it has with words).

[Lord Byron]

39. yes Peacekeepers

Someone asked who the enemy was. I stated that we're supposed to be peacekeepers in a civil war, akin to Germany in Yugoslavia during WW2. Is that inaccurate? If so, tell me how it is.

[ThomCat]

40. I was commenting

on your judgement that you're disappointed that others aren't liberal enough. I thought that was fairly clear.

As for us being peacekeepers, I don't think it's our roll to be peacekeepers in a civil war. I think we should have refrained from starting it, and the best thing we can do now is get the hell out and let it play itself out without us making it worse.

Edit: Re-reading, I'm not sure if you were responding both to both me and the poster above (i.e., this subthread) or to just the above post. If you're not addressing me, then this is an unsolicited response. :shrug:

[uppityperson]

52. Having been a big cause of that civil war, I think our ability to now be

peacekeepers is extremely limited. No matter how hard you try, it is really difficult to put the smashed wasp's nest back together and get them to go back into it, peacefully (by way of example).

[Lord Byron]

38. I'm not a conservative

I'm far enough on the left to be reluctant to define myself. No I don't come across as progressive on social issues, mostly because I'm a bit religious. But I accept the fact that others do. As someone pointed out, we're a big tent and need to stand together.

[Kerrytravelers]

49. I'm religious and I'm very liberal on social issues.

I'm not sure what religion has to do with not being liberal on social issues.

[Irishonly]

111. Agree

Of course, I have been accused of not being a Christian because of my stance on abortion and not agreeing with the death penalty.

[havocmom]

118. Have made that same observation, ThomCat

That very same observation.

[ThomCat]

119. I'm glad I'm not the only one

who noticed. :hi:

[welshTerrier2]

18. don't follow candidates

make them follow us ...

this place is a little too much like People Magazine or the "Personalities on Parade" section of your local paper ...

[Divernan]

121. Or a Pimp My Candidate blog

"Transparency" is such a popular term nowadays. And transparent is what these group think candidate supporters are to any thinking person. They appear very organized - you won't find one putting up an OP without the cast of usual suspects showing up to join in - either on a Home Shopping Network style adoration thread (Oh, he/she's just the PERFECT candidate; 100% right on every single issue; spotless moral character;blah, blah, blah) OR some True Crime Story attacking any candidate ahead of their candidate in the latest poll (he/she will be the downfall of democracy, I just HATE him/her; he/she voted wrong 1/2/3/4/. . . .19 years ago on "x" issue and I'll NEVER forgive or forget! ! ! )
I do not hold the candidates responsible for the excess aggression of their supporters, but it makes it increasingly hard for me not to have subconscious doubts about the wisdom of voting for someone with these kind of followers.

[Lautremont]

20. It's very democratic, not so much underground.

There's a lot to be said for the big tent website, if the intention in creating it was to mirror the big-tent party. You get a lot of perspectives and, likely, a fairly accurate cross-section of the genuine concerns of Democrats across America.

The flip side of that, of course, is the often frustratingly middle-class value system that predominates here. Such values are not exactly evil, but they're often rather self-centred, and concepts like privation and sacrifice don't get much air time. (Oh, the arguments I've seen in favour of the big ol' SUV!)

In short, DU is not a haven for activists, but they're certainly represented here. It takes a good amount of sifting and knowing what threads not to waste your time on, though. (Threads with the words "Edwards" and "House" are a good place to start when it comes to passing things by - these arguments seem, in the main, to be between pretend activists and pretend bourgeoisie.)

[Cocoa]

22. you have an LBJ avatar

just saying.

:shrug:

[Lautremont]

23. I think that's Richard Dysart.

[Lord Byron]

31. Yes LBJ

Because he advanced the cause of equality and social progress.

I wouldn't have supported the Vietnam War though.

LBJ was the last liberal (in the US definition of the term) President. more Liberal than Clinton.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

73. And a civil gentleman, too!

[Veronica.Franco]

115. Lady Bird's family OWNED Brown and Root ...

The largest military contractor in Vietnam ... Now Kellog, Brown, and Root .. AKA ... KBR ... a division of Halliburton ...

"What is it about Presidents from Texas?" ... Stephen Stills

[Octafish]

201. LBJ perpetrated the Warren Commission fraud...

...as well as perpetrated the Gulf of Tonkin fraud.

Both ended up being Big Moneymakers for a certain class of fellah.

[Lord Byron]

24. The name is Democratic UNDERGROUND

as someone above pointed out. The underground means that we should be bold in our desire to push ISSUES and not give a shit whether John Gibson, Neil Cavuto, or...even Anderson Cooper support them or not. We must be heard. Revolutions can be peaceful. All it takes is courage and initiative. We're not going to get anywhere simply talking about, "hmmm I like Obama because he speaks well, can get elected, and reminds me of Kennedy with his 'hope' message." You like Obama? Ok, let's talk issues. You like Edwards? Ok, let's talk issues. This is what we should be focusing on.

We're the progressive DEMOCRATIC wing of the Democratic party. Yes, we are the left. We are the people.

[Cocoa]

27. you advanced a RW smear on HIllary

The Obama madrassa smear is the first really ugly RW smear of the 2008 campaign, and you personally advanced it. Congrats to the leftier-than-thou Lord Byron!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3070912#top

[Lord Byron]

29. I apologize for that

I'm sorry. I didn't know better.

[Cocoa]

33. you did it on another thread too

welcome to DU, Lord Byron. Too bad Kerry's out, you could have posted multiple threads warning us about Skull and Bones.

:hi:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3064647&mesg_id=3065360

[Lord Byron]

34. Listen, at the time I didn't know

There were rumors being thrown around. I bought into one of them. It was a plausible rumor. They fooled me. That only serves my point that we shouldn't buy into what the "MSM" feed us.

[Wrinkle_In_Time]

42. Wow, you've come a long way in 9 days from flame-fanner to...

... the issue-driven voice of rational debate. That's one hell of an epiphany you must have had in between times. Perhaps you would care to share that experience?

It's a good thing that Cocoa gave you this opportunity to explain, otherwise people just might not believe you.

[Crunchy Frog]

55. You asked us to "prove" that Hillary wasn't behind it; prove a negative

while doing nothing yourself to offer any positive evidence that she was behind it. Only offering innuendo and the fact that she supposedly had a motive. That's more than just buying in to what the MSM feeds us.

You may want to brush up on your critical thinking faculties, our you'll find yourself falling for every "plausible rumor" out there.

[peacebaby3]

41. Amen. I've been watching and waiting. The time will come. n/t

[Guaranteed]

65. Yeah, but what does that have to do with his point in the OP?

I believe he was saying something about "talking about personalities."

[salin]

92. self-delete

re-read and what I wrote didn't quite make sense... never mind :D

[uppityperson]

32. Do you think that everyone needs to do as you say?

DU is a big tent, lots goes on here. Must we all be as you think we should, or else we aren't progressive?

[Lord Byron]

36. No

That's not my point at all.

[Greyhound]

25. Thus the term "distraction DU jour",

but hey, it is an excellent resource for news not readily available to those of us stuck in the gulag.
ETA - :kick: & R

[omega minimo]

74. givin' me props?

:toast:

[tinfoilinfor2005]

26. Oh Lord, Byron...

And yes, that is the punctuation I intended.

Stick around for several thousand posts before you make such dire pronouncements. This is a slow week.

[skipos]

30. Personally, I think DU is to the left of your average American Democrat. nt

[NYCGirl]

37. Gee, sorry we're such a disappointment to you. We'll try harder.

:eyes:

[spacelady]

43. Yarr, I was just trying to get me sea legs & here comes Lord Byron!

Now I have to rethink why I am Being on the DU!

[peacebaby3]

48. Oh my goodness...we are almost neighbors! Another LIBERAL in my

neck of the woods. I love it!!!

I saw your thread on the bible in the schools and thought you were up closer to the Space Center based on your name.

Sorry for the off-topic post, but I'm excited!

[spacelady]

54. Hey! Yes the space program in AL has brought that thought before

but I got that nickname in High School. Good to hear from you peacebaby3 - I live in Satsuma, how close are you? PM if you want.

[Tatiana]

70. ********Coffee Spew*******

:rofl:

[mitchtv]

56. I'm sorry too LB.

But I won't try to be more issue oriented. I can out left you any day. However, I lovvvve internet gossip and daily distractions.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[KoKo]

46. If you "enabled your Profile" we might understand where you are coming from?

:shrug:

[Lord Byron]

50. What does :enable [my] profile" mean? nt

[uppityperson]

53. Go to (Options) at top of page, then go to (edit your profile) at left of page

There is a place to put information about yourself.

[Lord Byron]

61. Done

enjoy!

[uppityperson]

64. Thanks, will check it out.

It is always difficult, knowing how much to share since there are nasty people cruising looking for info. It is always difficult, knowing how much of what is posted about someone is real since anyone can write anything. But it helps people connect more with each other. Thank you and welcome to DU, if I didn't welcome you before.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

75. HUH???

"I'm rather socially conservative compared to most people on here, but I think my serious progressive stance on socioeconomic issues makes up for it."

Are you sure about that?

[uppityperson]

81. I read it and have a couple questions.

How can you be socially conservative and have a serious progressive stance on socioeconomic issues? What does this mean as it sounds like you are saying you are a conservative progressive? :shrug:

[Lord Byron]

100. It means I don't believe in the "culture war"

All the bourgeois Fox News issues. Abortion, drugs, religion in the public place. That's not my main priority.

[uppityperson]

124. Abortion is "bourgeois FOX News issue"?

What is your stand on the choice/abortion issue?

[mondo joe]

136. Civil rights may not be YOUR priority.

But for some of us it's THE priority.

[Kerrytravelers]

138. So a woman's right to choose and family planning isn't important?

You don't place a huge priority on theocracy?

What are you progressive on? Against the war? Don't mind paying your taxes?


How about marriage equality? How about social safety nets? How about Climate Crisis? How about education? How about fair trade? How about health care? How about paper elections? How about ethics in government?



Just curious.

[Bridget Burke]

139. Details, please on the "bourgeois Fox News issues"

Abortion: You're anti-choice?

Drugs: Keep those pot smokers in Prison! Don't treat the crackheads, put them in jail!

Religion In the Public Place: Well, I haven't noticed any shortage of churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, etc., in "public." Houston's full of them. But I'm glad the ugly Bible monument was removed from the courthouse downtown. Do you mean that Government & Religion should work together? Most religious people know that's a bad idea.

Of course there's no Culture War. But there are plenty of real social issues.

[Lord Byron]

152. My answer to all of you

Abortion is currently a constitutional right to be respected. Do I think the practice of abortion is immoral? Yes. I do. It is the taking of a life. Am I active in telling people what to do? No. Would I support the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade? Not necessarily. But this doesn't make me a "conservative." After all look at Ireland.

I do not support the war on drugs but I don't consider it to be a pressing issue. Prison reform is more pressing. And keeping American workers employed and happy is what I think should be the progressive PRIORITY. Not whether you can smoke pot and get away with it.

As far as religion in the public place goes, I don't really follow this because it strikes me as a made-up faux-news War on Christmas bullshit issue.

And I'm also in support of tightening the borders, and am extremely against guest worker programs.

Flame away.

[Kerrytravelers]

160. Religion in public isn't the issue. Theocracy is the issue.

[Bridget Burke]

161. At least Irish women can go to the UK to end a pregnancy.

Except for the part of the UK that shares their island--laws haven't changed in Northeast Ulster. Yes, this makes you conservative. At least the Republic of Ireland has its good points. What are yours, now?

In some ways the "religion in public place" was "made up." That is, some of your co-religionists have been pushing to destroy the church/state separation. This is not a minor issue.

Somehow, I'm not surprised.

[Lord Byron]

162. First, we feed the hungry

Then we can talk about your armchair activist stories about religion.

[Kerrytravelers]

172. Armchair activist stories?

How condescending and rude.

[NoSheep]

176. I fear you are far too complicated for the likes of some here. And I see

your point entirely about many of the things you have stated. Just wanted to let you know you're making sense to someone. Not that it matters much. I'm sure I am a total enigma to many I encounter. I am FIRST a live and let live person, but I am highly ethical, have a strong sense of right and wrong and demand that of all in my company in a way they would not detect. There are many life ways I would consider theft that most people would never define as so. I am accused of being "rude" for confronting what I consider the people in our world who are "part of the problem". These people are poison and a danger to themselves and others and need to be called out and I'm not afraid to do it. I think we should all be in the streets screaming our heads off yet I am a very peaceful person.
I make mistakes and I'm the first to admit it yet I have a great deal of faith in my opinions and instincts.

We are living in paradoxical circumstances. An examined life will explore every end of the continuum to find truth. Personal solutions can be different than a solution one realizes may serve the larger good. I would like to see everyone being more thoughtful and take a little more time before they are critical of others. Ask "why?" before condemning something you don't understand immediately.

I have been this way since childhood. I've honed it. I cannot be pigeonholed because pigeonholes are an illusion and an easy way out for those who haven't developed the capacity to be critical about all things they encounter. And we must really do this unless we want to walk around being a part of the problem.

Thank you for your conversation here. I feel it is important.



:thumbsup:

[Crunchy Frog]

57. Go into Options,

and click on Edit your preferences. You'll see an option there that says "Hide your profile?". Click on the little circle beside the "no", and your profile will no longer be hidden. You can then share whatever information you wish about yourself with the rest of the board.

[Toucano]

62. I think someone is suggesting you are hiding something

because you didn't fill out a profile.

Perhaps you've noticed, DU is a bit heavy on the paranoia - not entirely without justification these days.

[KoKo]

68. Thanks for Enabling your Profile....

and for your post.

[Guaranteed]

66. Who cares?? Address the post!!! nt

[rman]

77. people can put anything in their profile

[Riddler]

51. Not only that, but if you have a big house you're subject to all kinds of scrutiny!

[donsu]

135. lol

nt

[mtnsnake]

58. DU is plenty progressive. Maybe it's just not as left wing as you hoped

There's a reason for this. DU is DIVERSE. One thing nobody can take away from this place is its diversity.

[lakeguy]

60. oh yeah, you're so "left-wing" you end up pushing

right wing propoganda with not one, but two threads about the same lie. right.

[Toucano]

63. Issues are discussed more in "Issue Forums" than in General Discussion

Perhaps you'll find more satisfaction in one of those forums.

[Guaranteed]

67. Great post. But people are going to attack you to find some kind of cognitive excuse/distraction.

It's the same shit over and over again. Looking at you instead of what you're saying.

[FredStembottom]

69. The good stuff is in there.

Just be more selective of the threads you read.:hi:

[JeffR]

71. Sorry, ain't buyin'.

And I'd pit my leftwing bona fides against yours any day of the week. I find the Clinton and Obama threads a bore and irrelevant, too. I ignore them. I find the Edwards' house threads preposterous, too. I read a few of them for a laugh, but mostly, I ignore them. I have other political priorities, myself. Assuming you do too, maybe you should pursue them. I'm not trying to dictate behavior to you, BTW, but maybe you need to check yourself before you start passing judgment on other people's behavior. This is a damn big site. Live with it or don't.

[Maven]

72. Wait a minute. You're a self-described "social conservative"

yet you're here to tell everyone that DU isn't far enough to the left? How exactly do you think "social progress" happens?

:wtf:

[A-Schwarzenegger]

76. But his "serious progressive stance on socioeconomic issues makes up for it."

:redbox:

[immoderate]

78. How does that work?

Social conservative means what? Anti-choice? Anti-porn? Anti-human rights? John Ashcroft is a social conservative!

And a "progressive stance" makes up for that? What's the trade off here? :shrug:

--IMM

[A-Schwarzenegger]

80. It doesnt. OP is a leetle confused.

He's conservative socially,
but
progressive socioeconomically.

[omega minimo]

85. cut and paste

:yoiks:

[Dutch]

87. Or not just taking your views en masse from the supermarket shelf. n/t

[omega minimo]

116. actually it looks like he's a very savvy shopper

:eyes:

[Dutch]

86. It doesn't sound like he's "confused" at all.

Sounds like a pretty clear general statement of his views- that you just happen not to like, ergo sanctimony and unfunny snide comments spew forth.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

89. Youre every bit as confused as him

if you honestly believe that it's possible to be conservative socially
and progressive socioeconomically.
I'm giving you some big free obvious hints there.
And youre wrong that I dont "like" his impossible stance.
I like it fine. I think it's funny.
Calling him & you confused is being generous.

[spoony]

198. Awesome, let us all know

when you perfect your litmus test. We can't have impure members now can we?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

204. Who's "us," you and your tombstoned hamster?

[donco6]

133. I'd like to hear the answer to that one, too. eom

[specimenfred1984]

79. So find someplace else

There was an chimpbot named byron1moreno on yahoo's boards who sounds a lot like you.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

82. And yet, you're "socially conservative."

Quite honestly, I find your post as confusing as the 32 recommendations it has. At least make your posts somewhat congruent with your profile. Put at least a little bit of effort into it.

[Mick Knox]

83. It is a little early to sell out to the status quo candidate

I agree 100%

NOW is the time to make them take a stand.

I said it yesterday, I wont support this war under a (D) any more than under a (R)

Status Quo DINO is NOT an option (yet lol)

[Exiled in America]

84. Yes, its not exactly "underground." Pretty mainstream at many points.

[Dutch]

88. Well said. n/t

[muriel_volestrangler]

91. It sounds as if you ought to be a strong supporter of Chavez

He, after all, is concerned about socioeconomic inequality, and opposes neoliberalism. Yet your posts show you definitely don't like him. Shouldn't you be concentrating on the issues with him?

[Lord Byron]

101. As an American, I could not find myself in a position to support Chavez

This is compounded by the fact that I grew up in Miami where Chavez and Castro are considered modern-day tyrants. It's just not done. It's nothing personal. There are certain world leaders you can't express public sympathy for. It's not wise. And some of what I said about Chavez, such as the fact that he is today's Nasser and that he is currently a dictator (albeit elected), aren't exactly false.

[muriel_volestrangler]

104. And yet you criticise other for looking at people, not issues

Chavez's goals are yours. Listen to your own advice.

And what does "As an American, I could not find myself in a position to support Chavez" mean? You can't support any foreign politician? That's an incredibly short-sighted attitude.

[Lord Byron]

169. Mao and Kruschev were both Marxists

But in China, supporting the Soviets would be unwise speech. It could get you in serious problems. Chavez is the Venezuelan President. I'm an American. I'd rather find Americans to support and let Venezuelans worry about their own problems and praise their own leaders.

[muriel_volestrangler]

185. Yet you went out of your way to criticise that he is a socialist, not a liberal

so maybe you're not so different from others on DU after all. Just about all of us have people to the left of us. Certainly, many people on DU support Chavez, and thus appear to be to your left.

I don't understand why you say "It could get you in serious problems" - what's that got to do with supporting or criticising Chavez on this board?

[bananas]

93. I think the purpose of DU is to get democrats elected

and in order to do that, we have to bring people together from across the spectrum. And DU has done a great job at that.

[EstimatedProphet]

95. So go then

Or reform the board by posting your point.

DU is a message board. It's what you make it. If you think there should be more acivism, then try it and find out. If it's not enough for you, then start a board that is, or find one that is.

Make DU what you want it to be.

[porkrind]

96. DU is a community and a learning experience.

A whole spectrum of people come here to learn and exchange ideas, and that takes time. There has to be room here at DU for all types of leftys. I've learned a lot in my time at DU, both from those to the right and left of me politically. Now I'm a Chomsky/Zinn progressive, but I keep reading and posting and learning. I think it takes a few years of being politically awake to look beyond political horse races to the deeper structural problems of our society. socioeconomic inequality, classism, militarism, corporatism, etc. Otherwise, I agree entirely with your post. We can't allow the corporate media to distract us from our class struggle, we need to unite, struggle, and agitate.

[Vinca]

97. The key word is "unite."

We make no difference at all if we're a thousand fragmented parts, each casting our vote a different way.

[TZ]

98. I'm sorry we don't live up to YOUR standards for what a liberal

should be. I am very liberal and open-minded and tolerant. However I would never bash someone for not being liberal enough. That smacks of zealotry to me. I don't like zealots of any stripe be they right wing loonie fundies or left wing neocommunists, although I acknowledge everybody has a right to their own personal beliefs, whether or not we agree with them, and nobody has the right to force their beliefs down other peoples throat. I stongly believe that class warfare (which seems to be what you want) won't accomplish anything in this country. This is still a democracy, even with the damage * and co have done and the majority in this country are very middle of the road. Agitation has its place. But if we Democrats want to retain any influence in the government and with the American populace in general we need to try to work in reasonable ways. If we become viewed as violent, marxist loonies what will that accomplish except for letting the Repubs back in power. You must play to the moderates and be willing to compromise (which our great leader does not do and you see where that has gotten us) in order to accomplish anything.
I do agree with your point with politicians but unfortunately if they really worked for us, they wouldn't spend the valuable time they should be campaigning for a election almost 2 YEARS away. I really do object to the fact that it seems today's politician is more interested in running constant campaigns than actually do anything. Then of course their is the whole fundraising reform issue. I don't mind discussing candidates when the elections get closer, but right now I think we ought to be focusing on the issues as you suggest. There now I have said me piece and will get off my soapbox.:rant:

[Lord Byron]

102. You make a good point

Though I think that the fact that Bush doesn't compromise should make us desire to push even further in our direction. Or else we're compromising with a crooked man while the victory is his.

[TZ]

109. yeah but I don't want to be anything like them do you? nt

[ConcentrationCramp]

181. What you said could all make sense

except for one thing.

There already IS class warfare. The very rich are waging warfare on everyone else and they are unopposed currently. Tell me which Democratic opposes them? Even Kucinich falls short with "moral equiavlence" load of dogshit on the I/P issue (and in other areas though less glaringly).

Even Warren Buffet admitted as much when he said "Heck yeah there's class warfare, and we're winning!"

That renders your entire post invalid. It is also fair to say that you greatly misassess the American people when you think of think as centrist troglodytes who have to be 'lead' along the right path. The unwashed masses are more Marxist loonies than you are.

[TZ]

199. in my experience

most of the other people I know are farther to the right than me ( I am definitely not considered a centrist). And many of the "unwashed masses" as you call them seem lean more towards the fundie right than anything. If what you said was true, why do people still try to smear people with the labels of "liberal" let alone "socialist" or "communist"?

[izzybeans]

99. Most people here are not stargazers.

There are plenty of them though.

[Lord Byron]

103. Some of you guys are pretty mean

I don't get it.

[Junkdrawer]

105. Build a left wing site with millions of views, and you'll get posers...

trying to divide us and spin us to their point of view.

Too juicy a target to pass up.

[babylonsister]

106. You need a real thick skin to post on DU. I hope you have the 'stuff' to

endure the criticism, as that too can be educational. It is a shame that people can't just post their opinions without getting snarky but some people can't help it.
I hope you keep posting your thoughts, Lord Byron, as no one's opinion is better than anyone else's.

[muriel_volestrangler]

110. When you start a thread saying many DUers are doing things wrong

you have to expect criticism back. That's the way it is here.

[devilgrrl]

112. Boo hoo

pantywaist

[mondo joe]

113. What, don't care for the agitating?

Make up your mind.

[WilliamPitt]

123. Hang on.

"We must agitate. Now."

...turns into...

"Some of you guys are pretty mean"

Um, yeah. We are. We have to be. Politics is rough. Bring a helmet, expect some bruises, and when you call for agitation, don't be surprised when you get it.

Jeez.

[byronius]

126. Hey, don't be bringin' some sort of balanced view into this thread.

The entertainment value just plunges when you do that.

My tin-foil helmet doesn't seem to work very well when it comes to concussions -- but it keeps the Rays of Heffle from turning me into a flesh-eater, like my pa. Like my ma used to say, 'a bruised brain is an interesting thing to see in the CAT scan'. That was afore the Heffle Rays got 'er.

Agitatin' like a Kenmore -- YEEEEEHAW!

[ConcentrationCramp]

149. No, Will

This is agitation:

http://boston.indymedia.org/feature/display/36351

[WilliamPitt]

150. No

That was annoyance.

[ConcentrationCramp]

151. If by annoyance you mean you being peevish

There is a "split" in the left. There are those who claim to be in "the left" who think they are really playing model UN. They offer "realistic" advice about what Uncle Sam should try. They are "pragmatic" and they are they claim they are only being so in order to save the Iraqis from themselves, since they are from the "beacon democracy" of the world. They have not yet managed to learn enough history or travel and experience other cultures enough to even *notice* that they are steeped in "western" supremacy. Many of these also seem to be very resume conscious, despite claims to the contrary.

Then, there are those who understand that the US is now and has always been about colonial conquest, theft, expansion and genocide. They understand that the US is the last government to be trusted to help human beings live longer, healthier lives, especially if these human beings are not rich and of European descent. They understand that the US empire that is consolidating global hegemony is a bipartisan process that serves unaccountable corporate interests, is capable of making human survival on earth impossible in the not too distant future.

William, you are in the Model UN camp, believer in the promise of" Western progress and democracy" to be shared with the rest of the world...


There is alot more in the comment section on the linked article.

[uppityperson]

155. What linked article, and posting all in bold makes my eyes hurt.

[ConcentrationCramp]

171. Sorry I couldn't get Quote to work

article is here and also linked to about four posts up

http://boston.indymedia.org/feature/display/36351

[WilliamPitt]

187. You're right, I don't buy it.

I'm no fool, and know the score, but a lot of what is described above is a phenomenon that began in the mid-1800s, as the railroad barons flexed their economic muscle. The underpinnings of the founding documents are sound, and are the remedy if we choose to use it.

And yeah, it was peevish. I was peeved.

[specimenfred1984]

127. Whannnnnnnnnn

Whannnnnnnnnn

[ConcentrationCramp]

148. Lord Byron

I've ghosted on DU from time to time, but have never felt compelled to participate for exactly the reason(s) you state in your OP. The 'Left' as represented by the Democratic Party in the US, has no idea what 'Left' means anywhere else in the world. Some think WillPitt is a solid far-leftist for Chrissakes.

The problem I see you having is even getting into social issues. Those arguments should be consigned to a realm other than politics. You are right, the most important issue is socioeconomic injustice. It's the ONLY issue.

What someone personally think about guns has nothing to do with it. Whst someone personally thinks about abortion has nothing to do with it. What someone personally thinks about gay marriage has nothing to do with it.

You can be a 'progressive' and go either way on all of those questions personally. They are divisive and merely diversions from the larger concern of social and economic injustice.

The people telling you that you are confused are likely to be lesiure class boutique liberals who are more concerned with hammering out iron-clad 'position papers' than helping the poor to survive, or reining in Big Business globally.

One perfect example where religion (especially the Catholic Church traditionally) gives us more moral clarity than any politician is Healthcare. Even here at DU, 'Universal Healthcare' is code for mandatory tax-payer funded health insurance. That is an outrage.

[Lord Byron]

153. Everyone on this thread should read your post

You summed it up a lot better than I could, and your words prove a valid defense to my position on "cultural" issues (on which I elaborated in my post "An answer").

[ConcentrationCramp]

173. I've already linked to this twice

but I suggest reading it, the comments by user Aimee are particularly relevant IMO

http://boston.indymedia.org/feature/display/36351

[uppityperson]

158. How does the Catholic church give moral clarity on healthcare?

And, do you believe in paying taxes? For what purposes?

[ConcentrationCramp]

170. Many Popes have written on subject

the obligation of the employer to his laborers, and how it is greater than the obligations of the laborer to his employer. 'Blessed be the poor?'

This has nothing to do with taxation. It has to do with middle class intellectuals failing to act to rectify the enormous disparity between rich and poor and then throwing up their hands and taxing the poor even more instead. That is a moral failing of the middle class, which is most of DU incidentally.

[uppityperson]

180. "tax-payer funded health insurance" seems to imply taxation.

Again, because it was written in the bible "Blessed be the poor" and because many popes has written and spoken on this subject, how does this give more moral clarity? I guess that my morals are because I was raised librul christian, or am I librul christian because of my morals?

You said "tax-payer funded health insurance" which seems to imply taxation. Now you say that the middle class is what is trying to tax the poor more?

Finally, what makes you say that most of DU is middle class, and what would your definition of middle class be?

[Name removed]

182. Deleted message

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

[uppityperson]

184. You didn't register to explain what you mean, to define terms but to insult?

Defining and explaining is posturing by puking out psuedo-intellectual clap-trap? ok.

I think you hold a different view of "Activist Democrats" than I do.

So most of DU is peole who have time to do nothing but bitch about Bush's every move and drool over the new ga-ga iPhone? I think you associate with different Duers than I do.

Thank you for replying.

[NoSheep]

178. !

:popcorn:

[NewJeffCT]

108. "I'm not a member of an organized political party - I'm a Democrat."

Comedian Will Rogers said that way back in the 1920s.

The great strength of our party is our diversity - and it is not just a diversity in race, sex, sexual preference or religion. It is in our diversity of ideas.

[byronius]

114. A remark from Brother in Username.

1) I have to strongly question a 'progressive' who believes in kid-whacking, as you posted on that thread the other day.

2) There are no clear boundaries. Everyone is a mix, especially here. Witness yourself. Many others are ultra-far-left on every issue but three, on which they have assumed their parent's moderate conservative position. It's all change and growth and morphing with time and experience and knowledge. This is a great place for growth and process. Casting aspersions on other's progressive credentials is poor form -- better to do the work than apply the labels. That's fruitless.

3) You a meat-eater, are you? A meat-eater that believes in spanking? Hmm. If so, you're middlin' to me.

[mopinko]

122. who do you think took over the congress?

rahm and chuck? guess again. try dfa, pda, and just plain old pissed off dems, educated in places like du, who got out and worked the phones, and knocked on doors, and gave whenever the bat went up.
we are the revolution that is occuring right now. are you a part of it? or do you just blather on online?
you do not have the whole picture, pal.

[More Than A Feeling]

128. I resent having my patriotism used to hold my vote hostage

and its worse when a politician builds an entire electoral strategy around doing that to people like me. I still believe that 99% of democrats are better than any Republican, but I am no longer happy about it, if that is my only justification for voting for them. Most of the time it isn't, though, so that makes it slightly better.

[specimenfred1984]

130. How are your repuke buddies phillip and tmr?

from over on Yahoo's AP business boards, huh byron1moreno? After a few years of lies and propaganda, what made you decide to bring your BS over here?

Just asking, I didn't mean to "be mean", lol.

[Lord Byron]

154. I really have no idea what you're talking about

Why would my name be byron1moreno? I have nothing to do with him and have never posted on Yahoo business boards.

[Mrspeeker]

131. I would tent do agree but.....

We post those media story's and thats what they are, just freaking stories, and then discuss them and shot them down pretty much, and theres always a guy like me that comes along and says this is just the SO CALLED FREE PRESS writing another story.

I would also agree with you on the whole we NEED to talk issues but thats what we are doing here.

As far as the Clinton vs Obama stuff well the presidential elections are so bought and paid for and the fact that the popular vote does not elect the president but the electoral college does and then the president goes onto appoint most of the government just looks like the IRANIAN government to me.

So what options do we have? all we can do is join a already rigged race and try hard to get some air time for are favorite in the hope that their views might be heard enough to stick!

A lot of people don't realize the full spectrum of the elites control on society, through control of the Federal reserve via the world banks, and the control of the entire government by huge corporations and defense contractors donations which dictate who and when is going to do what ever. the telecommunication Acts where a pinnacle to, it gave the government and corporations what they wanted which was even broader control of the media, so much so that now talking points from the white house make there debut on FOX news.

So what is really going on? well in short, its not about a side necessarily or being really progressive its about a small really powerfully and rich group of people that have been able to subdue and fool the masses. They have done it monetarily, religiously, and though means of force if necessary. Who are these people you ask? well thats the thing they remain hidden cause thats the beauty of it all.

So don't look down on DU because a lot of what we are doing is just throwing these Media story's out there so we can really see the holes in them!

[porphyrian]

132. I agree, except you don't get to set the agenda here, either.

You'll get more done by example than by trying to control others' behavior. Don't tell us what to do. Show us why we should do it.

[Bridget Burke]

134. So start some threads based on ideas & action.

Not just bitching about candidates you don't like. Or about most DU'ers--whom you apparently don't like, either.

And--just where do you stand on social issues. Details, please!

[mzmolly]

137. You make some good points. However, Clinton did do many things on

socioeconomic inequality. What one should note above all when joining DU is the word "Democratic" in Democratic Underground. That word refers to "Democratic" as in the "Democratic Party." So, it should come as no surprise to find that we support Democrats here.

However, I love this point:

I notice that instead of taking the fight to the rulers, we take their points and battle it out on their behalf. I notice that instead of talking about issues, we talk about personalities.

Well said!

:patriot:

[NoSheep]

140. I'm with you!

:toast:

[0rganism]

141. YOU are DU -- start your own topics, on your own terms

If you want to see something other than what's here already, there's no one stopping you from doing what you just did -- start a thread.

Keep in mind tho -- DU auto-triangulates to accomodate the moderates, conservative dems, and outright trolls who also populate the forums. If your pet issues don't float as well as you thought they would, perhaps you'll have better luck getting discussion in one of the specialty forums. Take a look, I bet there's one or two that have just the people you're looking for.

[alfredo]

142. Will Rogers was right

"I don't belong to an organized political party;. I'm a Democrat."


One suggestion, follow the example of DFA. Their goal is to help elect progressive (Democratic) candidates. Arguing side issues mean nothing without the power to do something about it.

We have been right for a long time, but we were losing. Now our time has come, let's show we can govern. Let's show them we are the adults.


Let's stop this bickering.

Stop fighting and get involved. Go here, find a local chapter and join. If there isn't one, build one.

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/ DFA isn't about Dean, it is about winning. Get involved.

Kentucky residents, your DFA goes by the name "Change For Kentucky" (CFK). See the link below.

[BlueEyedSon]

143. BS. The majority of DU was against the war before it was "fashionable"

[IronLionZion]

144. "Be the change you wish to see in the world." - M.K. Gandhi

"If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me." - I don't know who said this.

I'm pretty much a spectator/follower, but if you want to lead then you go right ahead. YOU push the issues. YOU revolutionize the political discourse. YOU push, unite, agitate, whatever you want to do...

Even though you are new, YOU are part of this community now. YOU are DU. And I respect your social conservative viewpoint. No matter what your views are, you'll find there are many here who agree with some of your views, and many that seem to disagree with all of your views, but you'll be hard-pressed to find even one DUer who will agree with ALL of your views. And that shouldn't stop you.

Welcome to DU. Wear a helmet and develop a thick skin. At the end of the day everything you see here are just words on a screen, so don't take the bullshit too seriously or get offended and run away. It's just words. It's the resulting actions inspired from the words that make all the difference in the world.

[mitchtv]

145. Socially conservative, but progressive

socioeconomically. Sounds fishy to me. anti gay, anti choice, anti science? , But progressive? ( whatever that means) I'm just a liberal

[Lord Byron]

157. Read post 148

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=77104&mesg_id=83731

[mondo joe]

200. You are both full of crap. I don't buy that you can be "progressive" but go either way on civil

rights.

[mike_c]

146. the character of DU has changed over the years....

Lots of folks left and post elsewhere now.

[happydreams]

147. No, help from you "Lord". How do you unrecommend a post?

It's equivocators and half-steppers like you that are the problem.

[blondeatlast]

156. There's plenty of other sites on the web, just not as big and spirited.

You must choose, Grasshopper.

[byronius]

159. If you can snatch the pebble from my palm, it's time for you to leave.

But if you eat the pebble, you need to stay and post in the lounge more.

[MasonJar]

163. I am pushing for more attention to the environment, the other living

creatures of this earth and for a renewal of the paper ballot. That said I am waiting to see if Al Gore enters the race; if he does not, I am behind Hillary all the way. It is time for a woman pres. The men have not done too well. However, if you dems choose someone else, I will work just as hard for him. No more Republics is my motto. GWB and the Cheney cabal are enough for the rest of my lifetime.

[Lord Byron]

165. So the fact that Hillary is a woman makes you support her?

What if someone said "I'll support the man, because the women haven't done so well?" What about the stand on the issues? Maggie Thatcher was a woman.

[Bridget Burke]

164. Pretending a moment that I can ignore the "social" issues....

How, exactly, do you propose to fight "socioeconomic inequality." (Perhaps you should leave off that "socio"--it's too much like "social.")

What's your work history? Union background?

Oh, and add some relevant quotations from Schopenhauer & Kierkegaard!

[Lord Byron]

166. Taxes, tariffs, restructuring, government programs

Duh

[Bridget Burke]

167. Duh?

Look, I don't have a heavy-duty business background.

Which taxes? Which tariffs? What restructuring? What government programs?

Which recent politician has done good work in this area?

(No Schopenhauer & Kierkegaard?)

[Lord Byron]

174. Take trade for example

Work can be done by subsidizing certain industries who would suffer from a reimposing of certain tariffs. To fund these subsidies, it would be necessary to raise government revenue, by taxation.

It's difficult for me to say so-and-so did good work because we're talking about a broad agenda. This would entail party discipline and a commitment to a goal. The Republicans had their "contract with America." We haven't been as bold.

[Maven]

188. No, sorry. Subsidies for most industries violate international law.

So it's not going to happen.

Please try again.

[Bridget Burke]

197. What about the government revenue we're wasting in Iraq?

And Afghanistan? And soon, possibly, Iran? Don't you think that ending/preventing illegal wars would help the economy?

Or is this another issue that's beneath you?

Another DU'er has pointed out that your proposal is illegal. Got any more?

[Flabbergasted]

168. K and R this. It would help as a big forum....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=67272&mesg_id=67272

[Kerrytravelers]

175. I'm honestly curious...

What was your intention with this thread? What kind of responses did you expect? What direction did you want this thread to go in? You basically told us we weren't good enough Dems, but we had to pry your beliefs out of you. What was the original intention?

[Lord Byron]

183. Never said you were not good enough

Never said you were not good enough dems. My intent was to see what people had to say. Many people agreed with me. Many didn't. I tried to respond to all of the negative posts. Hope I did a good job.

[AikidoSoul]

186. Like you I haven't been posting to DU for very long, but I find the diversity

Self deleted -- it was a mess.

[Joe Chi Minh]

189. Great, great post!

[AikidoSoul]

190. Let's try this again Lord Byron

Like many DUers, I worry about the super rich elites who are increasingly controlling our world.

"Increasingly" is the operative word here.

We see it everywhere -- the increasing networks of intricate monitoring and control going into place that can potentially make us all highly controllable.

Control exerted by the elites at this point in the history of the world--- is far, far more dangerous than in any time in history --due to the enormously powerful technology at their fingertips.

Add the explosive, dangerous conditions of our day when we see many of our large systems (economic, social, environmental) being pressured simultaneously to the breaking point.

Hitler only needed one of those breaking points to succeed with his brand of fascist power.

Now those who created these monumental systemic problems, are consolidating their power to control us when it all hits the fan.

I think they are PURPOSELY ACCELERATING all of this so it will hit the fan while they’re still in power.

If and when disaster strikes, the sheer monstrosity of events will distract us all and easily sweep all of talk and worry about the usurping of the Constitution underneath the bloody cloak of wailing, fear and tears.

Then they can consolidate their power to a degree unheard of in human history.

This administration qualifies for aiding and abetting this accelerating plunge into darkness for all of civilization.

Remember….slavery and torture are o.k. with these guys.

This administration and its collaborators have become the single greatest force for rapidly creating a DEVOLUTION of what it means to be decent, fair human.

Civilization was meant to climb much, much higher than this.

We were meant to someday finally learn that we are all connected together – every living creature, every rock, every molecule of air.

We were meant to follow the path of great thinkers, of prophets, poets and storytellers.

I agree with your point about the importance of discussing issues and believe that some DUers are in fact quite articulate in expressing the pros and cons of almost any issue.

The more articulate we become the more we can express these ideas and present them to each other and the public in speech, art and music....

But at the end of the day we will still have too many corporate candidates that are hand picked by the elites, to be elected by corrupt voting technology.

Please don’t forget for a second that the elections have been increasingly rigged since 2000, INCLUDING the last election, BUT IT WASN’T RIGGED BY ENOUGH OF A PERCENTAGE for the Repunks to win it all.

We were robbed of a landslide, but we squeaked in.

In many ways it was a miracle that we won.

One can see many battles lines drawn much more clearly now.

Meanwhile I worry about all those concentration-camp-like buildings we're seeing going up in the U.S.

What are they for?

Are they for when disaster strikes?

Is the elite getting ready for when these systems fail and society crumbles?

I don't know what the next step is, but Thomas Jefferson had a lot to say about what needs to be done when a country is broiling from within from growing iron tyranny (and fascism). One thing he said was this:

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established, should not be changed for light and transient causes; and, accordingly, all experience shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." --Thomas Jefferson: Declaration of Independence, 1776. ME 1:29, Papers 1:429

I simply pray that this Congress very quickly creates a highly efficient team of thinkers, doers, and activists who can rapidly devise and put into place a fair voting system before the next elections. This has to be done with a great deal of PR in each of the most key states in order to get the cooperation of state elections officials.

This battle cannot be won through a voting process corrupted by the criminal element of the ruling classes.

Welcome to DU Lord Byron. You are welcome here and you will find friends here who think more like you do.

Hopefully you are open to both teaching and learning.

It's true that you have to have a very thick skin to get along here.

Whatever possessed you to choose an elitist name like Lord Byron to chat in this particular left-leaning arena?

That name might remind some of us of the archetype of The Tyrant ... or even one of the super rich elite, or similar type individual -- you know…like in old England, like in the court of King George or somebody like that.

Maybe the name "Lord Bunny" would make you more lovable.

[happydreams]

191. You don't give a shit about anything "Lord"

"We must agitate now". :eyes:

Your the same fool who condemns true agitators against this fascist monstrosity like Hugo Chavez and Castro. THEY ARE PEOPLE WHO FOUGHT THE SON-OF-BITCHES.

If the US degenerates into chaos and it will be the gutless weasels who, even after being informed repeatedly, resort to emotionalism when confronted with real leaders.

[DemBones DemBones]

192. You're right, there's not enough discussion of

socioeconomic issues, everyone is distracted by the wedge issues, and there's far too much support for same old same old politics and politicians . There were more good discussions when DU was small; the site is a victim of its own success in many ways. We need more independent thinking, more diversity of views, but apparently that's not wanted by the majority.

[Warren DeMontague]

193. Eh. Thanks for telling us what we should talk about, care about, and what we're supposed to think.

I happen to think a socially libertarian approach to personal freedom and civil liberties, fighting the theocratic nutbags who want to drag us back to the 14th century, protecting the environment and pursuing commonsense solutions, like a SPHC system, to the concerns of working-class Americans.. That *IS* progressivism, to me. That IS what being a "progressive" is about.

Getting back the right of people to make their own damn decisions about their own lives and bodies. Re-establishing the primacy of the Bill of Rights in American life and governance. These are not second-tier items on my list, the ARE the list.

And you know what? The folks I've known who were wont to bitch at me that I wasn't "progressive" enough were the ones who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 and 2004. Screw em.

[Synnical]

194. No shit

Welcome to DU.

I feel your pain.

[PassingFair]

195. Why do you hate America?

Sit down.
Shut up.
Wait for the republicans to fuck up so badly
that the corporate dems can waltz in without
stirring up the shit.

Jeez.



Can I get you some ice water while you wait? :)


:sarcasm:

Do not attempt to adjust your dial:

[liberaldemocrat7]

196. check your DU private mail.

.

[devilgrrl]

202. Oh dear, the OP got the granite....

Shocking! :sarcasm:

[mondo joe]

203. It's too early in the morning to dance or sing.

But I may hum a happy tune.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

205. 70 Recommends for a Tombstoned OP.

Gotta be a record.

[devilgrrl]

206. How many were sincere recommendations?

I'm thinking many were being facetious - I was.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

209. I guess the record will have an *.

[piedmont]

207. RIP Lord Byron. I hardly knew ye.

Sorry DU wasn't up to your expectations.

:rofl:

[bring_em_home_bush]

208. no, I guess it's not

my mistake, too.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

210. And Thou Art Dead, As Young and Fair

And thou art dead, as young and fair
As aught of mortal birth;
And form so soft, and charms so rare,
Too soon return'd to Earth!

more ...
http://englishhistory.net/byron/poems/dead.html

[wakemeupwhenitsover]

211. I'm going to lock this since the

original poster is no longer a member.

best,
wakemeupwhenitsover
DU Moderator