These Are The Times

[NanceGreggs]

I have rarely posted here over the past four months – not due to lack of interest, but due to a desire to step back and analyze what is being posted here, and why.

I am known as a “cheerleader” for this Administration (and don’t taze me, Mod bros, for having invoked a term considered taboo). The truth is that I have chosen to opine on the positives of this president and his administration – a personal choice that in no way denotes the sense of “worship” that I, along with others, have been accused of.

I do not opine on this Administration’s position on education – because there are teachers here who are vastly more knowledgeable than I on the subject. And I defer to their better judgment on how such policies impact not only on their ability to teach, but the students they hope to educate.

I do not opine on the need for electoral reform, environmental issues, GBLT rights – and a myriad of other topics – because we have among us experts in the fields; i.e. people who have made such subjects a cause celebre, and know (far better than I) whereof they speak.

I believe we have often confused support for this Presidency as blind acquiescence – just as often as we’ve confused valid criticism of its policies as unsupported bashing. The sincere among us (on both “sides”, if you will) often raise our voices out of hot-headed passion rather than cooler heads being allowed to prevail. And vice-versa.

I have raised two children, and have supported them throughout. Although I may have disagreed (vehemently at times) with their choice of career, companions, lifestyle, education, career opportunities, etc., my support has been unwavering. Support does not always equal agreement with every choice – just as criticism does not always equal a complete withdrawal of support. It is a distinction with a difference – and I believe a lot of us (myself included) have failed miserably in discerning the difference between the two. Supporting the current Administration does not equate to agreement with its every decision; criticism of this Administration does not equate to bashing. We would all be wise to note the difference.

There are those among us (and I’m not naming names, but I think the vast majority of us know who they are) who have consistently posted only the most negative of comments, article excerpts, op-eds they can find on the internetz and the MSM, in order to quash optimism and dissuade voters from thinking that their vote matters.

There are those among us who have labelled themselves as representative of “true progressives’, “true leftists”, “true Democrats”, and have, in the doing, labelled all of those who disagree with their every agenda item as somehow being less worthy, less valid, less sincere in our efforts to see this country move forward rather than backward, as though such labels – self-proclaimed and self-affixed – are to be accepted without question, or factual support.

We are – and always have been, forever and ever, amen – the party of the Big Tent. Our strength has always been not our sameness, but our diversity; our sweeping inclusion of the centrists, the moderately-left, the extreme left, and everyone who falls within the scope of those who desire change for the better, immediate or painstakingly gradual, as the case may be.

“You’re either with us or against us.” It’s a phrase that, once uttered by one G.W. Bush, immediately fell into disrepute. Accepted as a RW talking point and nothing more, it lost its true meaning as a rallying cry for those of us who, on the left, pose it as a valid question. You are either with us or against us – you are either with the Democrats who, with all of their failings and flaws, are for progress – or you are with those who would see our nation move backwards in opposition to every step forward the Democrats have made, no matter how slight you might perceive such steps to be.

There are times when we must choose our battles – not only against the “other side”, but amongst ourselves. There are times when we must, as a widely diverse group, speak up as individuals – and there are times when we must speak with one voice.

The time to speak as one is now.

Speak up in November. Or forever hold your piece – for what it’s worth after-the-fact.

“I told you so” may warrant kudos on certain websites, populated by those who deem themselves to be (despite all numbers to the contrary), the “real voice” of the Party – as though there is some victory to be found in the defeat of those who purport to be the “base” thereof.

You’re either with the Democratic Party, or you’re against it.

Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side.

[shraby]

1. This is up to the standards I expect from Nance. Kudos kid.

[rhett o rick]

296. Is the OP intended to unite the party ?

I would think that most Democrats would object to the "get in line and shut up" tone of this piece.

[billh58]

331. And I think that

you have a clouded, pre-conceived view of what, or who, constitutes "most Democrats." If you perceive the OP as a get-in-line-and-shut-up message, you must be reading a different version than the one I read.

I read the version that urges Democrats to pull together for the good of our nation, and to strive to protect those gains (however small) that we have fought for -- as Democrats.

[rhett o rick]

339. How do you get "let's all pull together", from "Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side."? nm

[billh58]

342. Easy. For the foreseeable

future in the US, either a Republican or a Democrat will win a vast majority of contested elections, and Third Party candidates will be either inconsequential, or act as spoilers in some races and allow Republicans to win.

That bit of real-world fact suggests that if you want to make your vote count, you will either vote Republican or Democratic: Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side.

You can criticize Democrats all you want, but on election day, a Democrat will remain the best hope for the future of this country. If you do not believe that, then as Nance suggests, you need to reassess your political stance. If you are an "Independent" who subscribes to the "best man (or woman)" school-of-thought, then "picking a side" is something that you may not understand.

I have picked a side, and I am an American Democrat.

[rhett o rick]

343. If the OP was intended to unite it failed. If anyone is sitting on the fence they would not

react well to be told to "pick a Fucking side". Her insinuation as yours is that we are not all Democrats, that we havent "picked a FUCKING side." Please see http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=440840&mesg_id=442503

I have read many posts, some in this thread, indicating a disillusionment among GOOD AMERICAN DEMOCRATS with the current administration. I understand them completely. These people need to be rallied, NOT THREATENED. Is it wrong for them to want more for the people?

The only reason I can think of for people, like Rahm, to belittle and threaten the left, is that they are trying to impress the centrists to get their votes. They are taking the left for granted. And then to add insult to injury, they threaten that if the left doesnt toe the line, we will get another Bush.

I am an American Democrat party member. I participate locally and support Democrats nationally. I will fight hard for Democrats in fact that's why I am upset by this OP. I feel it hurts Democrats more than it helps.

[billh58]

348. I appreciate your

explanation, and tend to agree with some of your points, however, we will just have to agree to disagree on the meaning and intent of this particular OP. I read it as a rallying cry to ALL Democrats to put ideological differences aside for the moment, and to support even Democrats that may not meet all of our standards. I read this OP as an honest, and needed, call to the extremely polarized Democratic factions here on DU to unify for the upcoming elections as Democrats first, and ideologues last. And, because we are having this conversation, I don't believe that the OP, or its message has "failed" at all. I am heartened by the many positive responses to this OP.

To my way of thinking, the terms "Left," "Far Left," "Progressive," and "Liberal," can, and do, mean very different things to most Middle American Democrats. The one thing that we can all agree on, however, is that the term "Neoconservative" and its proponents bodes ill for this nation. We, as American Democrats, MUST ensure a Democratic majority in Congress, and continued control of the Oval Office for as long as possible.

The call to "Pick. A. Fuckin. Side." I believe, refers to Democrats vs. Republicans, or "Independents" vs. both Democrats and Republicans, and NOT the various flavors of Democrats vs. each other.

[rhett o rick]

353. I am continuing because I think this is an important issue.

We both want the same thing. I just disagree that OP's like this are helping. You say that there are lots of positive responses and I agree. But all of the positive responses are from those that already agreed with the OP. I doubt that anybody on the fence was swayed. In fact, I believe that the OP pissed off a lot of people. Look at all the deleted messages here. Not a very unifying OP.

Again, we need to rally together, not tell each other to "pick a fucking side".

[billh58]

354. Most of the

deleted messages appear to be from one, or maybe two people at most, and is not a fair assessment of the overall response to the OP. Again, I believe that you, and others, are purposely choosing to interpret the OP as telling other Democrats ("each other") to "Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side." "Picking a side," obviously refers to those who are here to bash Democrats for the sole purpose of causing disruption.

"Picking a side" refers to those DU members who have stated that they are so "disgusted" with Democrats, they will either not vote, or vote for the "best person" regardless of political affiliation. It refers to "Independents," and Third-Party promoters who will vote for "spoilers," and justify it by claiming they are taking the "high ground."

"Picking a side" does NOT refer to Democrats who are critical of their Party, or the current administration, but are sensible enough to see that the alternatives to voting a straight Democratic ticket are not an option if we are to keep the dangerous likes of Gingrich, O'Donnell, and Palin out of office.

I agree that those who are only here to disrupt, or who are using DU to espouse an ideology which does NOT represent mainstream American Democrats (Third Party promoters) will not likely be swayed to pick the Democratic side, or to vote Democratic. In that case -- no harm, no foul -- as they were not going to vote Democratic in any event.

[rhett o rick]

355. I am purposefully choosing to interpret the OP?? This author is busy in another thread trashing the

left. I dont know who the mysterious left is but I am sick of the continued attacks. I have asked every single poster that I can that trashes the left to tell me "On what issues do you disagree with whom ever the left is". I have never gotten a response. Why the attacks on the left?

Nance says that some proclaim themselves to be the left and trash the president. I am aware there are such people. That is no excuse to wage war.

At a time when we need to pull together, this author continues to sow dissent.

And I ask you, who i assume arent on the "left", on what issues do you disagree with who ever you thinks is the left?

Medicare for all? Single payer health insurance? The Bush Wars? Patriot Act? DADT? Military Commissions Act? Domestic spying? Prosecuting the Bush war criminals? More jobs? Corporate bailouts?

On which of these issues to you disagree with the stand of the left?????

[billh58]

357. Nice try, but

I will not be drawn into a discussion about the expansive ideological makeup of Democrats, or their individual causes. Since I am seven decades old, my perceptions of what constitutes the political ideological spectrum have changed with almost every passing decade since I became old enough to vote. It is an ever-changing landscape. And, FWIW, it appears that you are very close to "calling out" the author of this OP. Let's just stick to the premise of the OP and leave personal animosity out of it, okay?

I am an American Democrat (as opposed to the various European versions of Social Democrats) who believes that there are two basic kinds of people: those who believe in the "survival of the fittest" societal model, and those of us who believe that we are indeed our brother's keeper. By and large Republicans fall into the former category, and Democrats into the latter.

I pay little attention to "Independents," and Third-Party proponents who are very vocal about their dissatisfaction with both Republicans AND Democrats. In reality (and for the foreseeable future) a candidate from one of the two mainstream political Parties will win the vast majority of most contested political offices. I choose to vote for Democrats since voting every two- to four-years is my only meaningful input (by Constitutional design) into our representative form of government. It is a deliberately slow process as foreseen by the Founders to be the prudent and cautious approach to societal change.

Fortunately, I have lived long enough to have witnessed Democrats lead this country out of an atmosphere of inequity, servitude, poverty, and ignorance into the light of equality, knowledge, and a chance at a decent life for all. We still have a long way to go, but our history gives us the impetus and edge to continue our successes. I am pleased that Democrats have managed to make even small changes for the better in this, and previous administrations. It is not about me you see, rather it is about laying the foundations for improvement by future generations of forward-thinking Americans.

Spewing vitriol and animosity toward fellow Democrats, be they "Left," "Far Left," "Liberal," "Centrist," or any combination of those somewhat meaningless terms, is a learned behavior born of the Ronny Raygun, Newt Gingrich, Lee Atwater hate machine of the 70s and 80s in their successful attempts to demonize Liberalism. Even Democrats began to run from the label. The most recent Democratic Primary Campaign was the worst Internet "me first" spectacle by so-called "Progressives" I have ever witnessed in my relatively long-lived political experience. The aftermath of that sad affair is being carried on to this day, and has taken on an extremely divisive, and meaningless, life of its own.

In reality, there are only two viable political Parties in the United States, and a candidate from one of those affiliations will win the vast majority of the political seats available. The winners, in turn, will "appoint" others of their Party to positions of power. Voting anything but a straight Democratic ticket (including voting for a "spoiler" candidate) will only result in opening the door for Republicans to promote their ideas for social regression, and a worsening American economy.

There are only two sides: Republican, or Democratic. Pick the one which will provide the most good for the most people -- however long that takes.

[rhett o rick]

361. I give up. You go ahead and with the author of this OP drive a wedge between the left and who ever

you are. I am not sure what your motivation could be. I think we agree on the issues but you wont say. You will not tell me how you feel about the same issues the left is fighting for. What is your motive?

[billh58]

363. I have already answered

your question, but you may have missed it. From my previous post:

"Spewing vitriol and animosity toward fellow Democrats, be they "Left," "Far Left," "Liberal," "Centrist," or any combination of those somewhat meaningless terms, is a learned behavior born of the Ronny Raygun, Newt Gingrich, Lee Atwater hate machine of the 70s and 80s in their successful attempts to demonize Liberalism. Even Democrats began to run from the label. The most recent Democratic Primary Campaign was the worst Internet "me first" spectacle by so-called "Progressives" I have ever witnessed in my relatively long-lived political experience. The aftermath of that sad affair is being carried on to this day, and has taken on an extremely divisive, and meaningless, life of its own."

If you believe that calling yourself "Left" somehow sets you apart from mainstream Democrats, and gives you some sort of moral superiority, then please re-read the paragraph above. The vitriol and divisiveness begun during the 2008 Primary Campaign is alive and well at DU, while the vast majority of non-vocal Democrats have moved on.

There is no viable Left Party, Centrist Party, or Independent Party -- only a viable Democratic Party whose candidates will either win, or lose, seats. Who then, is driving a wedge into the heart of the Democratic Party at DU? Hint: it is not mainstream, Middle American Democrats.

[rhett o rick]

366. I want to know who YOU define as left. YOU and Rahm and Nance call the left. I dont define myself

as left. I dont feel "some sort of moral superiority" and I am sickened that you and who ever your side is keep saying that. You, yes you and Nance and Rambo are the ones driving a wedge between who ever you think you are and who ever YOU think is the left.

I have asked repeatedly for YOU to explain who the left is and how they differ from you and Nance and Rambo. But you wont say.

Funny how you will allow Arlen Specter in "your" tent but not the "left" (your definition).

If you want a united party, you are not doing a very good job.

[billh58]

367. Sigh...

You, my friend, are the one who defined the Left as a DU group a few posts up: "You will not tell me how you feel about the same issues the left is fighting for. What is your motive?" Your words -- not mine. I don't define ANYONE as being anything other than a Republican or a Democrat.

I have repeatedly attempted to tell you that those labels are meaningless to me, and to most Democrats I know. I would never attempt to define anyone as anything other than a Democrat, or a Republican. The only "side" I am on is being an American first, and a Democrat next. If you feel a need to define yourself as something other than a Democrat, then you are having the identity crisis and not me. The last time I checked, there are only two major "sides": Republicans and Democrats. Those who self-identify as "Independents," or subscribe to Third-Party ideologies do not have any meaningful representation at ANY level of government, and are no better than the Tea Baggers.

I will say it one last time: I am an American Democrat. If someone registers in their voting district as a Democrat, and votes Democratic, then I suspect they are Democrats as well. I have never seen a ballot, or a voter registration form that asks if the voter is "Left," "Right," or "Centrist." I have nothing but contempt for those who pretend to be "Independent" and refuse to pick a side, and waste their votes on spoiler candidates, or threaten to withhold their vote if their "demands" are not met.

You are free to call yourself anything you like. My only hope is that you vote Democratic. You may now have the last word, as it is evident that you only want to pick a fight with someone you perceive to be your opponent. Nothing could be further from the truth bubba...;-)

[rhett o rick]

368. You accuse me of picking a fight. Read the OP. Read the OP. nm

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. Well said, my dear Nance...as always.

I know where I am...

I plan to vote Democratic this fall...because the other side is just plain unacceptable.


Recommended.

[txlibdem]

73. Of course we'll all be voting in November, and putting it in "D" and never "R"

We all want to move this country forward but the administration has gone out of their way to try to alienate the liberal wing and the Progressives in the Democratic Party. We will not be taking that out on good Democratic members of congress. But we will remember it in the 2012 primary season.

[Bitwit1234]

169. I'll add this even if you are not 100% thrilled with the

Democrats just remember this - they are and always will be 1000% better than any republican. So vote Democratic and show the republicans we CAN.

[knixphan]

320. But we will remember it in the 2012 primary season.

Word.

[txlibdem]

324. 2012 is not too late

I'm hoping Howard Dean could be the FDR we so desperately need.

That is why we need to keep a Democratic majority in both the House and the Senate.

[The Magistrate]

3. Hear Hear, Ma'am!

[depakid]

4. So now you're given to validating Bush?

:crazy:

[quiet.american]

8. Er.. wth? No. nt

[NanceGreggs]

44. ...

:rofl:

I just LOVE non sequitars that make absolutely no sense whatsoever!!!

[Sal Minella]

94. I have awarded my "Takes The Non Sequitur Cake For The Day"

medal without even seeing the posts that will appear in the p.m.

Can't believe that one will be topped.

[saltpoint]

57. Try reading the damn post for once.

It'll be a new experience.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

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

[Cha]

5. Thanks Nance..good OP!~

"Speak up in November".. There's a big primary going on here tomorrow, too.:hi:

[rasputin1952]

6. As I've said before...

the only poll that means anything is the one we go to, (or not), on election day.

Like most people, I am not 100% happy with what the administration has not done, I think there is always room for other things that need to to be addressed. But I know that this administration. The thought, regardless of how remote that Boehner might become Speaker should be enough to move every D and I to the polls to ensure this has no chance of becoming a reality.

Beyond that though, I am often amazed that individuals don't vote as much as they should. So many local things are on ballots that the motivation to get to the polls should be incredible. There are always those, in both parties that will sit out an election because they have a one issue point of view. Getting a look at the bigger picture would help immensely, for if D's stay home, there is a possibility that people will find themselves in a true world of despair. If single issue voters thisk they have it hard now...if the GOP gets in power, not only will their issue never be addressed, (regardless of what issue it may be), but we will turn back and look like the 19th century. The neo-cons need to stomped out of existence...and only voters can do that.

Yes, it's time to come together for the good of the country.

:hi:

[alittlelark]

7. Thank You.

[quiet.american]

9. Excellent. K&R nt

[Scurrilous]

10. K & R

:thumbsup:

[rufus dog]

11. Nice, actually great, work

There is also the "I am getting too fucking old to go with the lesser of two evils" group.

I tell you what, I am getting too fucking old not to compromise.

It is debatable if this County could survive any more Republican rule. There are a boat load of issues that I want handled, and strongly believe need to be addressed immediately. But my personal requirements and requests do not outweigh what is good for all and what can reasonably be accomplished.

[NanceGreggs]

15. " ... my personal requirements and requests ...

... do not outweigh what is good for all and what can reasonably be accomplished."

Amen.

What is good for all should outweigh what is good for the individual. That's what this party should be all about.

[Kweli4Real]

93. Well said ...

in the original post and in this post.

I would add to "What is good for all should outweigh what is good for the individual" the simple line of: "And when what has been attempted and/or accomplished for the good of all still leaves you wanting ... consider the known alternative."

That is what this party should be all about.

[dalaigh lllama]

160. That's it in a nutshell: "I am getting too fucking old not to compromise"

I plan to vote for democrats this fall, no matter how many times they disappoint me, because the alternative would not only disappoint me, it terrifies me.

[DeschutesRiver]

369. Thank you for that last line

That is exactly how I feel. Oh, and also the "I am getting too fucking old not to compromise" - yes on that as well.

And I am so glad Nance G. wrote the OP - it says what has been in my mind and heart on this issue. And it is a thought that needed to be expressed forcefully here. I had about given up hope that anyone had such clarity on the core issue, or the courage to give it voice, considering what I've been reading here at DU.

[NRaleighLiberal]

12. Big Time K & R! n/t

[Number23]

28. I second your Big Time K&R with another Big Time K&R!

[Hekate]

13. Really. Well. Said. A line of Dem Rockettes for you, m'dear.

:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick:

[NanceGreggs]

45. Love me some Rockettes ...

... especially DEM Rockettes!!!

Thanks!

[Skittles]

14. LOL

I was wondering when you'd post this

[NanceGreggs]

25. LOL ...

... and I was wondering how long it would take you (or one of your compatriots) to post an LOL response.

Some here take the upcoming elections seriously. Others think it is a matter of on-line LOL!!!

Thanks for weighing in on where you stand.

:hi:

[Skittles]

47. yes I TAKE ELECTIONS SERIOUSLY

which is why I PAID ATTENTION LAST TIME

[POAS]

66. Your posting in caps has convinced me....your right...way right...n/t

[HughMoran]

229. I disagree

[Born_A_Truman]

16. Say NO to the party of NO!

[sandnsea]

17. Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side.

That goes for all those independent "vote for the man not the party" people too.

[johnaries]

18. K&R.

[jaxx]

19. I'm a Democrat and that's how I vote.

K&R great thoughts Nance!

[Flying Squirrel]

20. I no longer know what the so-called Democratic Party stands for.

That doesn't mean I'm against it, it means I'm for traditional Democratic values. If the current so-called "Democratic Party" is no longer upholding those values, then under the current system I have nowhere to turn. Sure, I'll vote Dem this November since that is my only viable option under the current corrupt system which will continue its downward spiral into complete chaos or fascism. But that doesn't mean I support what the so-called "Democratic Party" has become. I am sad to see you posting this black-and-white choice, though I understand the fear which led to the post - the fear of the greater evil winning. Ultimately it won't matter, the system will come crashing down - it will just happen sooner with Republicans in charge.

[NanceGreggs]

23. "Traditional Democratic Values" ...

... are only as strong as the Democratic voters who uphold them, and fight for them.

No personal offense meant, but when you view the Party as something outside yourself, you may be part of the problems within it.

Think about it.

[Flying Squirrel]

39. If I am a part of the problem within the Democratic Party

(but first, I must analyze the entire supposition)

If in fact I am viewing the Democratic Party as something outside myself,

then by definition I must BE something outside the Democratic Party

since how I view myself defines myself, at least as far as politics goes.

Therefore, if I view myself as something outside the Democratic Party, then I AM something outside the Democratic Party, and therefore I cannot be a part of the problem within it.

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

However, let's assume that there's some kind of fallacy in my argument, or that I'm somehow twisting your words to mean something they don't mean.

In that case, I may be a part of the problem within the Democratic Party.

If that is true, then I am not alone. How did I and other Democrats, who truly believe in the ideals of the Democratic Party, get to become part of the problem? It's called learned helplessness. We fight for what we believe in, and then discover that we've been lied to, and that the politicians we believed in were not really willing to fight for what they SAID they believed in. Or worse, perhaps they never really believed in what they claimed to believe in. Or, perhaps they really did believe what they said, but then discovered that the reality of the political system left them little choice but to do what was necessary to keep their cushy job regardless of their actual beliefs; since if they didn't, someone else would be happy to take their seat and all the nice money and benefits that came with it. And so they became corrupted by the system.

Then we become demoralized, and we stay home. Or we go vote because we know that staying home is even worse - but we no longer make campaign contributions in the form of money or time and effort, because first of all we don't HAVE the money since the people we voted for didn't produce for us, and second of all we don't have the motivation because we feel that we've been played for fools.

It's just human nature. Can you really put the blame on people like me for having been demoralized? I don't suggest that people stay home, or that they vote third party when a race is close enough that it could cause the Democrat to lose. I don't suggest that people not campaign for or donate to Democrats. It's my own personal decision which I usually keep to myself.

So, if I'm part of the problem, I'm truly sorry but I cannot find it within myself to be any better, having been treated the way I have by the vast majority of those I have voted for. I still vote, and I still vote Democratic.

This site is for Democrats "AND OTHER PROGRESSIVES". As long as I am generally supportive of progressive ideals - which I am - and support Democratic candidates for political office - which I grudgingly do since there is no viable alternative in most cases - I'm still supposedly welcome here, notwithstanding any posts that say I'm either "with the Democratic Party or against it."

[SaveOurDemocracy]

130. Great reply, Flying Squirrel. Damn right you're not alone!

The only issue I may have is with the phrase 'learned helplessness'. Feeling helpless often leads to giving up, not caring. I'm sure there are those who have withdrawn from the whole process; but despite a feeling of hopelessness, and newly reinforced cynicism, there are many who will work reestablish what were once the core values of a great, and dynamic, Democratic Party.

If that is true, then I am not alone. How did I and other Democrats, who truly believe in the ideals of the Democratic Party, get to become part of the problem? It's called learned helplessness. We fight for what we believe in, and then discover that we've been lied to, and that the politicians we believed in were not really willing to fight for what they SAID they believed in. Or worse, perhaps they never really believed in what they claimed to believe in. Or, perhaps they really did believe what they said, but then discovered that the reality of the political system left them little choice but to do what was necessary to keep their cushy job regardless of their actual beliefs; since if they didn't, someone else would be happy to take their seat and all the nice money and benefits that came with it. And so they became corrupted by the system.

Then we become demoralized, and we stay home. Or we go vote because we know that staying home is even worse - but we no longer make campaign contributions in the form of money or time and effort, because first of all we don't HAVE the money since the people we voted for didn't produce for us, and second of all we don't have the motivation because we feel that we've been played for fools.

[cliffordu]

84. Whoop, there it is.

That thougt - "traditional Democratic values are only as strong as the Democratic voters who uphold and fight for them"

should be it's own OP.


Maybe a group tattoo, or something....

[SeattleGirl]

21. Amen, Nance!

The people in this country who are disappointed, disillusioned, etc, that their favorite issue or cause is not #1 are understandably feeling that way, but they need to look at the larger picture. I know that what may be an important thing for me may not be important to my neighbor next door; they may have something else that means more to them. But I am a Democrat, and if they are a Democrat, then we both need to look beyond what we find most important to ourselves, and see the larger picture, and realize that just as there are many people in the Democratic party, there are also many issues that are important to those people. If power falls back into Republican hands, I cannot tell you how totally fucked this country will be. The Republicans have been systematically fucking us over since Reagan was elected. I don't know about others, but I've had my fill.

I have always been a Democrat, and even though I sometimes get frustrated with the leaders of the party, I know they are the far better choice than the Republicans are.

Excellent rant, Nance! :fistbump:

[Enthusiast]

60. It is the larger picture that many of us find so disturbing.

However we can certainly agree that electing a Republican majority would be a horrible fuck up.

[Safetykitten]

22. Your kids did not elect you.

That was a biological affair. But I assume you have taught them to stand up for their beliefs.

[NanceGreggs]

24. Yes, I have ...

... and they are both liberal, pro-choice, pro-GBLT rights, pro-marijuana legalization, anti-war advocates.

Guess I did something right along the way ...

[Safetykitten]

26. That's not the point. Say one does have a belief that although in line generally with what you

believe, you have a different opinion on how it could be achieved.

So far in your writing above, you espouse a big tent, then continue on to make asides that shut the tent.

I guess it is just puzzling for someone to be so....defiantly moderate. But I guess you have the same puzzlement over the close to far left types.

[NanceGreggs]

27. I sincerely apologize ...

I keep forgetting that the left, the far left, and the in-between left are determined by people such as yourself.

Perhaps you could post a graph, so we all know exactly where we stand in your estimation - which, of course, is the last word on the subject.

[Safetykitten]

32. No apology needed. But an invitation to a "we told you so" get together may be nice.

“I told you so” may warrant kudos on certain websites, populated by those who deem themselves to be (despite all numbers to the contrary), the “real voice” of the Party – as though there is some victory to be found in the defeat of those who purport to be the “base” thereof.

You sound like you don't like the "I/we told you so stories" so that will maybe will be addressed after the elections.

But so you really know, we are at war for this country. We trusted the first strategy although mystifying, and went along with the others, but now, at this specific time, you seem to forget that the strategy is basically armoring kittens with litter launchers against a Halo Reach army.

So, no apology needed. You can revisit this though to strategize with "us" after the results and ask for our patented crazy, shithouse rat ideas.

[NanceGreggs]

43. To the contrary ...

... I am fascinated by "I told you so" stories - along with Vicsims tales and the like.

Fascinated.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

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

[PBass]

29. We need to look forward, and MOVE forward now!

I just can't stand any more rehashing of old events... how already-settled legislation hasn't lived up to all the expectations (etc etc).

We don't have time for that... the next election is happening NOW, with or without the full participation of Liberals. We need everyone to be present, and concentrating on what's up next, not looking backwards and bemoaning the water that's already under the bridge.

I'd like to see people pledge that they will stop bringing up old business, until this election is over in November. I don't care how disappointed you are now, NOTHING you've seen under Obama has been as bad as it might get, with Republicans controlling the Congress next year.

WE DONT HAVE THE LUXURY OF BEING ABLE TO WALLOW IN NEGATIVITY NOW.

[liberation]

191. I am a bit dense... so please excuse me asking:

... I assume this is sarcasm, no?

[madamesilverspurs]

30. Right. Fucking. On.

And not just because "left fucking on" sounds like my realization about the iron when I'm two hours from home.


Terrific to see you back. You have been missed!

K&R


-

[T Wolf]

31. Reading this, I kept thinking I was reading something from False News.

Under the guise of being "fair and balanced" to both the pro-Obama and (let's face it) anti-Obama sides of this battle, she actually dismisses many issues where "the left" disagrees with the direction Obama is moving - she does not "opine" (using O'reilly phrasing, really?) on "education..., ...the need for electoral reform, environmental issues, GBLT rights – and a myriad of other topics." Very convenient.

She uses language cleverly. "Supporting the current Administration (never knew the word required capitalization, guess I am disloyal) does not equate to agreement with its every decision." Those evil leftists have "labelled (sic) all of those who disagree with their every agenda item" as not wanting progress. We don't actually think that. We think the anti-lefties are being wrong-headed in too many/most of their positions and disastrously wrong in their tactics.

Maybe she just has different definitions of "the centrists, the moderately-left, the extreme left" than those who are critical of this administration. Some would hold that the party is made up of moderates, centrists, corporatists, and conservatives of varying degrees - the leftists (moderate and extreme) have been told to donate, vote, work and STFU.

After confessing to being guilty of failing "miserably in discerning the difference" between support/worship and criticism/bashing, she then proceeds to attack the more-leftish for their perceived/expressed greater cred as liberals.

After citing the bush "with us or against us" meme as the negative it was, she ends up by calling out people to "Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side." because "You’re either with the Democratic Party, or you’re against it."

There may be some validity in what she says, in some instances. But this administration, at this time in history is not the correct time to be satisfied or (damn me) even supportive of this compromising administration and Congress. By being so timid and, in far too many cases, actually regressive, the best, last opportunity for significant progress

Has. Been. Wasted.

That offense cannot be ignored, rationalized away, or condoned.


I realize that criticizing an esteemed presence here will further isolate me from most DUers (assuming anyone does not have me on ignore). I have come to recognize that this site has changed from primarily a lib/progressive site to something less position and more party-oriented.

DU - or rather, the people who are this place, provide a great source for news and leads to news. Just not so much for pushing a leftish agenda. Much like the party itself, most of us have become more interested in maintaining what position we think we have.

[TriMera]

35. I'm glad I don't use the ignore function.

Well said, T Wolf.

[NanceGreggs]

37. "She" ...

... has, I believe, been succinct in her own personal views. You are free to agree or disagree, accordingly.

But the fact remains that you're either with the Democrats or you're not.

If you honestly feel (and I do not dispute the validity thereof) that this site has become something not to your liking, or one that fails to represent your personal political views, there are many websites/message boards that may be more in sync with your opinions.

I would suggest that you seek them out and post there.

This is not a STFU reply - merely a suggestion that you might find more like-minded, sympathetic ears elsewhere.

[Bonobo]

38. Ouch. You're on a roll and going right off the cliff.

You are following up your "You're either with us or you're against us" with a "If you don't like it, leave" (aka "Love it or leave it")

I wish you could hear yourself.

You are not the poster I once looked up to so much. Or you are having a bad day/month/year.

I think you should listen to yourself.

Simply saying "This is not a STFU reply" does not make it true.

In fact, it rather reminds me of a boxer who waves off a good punch when he is hurt or a person that says "Want me to be honest?" right before lying.

[NanceGreggs]

49. I absolutely agree ...

Saying things on a message board don't make them true.

And I DO hear myself - and I never said "Love it or leave it." (But I repeat myself - saying things on a message board don't make them true.)

Nice try, though ...

[puebloknot]

50. This doesn't sound very democratic!

I have very good reading comprehension. I earn my living that way. I've been reading since "forever and forever, amen."

As I read this response, you are suggesting that this person leave DU and go elsewhere, to "websites/messageboards that may be more in sync" with his/her opinions.

Who are you, Nance Greggs, to invite others who do not agree with you to leave DU?

A mark of intelligence is to be able to hold two conflicting thoughts in your mind at the same time, and not feel forced to choose one or the other, but to honestly reflect on both, and stay neutral, rather than picking a "fucking side," until an honest decision is made without pressure from outside forces.

Fanaticism has many faces.

[NanceGreggs]

52. I was merely suggesting ...

... that if one finds this website contrary to one's core beliefs, one might feel more welcome elsewhere - as I have.

[puebloknot]

96. Please share ...

... where you have felt more comfortable. Inquiring minds want to know.

I would feel uncomfortable with any web site that did not invite and encourage open discussion. "Of one mind" on a web site or in any sitution smacks of right-wing intolerance.

[Smashcut]

103. And who the hell are you to tell people what websites to visit?

Get over yourself, lady. Really.

[JuniperLea]

122. Me thinks thou dost protest too much...

And I think you should reread that post... really. Then get yourself a dictionary and look up "suggestion" and then think about how that differs from telling someone what to do. Then reread that post yet again. Learning is a good thing.

[CLANG]

132. If that's the case then I "suggest" you jump in a lake.

O8)

[vduhr]

165. There ya' go...

Now you understand.

[MissDeeds]

123. +1000 n/t

[NanceGreggs]

148. Suggesting that some ...

... might be more comfortable on other websites that are more in keeping with their own positions/beliefs is "telling" them what to do?

Alrighty, then ... :eyes:

[Smashcut]

210. That's just it.

You don't determine what this website stands for. Just because you support the party at all costs doesn't mean that your methods in any way define the entire membership of this community.

The arrogance is astounding.

[NanceGreggs]

217. Yes, I arrogantly post ...

... on a website for Democrats, and others who are supportive of the Party and its candidates.

And you're right - I don't determine what this website stands for. The owners of this website do - and their posted mission statement is readily available, should you care to read it.

[Name removed]

221. Deleted message

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

[NanceGreggs]

226. A US citizen living in Canada ...

... involved in the political discourse of my country, contributing to Democratic causes, and voting in US elections, as is my right and my civic duty.

Jesus, this "but, but, but, but you live in Canada" meme is incredibly tiresome. Never hid the fact that I do - it's been right there in my DU profile since day one. But there's always someone who thinks they're "outing me" ... tiresome.

[Name removed]

231. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

235. Deleted message

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

[NanceGreggs]

237. No, you;'re absolutely right ...

There are no Democratic organizations in Canada for ex-pats (even though there are tens of thousands of us living here). Organizations like Democrats Abroad try to hold meetings, but no one ever shows up. US citizens who live out-of-country never vote, or encourage other ex-pats to do so.

Yep, just doesn't happen.

:sarcasm:

[Mimosa]

333. Good for you since you now have Canadian health care

Many of us don't have good health care and we are fighting for it.

I honestly don't think you're helping.

[sabrina 1]

326. A lot of people think they have the right to tell others what to do.

Especially on the internet. It's pretty funny actually.

[Name removed]

242. Deleted message

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

[SaveOurDemocracy]

136. Why, how very "Love it, or leave it" of you. I recognize

that there is an entrenched group here who lust after a DU that is little more than an echo chamber of kudos and banners pronouncing, 'My President, Right or Wrong!', but I believe (hope) they are still a small minority.

[Ignis]

157. The size of a minority matters less than the power they wield.

I, for one, welcome our new politruk overlords.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

164. Our illustrious leaders have noted your unwavering ...

devotion. I'm sure you'll look splendid in brown. :patriot:

:hi:

[Ignis]

175. Oh, I've learned my lesson! My Betters tell me what to think, now.

I'd love to chat more, but these boots won't polish themselves!

:hi:

[liberation]

197. .. and don't forget your shirt!

I missed a couple of corners with the iron the other day and I did not hear the end of it...

[Ignis]

199. I realize now that the beatings are done out of love!

I look forward to the next time I'm called horrible names by some of DU's Most Upstanding Citizens! They only do it because they care!

:grouphug:

...And because they can get away with it.

[liberation]

194. Technically you are correct, it was not a STFU reply. It is a STFU with a side of GTFO reply.

Fascinating hearing someone residing in Canada telling other people that if they don't like a place to leave it.

BTW, the whole "you are either with us or against us" besides it being a false dichotomy, it is also woefully undemocratic. So if you have to recourse to use GOP-like fallacious memes to make your point, I would advise you need to take a honest stock of where you stand before you start giving advise to others.

Cheers.

[Name removed]

202. Deleted message

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

[Mimosa]

332. Who made you the arbiter of who is a legitimate Democrat?

Ms. Gregg, you do realise you just instructed a member who doesn't agree with you to leave this website/message board. That takes a lot of chutzpah.

[Enthusiast]

61. Nice post T Wolf.

I agree with every fucking word.

[unapatriciated]

69. I have no one on ignore and if I did

you would not be one of them. You put into words my thoughts better than I.
Thank You.

[Smashcut]

101. THIS. The perfect antidote to the cheap sophistry in this "piece"

[Caretha]

244. Cheap Sophistry

I was looking for that phrase...thanks.

I think I'll add this op to Wikipedia as an example. Perfect! :applause:

[bvar22]

105. Excellent deconstruction & rebuttal.

"After citing the bush "with us or against us" meme as the negative it was, she ends up by calling out people to "Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side." because "You’re either with the Democratic Party, or you’re against it."

Well Done!
:patriot:

[racaulk]

108. Excellent post, T Wolf.

Thank you. :thumbsup:

[Name removed]

111. Deleted message

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

[racaulk]

114. I don't think that's true.

IIRC, Nance is an American citizen living abroad in Canada. As such, she likely votes via absentee ballot.

[Name removed]

204. Deleted message

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

[Steely_Dan]

113. Excellent Post....n/t

[MissDeeds]

127. Well said

I agree completely.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

131. Right. The contradictions are glaring. n/t

[treestar]

137. so you have no problem with the POTUS running roughshod

over the Constitution, it's just WHO does it? We only didn't like it when Bush did it?

This "timidity" theme is for people who can't accept the fact that we can't get everything we want by pushing other people around.

[Ignis]

190. You're very brave to post this.

:thumbsup:

...But of course I'm not saying I disagree with the OP! No! NO! I agree with every single word of this OP, and any others that have been declared infallible and imprimatur at DU! In fact, I agree completely with some OPs that haven't even been written yet! Now that's loyalty!

[katandmoon]

268. +1,000,000. Ditto.

[rhett o rick]

297. Well put. nm

[m00nbeam]

301. Very well put

You have put into words the things I have been thinking and feeling these past many months.

And the "with us or against us" argument the OP makes is tedious.

[sabrina 1]

338. Very well said, T Wolf ~

[FrenchieCat]

33. I'm not ready to go backward......

not for.or.in principle!

Those who believe that directly or indirectly giving the Republicans back the keys
no matter their "rationale" are not rational, no matter how well they might type!


Thank you Nance! :hi:

[MadHound]

34. Another question. Is the Democratic Party with me?

Used to be that wasn't even a question. The past few years, well, that has become the question.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[MadHound]

42. First of all, what the hell are you talking about?

My home website? What are you trying to imply here? I've noticed that seems to be your tendency, somebody posts something you don't like you go into some sort of message control mode. You denounce, you use innuendo, you imply all sorts of conspiratorial nonsense in order to try to drown out what you don't want to hear. You seem to think that people with legitimate complaints and questions are part of some great conspiracy taking over the intertubes.

Now then, on my original question it is a question of whether or not the party is with me. We laugh and mock those on the conservative side of the fence for voting against their own interests, but that has become a problem with the Democratic party as well. When you are a teacher who is being dramatically effected, in a very negative way, by the policies of this administration, why should you vote against your own interests?

All politics is, ultimately, about the individual. Are you better now that you were four years ago, has your live improved or not under this administration. It foolish to think that many voters put the good of the whole ahead of the good for themselves. All politics is not only local, but ultimately it is individual. That is why questions like mine are both valid and critical. The fact that you try to cavalierly dismiss them with insults and innuendo simply proves that you are incapable or unwilling to deal in real life and realpolitik in an intelligent and logical manner.

[NanceGreggs]

46. "Message control mode" ...

... it has a very familiar ring to it.

I wonder where I've seen that very phrase before ...

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

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

[CLANG]

134. Awesome rebuttal, Nance!!

:sarcasm:

[sabrina 1]

327. I think it began with the DLC ~

They are very into 'message control' which is the reason Rahm calls 'liberal bloggers' and tells them that to go after Blue Dogs in primaries is 'fucking retarded'. Yep, I think 'message control' emanates from the rightwing of the Democratic Party.

[unapatriciated]

71. Your question is indeed a good one.

When the very people we elect move away from the core values and polices of out party, putting us in a position of voting against out best interest is exactly the time to ask that question.

[treestar]

139. LOL, you expect to be the leader of every group you're in

Even if you don't acknowledge that? Those who are the leaders are to read your mind? And ignore everyone else, of course.

[MadHound]

271. No, actually I'm trying to point out political reality

Most folks don't vote out altruistic motivations about some party or another. They vote based upon what a politician or party has done for them lately. Has the party helped them with some piece of legislation that improves their lives? Has the party taken some action that prevents a person from suffering a perceived harm? These are the judgments all voters makes. So again, the question become whether or not the Democratic party has stood with me.

Many people feel that the Democratic party has not only failed to stand with them, but actively worked against them. Teachers, anti-war folks, the LGBT community, those concerned about civil rights. With that many votes at stake, well, somebody in the party needs to be working on that question right quick if they don't want to lose a lot of state elections:shrug:

[Cherchez la Femme]

272. 'Rhetorical Question' -- look up definition of

:eyes:

[Bonobo]

36. Disappointing. And the big problem with your OP is...

That it is completely devoid of reference to issues.

In fact, you take pains to avoid issues by saying that you are "not an expert" enough to discuss them.

In the end, your OP would still be true no matter what positions the Democrats took and that is where it falls through the hole for me.

Your unstated position is that you have to be on the side of the "Democratic Party" no matter where they actually stand with regard to policies.

This is a glaring flaw in your OP and what I found so disappointing.

It is also a recipe for disaster.

Uncritical support of this type can only lead to the inevitable -being taken for granted -and it is clear where that leads.

Sorry, but I will hold on to my memory of what the Democratic Party means and I will wait until they come back to the correct side of the fence.

If they lose in the short term, it is perhaps for the best even, if it results in them ultimately returning to the light side of the Force.

I'm sure you were aware of the bitter irony of closing with the inimitable words of GWB: "You're either with us or you're against us."

Perhaps you thought the irony was cute. Perhaps you thought it could be forgiven since you are on the "right side".

It can't.

[NanceGreggs]

41. My sense of irony ...

... is people who think that voting for Republicans - or not voting at all, which is the same thing - think they are accomplishing anything.

"If they lose in the short term, it is perhaps for the best even, if it results in them ultimately returning to the light side of the Force."

This is the fate of the country at stake - not a video game. Do you know the difference?

May The Force be with you.

As for the adults, we'll vote accordingly - in real elections.

[nxylas]

88. Trouble is, it's not DUers sitting out the vote you need to worry about

People here might complain, but come November, I'm pretty sure most of them (other than the trolls, and non-US citizens lke myself who don't have a vote) will vote Dem. Unfortunately, this administration was elected largely due to the efforts of people who are not necessarily rock-ribbed Democrats, and who have repeatedly been thrown under the bus in order to court the votes of people who wouldn't vote for a Democrat if their lives depended on it. If there is an enthusiasm gap between Republican and Democratic voters, it's not because the "professional left" is sulking because they didn't get a pony. It's because the WH spends more time attacking its own base than the opposition. Why not try telling them to "pick a fucking side"?

[CLANG]

135. I'm voting Democratic Party across the board.

I still find your OP nauseating.

[Ignis]

158. So am I, but that doesn't matter.

For some people, it's about power, authority, and control rather than actually winning elections to push forward progressive policy.

[vduhr]

185. I agree...

I have to ask everyone here what their solution will be come November, and in 2012? If you don't like what you are getting or not getting from the Democrats, what is your solution? Are you going to sit home and give this country back to the Republicans? Will you vote Independent or Tea-Party? What choices do you think we have that will help solve the current situation? When I read so many comments from people who say the Dems are not giving us what we want, that may be true, but at this point, there is a major decision we have to make in just a couple of months - Times-a-wastin'. What candidate have you decided is the best, or what party is the best. When it comes to voting, you DO have to pick a side.

[Name removed]

273. Deleted message

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

[LostinVA]

289. I have been sitting here reading this thread

And it is totally :wtf:

I would have loved to have seen this posted in GD instead of GDPEC.

[Cherchez la Femme]

302. That would make *very* interesting reading!

[MessiahRp]

277. The fate of a country is a long term evolving thing.

You think way too short term. It's not as if Obama and his Corporate Buddies aren't fucking things up too.

Purging the DLC/Corporatists in the party hurts us short term for sure but it's probably better for the future of the country because it will force the Democratic Party to either recalibrate or permanently splinter. Not unlike what the Tea Partiers are doing to Republicans.

Having four parties, one liberal/progressive, one Corporate Democrat, one Conservative Republican and one Tea Party Right Wing Whack Job is almost a good thing. It labels people correctly. Ends a lot of the muddled confusion that voters have when supporting someone. More issues would get serious discussion during a campaign and more candidates would get legitimate air time during it.

You can see the purging of the Republicans-in-disguise as a bad thing, but it's only bad short term. The forced change that would result in the Democratic Party would be the best thing for everyone long term.

In fact I argue that it is more definitively picking a fucking side, as you like to put it, then picking a muddled mess of lies and pretending that that person is a Democrat.

The country will not end after one or two election cycles. It's already been on a sad downward spiral and the corporate Dems have been more than enablers in this.

Just wait until Obama goes after Social Security... or wait, is that okay as long as a Democrat is behind the dismantling of it?

Rp

[Ignis]

344. ^^^ Great post.

:patriot:

Let's vote for what matters: Values and policies, rather than labels and personalities.

[hulka38]

351. Yes. This is a great post.

[cliffordu]

86. If you really believe it's better that the Dems lose for a while

to teach them a lesson, then you should be actively working for the R's

Or the teabaggers.

what complete fucking idiotic drivel.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

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

[Lilith Velkor]

109. Treat the left as your enemy, then come crying to them when you lose

Great strategy. :thumbsup:

[Tarheel_Dem]

117. You must have me confused with someone who gives a shit what the 3rd party

nuts have to say. :shrug: As a lifelong, third generation, union family, diehard Democrat...I would rather lose the upcoming election, and every election in the future, than allow this party to be taken over by the left's version of the "teabaggers", but that's just me.

The downright childlike naievete, sometimes displayed by "the left", is nothing short of breathtaking. The people I referred to in my post aren't Democrats, and for better or worse, it's high time that the Democratic Party made a very public split from these fractious elements (IMHO).

[Lilith Velkor]

119. That's the very thing the party did in 2000, so why bitch about the results?

:shrug:

[Tarheel_Dem]

121. You still have me confused with someone who cares what you have to say. (nt)

[Lilith Velkor]

143. That would be because you are still replying to me.

Your willingness to have the Democratic party lose big this year in order to stick it to the DFHs remains duly noted.

[liberation]

188. "I would rather lose the upcoming election, and every election in the future..."

So you are willing to sacrifice the whole party if it does not do exactly what you want it to do, and yet us lefties are the intransigent childish ones who should be blamed. Ain't that a bitch?

Your post is rather enlightening and at least shows where all these shenanigans regarding us "evil" lefties are being projected from. Amusing to say the least...

[Tarheel_Dem]

203. Guilty as charged. There are lefties, and then there are "lefties".

Some "lefties" have been working against the Democratic Party for decades. They can't really convince anyone that their ideas are better, so they pout and try to take down what they see as the "establishment" Dem party. I've seen posts here, from so-called "lefties" that are downright anarchist in nature. As a Democrat, this is not the "left" I want to be associated with. I stand by my original assertion.

If Naderites, Paultards, and Socialist Independents think they have a shot, they should go for it, and quit trying to destroy the Democratic Party. They should build their own, just as the two "establishment" parties have done, but that would actually take work.
Third partiers should know that you can't pop up every election cycle with a list of demands, and expect to be taken seriously. Take Nader for instance...what the hell does he do to build a dream party for disaffected "lefties"? Does he actually do anything between elections to build the grassroots, besides taking constant potshots at Dems, and enabling Repukes?

[LostinVA]

290. Yeah, and I am really sick of it

As well as people telling the Left, including the OP in posts in this thread, that they might vote Republican or Teabagger.

:rofl:

[Lilith Velkor]

312. Really?

Those posts wouldn't happen to be deleted, would they?

[puebloknot]

48. Extremism ...

... in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” ~~Marcus Tullius Cicero

Before I go on, I'm not voting for any Republicans, period!

But I find a lot of extremism in this new OP (which does not speak to individual liberty but calls for group think again)and I hear, again, the old refrain which you've been singing for as long as *I've* been reading your posts at DU. "With us or against us" (the Dems)? How about less moderation in the pursuit of justice for the Bush era crimes? I know, that's old stuff, and we should just march on, over the graves, metaphorically speaking, of the little guys who got in the way and were trampled. We need to point our noses to the future, like some of those Marxist sculptures that extoll the virtues of the common man in service to the state! We can take up thinking again after we've won this next election, after which we'll finally get down to change we can all believe in. We've been too busy kowtowing to corporate interests, but everybody takes on too much at times, so let's forget the "mistakes" of the past and just move on.

One voice? That reference sends me hurtling back to the past again: Nuremberg rallies; French and Boshevik Revolutions, The Inquisition, etc. There is never one voice; there is only tyrannical control that is made to look like total acquisence on the part of the people.

You tell me exactly what high principles the Democratic party of today represents, and I will use my functioning brain to decide which ones (if any) are worthy of my support.

We are all over a barrel, and I, for one, will vote for some Democrats again out of a sense of ironic inevitability, not with any feeling that it is likely to make a damn bit of difference -- even if they happen to count my vote. But I'm sounding negative here, aren't I? There's a new religion abroad in the land and it's called "Positivity." Its evil opposite is thinking for oneself, and those who engage in such heresy are highly suspect.

"We are – and always have been, forever and ever, amen – the party of the Big Tent." Is this one of Aesop's fables? "Forever and forever????" Is this where we cross ourselves with holy water, and genuflect before the cross? I don't think the Democratic Party is that old, is it? Democratic ideas, yes, from ancient Greece, but even the Greeks have been around for less than "forever."

Sorry, I am not required, under the Constitution of the United States of America, to hold my "piece"(sic). (It's "peace," Nance!)
I'm not interested in marrying the Democratic Party, but I can imagine that someone reading this may be inclined to shout the reasons I should not be so joined, anyway, and if they don't do it, they'll need to forever hold their peace. I'd rather live in sin with the Democrats, taking what is good (there is a lot of good), and shutting the door to that which does not meet my standards.

You mean well, but you're preaching and finger-wagging again. And, as usual, you have the ardent support of a group of passionate lane-pickers! In my opinion, of course.

[NanceGreggs]

51. I know the difference ...

... between peace and piece, and chose my words accordingly. I have no issue with those who promote the former, but with those who use the latter to be divisive on this website.

There is much to be said for those who feel this party does not live up to its individual standards. That doesn't change the fact that we are (like it or not) a two party system.

Picking a side between the two options is a reality.

[puebloknot]

97. Everybody has a reality. Some cannot pull the lever (or touch a screen) for ...

... the lesser of two evils anymore, because their conscience, and a knowledge of history, forbids them to do it.

You have me flummoxed with your "peace and piece" comment. What would be meant in this context by "forever hold their piece?"

[NanceGreggs]

146. I meant "piece" ...

... as in a piece of writing, a news article, an op-ed, etc.

There are some here who consistently post "pieces" that are negative and derogatory, or imply that voting is a waste of time.

I think those same people should "hold their piece" after the elections , i.e. "pieces" decrying the state of things because certain people were elected, and certain others were defeated.

No doubt we'll be seeing a lot of "if only so-and-so had been elected, things would have been much better" pieces - posted by those who didn't bother to vote to get anyone elected at all.

[puebloknot]

167. You stepped right up and mended the hole in *that* sock, Nance. Very good!

I've been a wordsmith for many years, and have never seen that usage. But we live and we learn.

I'm glad you explained that because the lower angels of my nature were conjuring up some pretty interesting images of what it could mean to hold one's piece. I thought of everything from the great unwashed packing heat to some more ribald possibilities which delicacy (and probably the rules of DU) prevent me from elaborating on here.

Ain't open dialogue a hoot!?!

[NanceGreggs]

180. I was reminded of the "hold your piece" thing ...

... recently.

Many years ago, a friend sent out emails about an upcoming wedding he was attending. He said he hoped the priest would remind everyone to "hold their piece".

A few of us wrote back and said, "Don't you mean hold your peace"?

He said, "If you saw the names on the guest list (quite a few 'made' guys with familiar names from newspaper headlines), you'd realize that I actually DO mean 'hold your piece'."

As for the other possible connotation of holding one's "piece", I hadn't thought of that. But you're right - it does conjure up some rather, uh, interesting visions - not to be discussed on DU, nor indulged in while in the voting booth!

:rofl:

[Bluenorthwest]

230. The 'hold your piece' joke fills a few pages of Shakespeare

But I knew you were not making an allusion, you were making a mistake. It might be the most common pun in the works of Will.

[NanceGreggs]

236. Honestly ...

... not a Shakespeare fan. And having been educated in a Catholic school that never taught the classics (unless you consider "Lives of the Saints" a classic), I wasn't even exposed to Shakespeare until later than most students.

Admittedly, I am often left with that "duh!" look on my face when people quote a Shakespeare line (often the only person in the room who doesn't get the reference).

So I'll take your word for it that it is a common pun in his works (just please don't make me read them!)

[puebloknot]

249. Well, Nance, just look up "codpiece" on Google, and you won't need to read Shakespeare.

There! You an thank me properly when you can find the time.

[puebloknot]

250. And BTW ...

... I once posted "hare's breath" here on DU when I meant "hair's breadth," and was appropriately corrected.

[NanceGreggs]

278. It's rare that I post anything here ...

... that doesn't have the "edited by poster" label attached after-the-fact. :blush:

My glaring mistakes often don't "register" (duh!) until the post is up - and I scurry to correct them.

My husband, JeffR, pointed out my "mistake" in using piece rather than peace within minutes of my post. But I explained why I used that word - it has a particular meaning here, and I knew most people would get it. And they did.

[Bluenorthwest]

299. Politics aside

You would love a trip to Stratford, Ontario. I sincerly recommend it. Opinions aside, you do love words, and I'm saying, pick a play or two, read the Cliff Notes-really- and then go see them. You will be glad that you did. So will whoever you take with you.http://www.stratfordfestival.ca/default.aspx

[Mimosa]

334. Funny. The Catholic schools I attended taught Shakespeare..

Someone may have been skipping English classes. *rolls eyes*

[Name removed]

291. Deleted message

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

[girl_interrupted]

53. "To those whom much is given, much is expected." John Fitzgerald Kennedy

And you know what, I don't think thats unreasonable. President Obama was given a lot of support, and so were our fellow Democratic candidates, that we worked hard for and voted for. And in doing so, we the people, gave them the Majority. And with this power, they still can't get it together. So to chastise people if they have complaints, well I think they have every right to vent.

I use to love being a Democrat, but now I feel somewhat like an abused wife. You give your time, your money & your vote and they turn around and vote the opposite way. And sometimes its like, here's a few crumbs, now shut up and go away. But you keep right on supporting them because...I don't know anymore. What I hear is "they are better than the other guy" and yet, many, many times they vote the exact same way.

Unconditional love for politicians is getting old, might be great for your kids, and your loved ones, but lets get real. I wanted to see this President & this Democratic Majority succeed, not just for themselves but for the millions of people out there that desperately need their help. It isn't about them or their careers, or their egos, politicians will always survive, make a ton of cash in the process, re-elected or not.

But what about the little guy or gal? They are hanging on by a thread. And what this party truly stands for, I'm not really sure of anymore. It's confusing. Unions, teachers, gays, seniors, young people, the "progressive left", beat us up and you can be sure we will come back for more.

I am truly bummed tonite, I have a friend who is dying of cancer. And while we spend billions on another war, and send more young soldiers off to God knows what, I can't help but wonder if these politicians ever stop and think of better ways to spend our money.

Just a thought, but wouldn't it be nice, if politicians felt like they had to earn our vote, instead of expecting it. That they would go the extra mile instead of caving in. That if voters are unhappy & they voice an opinion, maybe they will stop and listen. Maybe change course.

Well, time will tell. I'm not interested in voting for Republicans, it's just that I'm not that enthused about voting, period. Hope that feeling wears off soon.

[bertman]

104. Thank you, girl_interrupted. Well said.

[Bluenorthwest]

120. President Kennedy was quoting the Bible

That's all I'll add to this. You said it well enough.

[MessiahRp]

243. Great post and analogy..

Look like it or not Democrats, especially DLCers don't give a rats ass about the party base with the rare exception of needing our votes in November. The entire mantra of these rich corporate Dems is to basically be Republicans with a slightly more moderate social agenda (even that isn't certain with the recruitment of pro-lifers, anti-GLBT rights, anti-Social Security, anti-Health Care Dems).

They care about networking with the corporate elite, using and abusing their power to fatten their wallets with our tax money and in turn get a ton of corporate donations back for election time. They railroad progressives out of primaries and openly have recruited Republicans to run as Dems.

Unions have been destroyed yet are expected to turn out and spend millions of dollars to defend the very people that have not fought for them.

Gay rights activists are supposed to turn the other cheek as they see their rights ignored and dismissed readily.

Non-Christians get to see Obama go to Rick Warren's church and salivate all over being declared the right wing definition of Christian.

Civil Rights activists get to see Obama expand beyond what Bush wanted to do in terms of illegal wiretaps and secrecy.

Anti-War advocates get to see a phony draw down in Iraq (50,000 troops remaining does not = pull out) while Afghanistan, a place where al-Qaeda does NOT reside, sees an escalation of forces.

Health Care advocates get to see the President and his Chief of Staff purposely fuck them over by not allowing Single Payer advocates to the table at all. He begins negotiations right where Republicans would have gone for a compromise and negotiates rightward until HMOs and Pharmaceuticals, the ones who fucked the whole system up, get an even bigger gift by getting an increased piece of the pie... hell now they get the whole fucking pie.

Sure, there are a lot of issues in which the Left gathers round to work for but continuously the DLCers, and this dates back to Clinton (who cut welfare, signed NAFTA, DOMA, DADT, etc) want us ALL cut out of the equation. They truly view us as the "fucking retards" that Rahm so famously proclaimed us.

Obama has shown his second face as well. Going to Netroots conventions and asking us to keep fighting for what we want while purposely dismissing us at every turn and having Rahm and Gibbs insult us (the Gibbs one is clearly something the White House was pleased to let out there) only makes this worse.

We were promised change. Change from the most power grabbing, corrupt Administration ever is drastic. Not slight. Not following the same path as the guy you said you were changing us from. Change is fucking change.

So when we're insulted, ignored, treated as bastard children and then told, "Well Republicans are worse, so vote for us no matter how much we fuck you over because they'll be worse than us" isn't exactly the rallying cry that is going to get us to go along.

And they don't deserve our votes quite frankly. Most of them have been there too long and have very little in terms of values or principles aside from their value of the almighty dollar.

We SHOULD be forcing them to earn our vote. Voting for them now is equal to agreeing to how they treat us. And then the next two years will be even more of the same. And then we'll get "Well if it's not Obama, it's Palin and who is worse?"

That's not a legitimate argument. Choosing between two groups of people that seem to despise you is not something that motivates people to go to the polls.

And at this point, yes, we deserve something better.

If we have to throw a bunch of the bums out to reshape the party, maybe that's the way the cookie crumbles...

and to the DLCers or those who believe what this Administration has done is perfectly fine, this might be your "With us or Against us" moment to ponder for the future.

Rp

[Steely_Dan]

247. Wonderful Post...

Thank you for expressing my feelings. It is a matter of principle...nothing more, nothing less. If the "other side" cannot understand that, then there is no use trying to explain it to them. They will never understand.

-P

[LostinVA]

292. This deserves it's own OP, as does TWolf's post upthread

[rhett o rick]

340. Great post. I understand your frustration but now isnt the time to give up.

In 2008 we proved that progressives were a powerful force. We need to keep up that momentum. Continue to demonstrate to the New-Democrats that we wont give up. We will fight for progressive legislation and not let the corporatists discourage us.

Today we need to concentrate on getting progressive candidates elected in local and state offices. Fight to oust the Blue Damn Dogs.

The reason that there is so much crap being dumped on progressives is that some people are worried that we will be a force.

NGU

[Techn0Girl]

170. In a just world your post would be the one with 72 recs now :)

Well said.
Thanks for bringing a breath of common sense and eloquence to the discussion.

[Ignis]

306. That doesn't require a just world, just posting in GD instead of GDP.

[gkhouston]

359. +1000. Yet another essay on why I should be a true blue faithful Dem, dammit!

does not make my heart sing with joyful gladness to do the Party's bidding.

From where I stand, one party is doing its damnedest to keep us down, while the other isn't breaking a sweat to help us up. The difference is there, but not that discernible to someone who's laid out on the ground.

[newthinking]

54. So you propose using the same terminology and approach as the Republicans?

"With us or against us" is *always* used by authoritarians and as a way to usurp power from the people. It is not a statement for anyone who believes in democracy to be proud of nor try and use to intimidate others.

Having said that, the vast majority here are democrats and will vote in the booth for democrats. Post like this that want to call our and label others are not helpful. And in fact it's a red herring to keep bringing this up.

[NanceGreggs]

55. Yes, I was definitely promoting ...

... the same approach as Republicans.

Good thing you were there to catch me doing so, and to call me out.

:sarcasm: for those that (not sayin' who) need it.

[CLANG]

138. Deny it all you want, but you posted it, and it's on the internets now.

[Ignis]

186. I agree, because your words are above criticism! BUT...

How is this poster guilty of a "call-out" by responding to your OP? :shrug:

[LostinVA]

293. Well, you did and you are

That si exactly what your OP is.

Wow. This si as bad as when you refused to admit you got the definition of "apologist" wrong, and called everyone out who corrected you. YOU wrote the OP, WE didn't. And, that is what your OP, and many of your posts are through this thread. It is a despicable thing to do, to call out a group on DU who is THE most loyal to the Democratic party.

[Techn0Girl]

166. SO many of us DO understand and agree with you, newthinking :)

[Ignis]

345. Yes, many do--but most have been bullied into silence.

Bullying is bad enough, but an environment in which bullying is allowed (or even condoned, when it's deemed to be done for a "good cause") is toxic to real discussion.

[saltpoint]

56. I like a clear, strong mind and potent writing.

Like this post, "These Are the Times," for example.

Elections are serious business.

Nice one, ma'am.

Recommended.

[lillypaddle]

58. Spot on, Nance

K&R

[babylonsister]

62. Big recommend, and the usual suspects are acting as per usual.

Thanks for putting this together so succinctly, Ms. Greggs. Your writing is still awesome; I've missed it and you. Oh, and please don't let the naysayers get you down. They obviously didn't take to heart a word you said. But you knew they wouldn't.

Though there are several issues I disagree with concerning this admin, I'm convinced some people thrive on continual disappointment and negativity. I cannot be like that; you can't, either, and I'm glad.

:pals:

[JTFrog]

63. Right on Sister!

K&R!

[Peacetrain]

64. K&R!!

I was going to op on something similar when I got up this morning.. and you have done a much better job than I could ever do of putting it all into words.

[Mass]

65. I agree except for one thing. It should be "You’re either with the people, or you’re against them"

Those who say they will skip this election are enabling the GOP. This is as simple as that. And nobody who is a progressive can think that a GOP congress will be better for the smallest among us than a Democratic Congress. Nobody in their right mind, at least. Being for the people is making sure the best team comes to power. Not the ideal team (there is none), but the best. So, the choice should be clear for a progressive. Do you think that the GOP is really the same as the Democratic Party. If you do, please stay home, but dont consider you care about people.

This is not the worst of two evils. This is basic compassion for those who will suffer more. So: Say NO to Republicans. This should be as simple as that, and, even if I wished there was a more inspiring line, this should be enough to get any progressive out to vote.

[badgerpup]

68. I'm just glad to see the by-line!

:hi: :bounce:


:yourock: Nance Greggs!

YAAAAAAAY! :applause:





Now I will read the post.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[POAS]

72. I am so tired of Democrats(?) who want to

run up the white flag of surrender and see if anybody salutes.

Not voting and encouraging others not to vote is the same as surrender. You are guaranteeing that a government is elected that is not to your liking.

IF you want a government that is more progressive then the day to start is the day after election day with an eye towards the next one.

If you want a government that is more progressive the place to start is not a message board, it is at meetings with your local party leaders and making sure that those elected locally will reflect your views and that will eventually filter up as those views and politicians gain influence inside the party.

IF you want more progressives in government running up the white flag of surrender to the right will only drive the party more to the right and further marginalize the left.

[paulk]

74. you don't need to be a member of the Democratic Party

to vote for a Democratic candidate -

[LWolf]

75. I'm on the LEFT. That's my side.

I'm on the LEFT SIDE OF ISSUES. It's not a partisan thing. It's not a team sport.

[bertman]

76. "You're either with the Democratic Party, or you're against it. Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side.

Sure sounds like "Love it or Leave it" or "You're either with us, or against us", to me.

Those last two lines are the ultimate in reducing a complex situation to a simplistic and inappropriate demand. I expect rhetoric like that from Beck or Limbaugh, but not from you, Nance.

[geek tragedy]

91. Elections are zero-sum games.

There is no "well, I support the Democrats in principle, but I'm not going to vote for them."

[JNelson6563]

77. Well done Nance.

I see the usual suspects show up to piss into the tent. lol Could they be more predictable?

I enjoyed the post and agree with you. Thanks for taking the time!

Julie

[bluescribbler]

78. I have picked my side

I have a sign in my living room window, facing the street.  It
reads, "This home stands with President Obama."  I
do not agree with every decision he's made.  I still think
single payer is the best way to reform the health care system,
and failing that, the public option should have been included
in the bill.  But I also believe that half a loaf is better
than none, and that had Ted Kennedy lived to vote on the bill,
he would have voted for it because he knew that it could be
amended to improve it in future sessions of Congress.

[voteearlyvoteoften]

79. Yay and Effin A

Got your back...and dem candidates too.

[Umbral]

80. Just another 'Get in line' lecture. nt

[Raine1967]

81. I never needed to pick a side...

until some people drew lines in the sand -- and it wasn't like minded people like NanceGraggs, that is for damn sure.

I have been liberal at least since I was in the 5th grade -- I know this because I pleaded with my parents to vote for Jimmy Carter. (they didn't). Looking back -- being a liberal is in my dna, and being a proud member of the Democratic Party is a choice.

If people don't like the party, they can work to change it -- or can leave. It is a choice, and one that I happily make -- to STAY. We are A big tent, and being part of a big tent requires Tolerance. There is a small but very vocal group in this tent that in very intolerant.

NOW it's general election season. As Bill Clinton once said, "In primaries you fall in love; in general elections, you fall in line". We cannot survive another Republican majority.

hearty K&R

and thank you.

[flamingdem]

82. Thanks for this nt

[cliffordu]

83. Excellent. This should be a sticky at the top of this forum.

K&R.

[Spazito]

85. Well said!

Recommended.

[Bobbie Jo]

87. K&R!

Awesome OP! Glad to see you posting again. :hug:

[BlueMTexpat]

89. I chose my side long ago and it is indeed the D side.

I will likely continue to be disappointed by some Ds - but definitely not by all. And even those who do disappoint me do not always disappoint me in everything they do.

But I know that I will ALWAYS be disappointed by Rs. Worse, I will literally abhor everything they do. They have no vision, only buzzwords, divisiveness and concern with themselves and their own interests - never those of a nation or the complex groups of citizens that make up a nation. And therein lies all the difference.

***********
By the way, it's primary day in Maryland (my voting residence). Any Marylanders who haven't yet voted, please do get out there and do so! I voted there last week by provisional ballot because my absentee ballot had already been sent to me where I live abroad. I fortuitously happened to be present in the state at a time when I could vote in person. Upon my return to the East Side of The Pond, I found my absentee ballot in my mail when I picked up an impressive accumulation from the post office. Maryland is a good state about such things. But now, of course, the absentee ballot will not be sent.

***********
Nance, I personally have missed your rants! For every one of your detractors, you have hundreds of admirers, so please don't let the detractors EVER get you down! Thank you! :loveya:

[Political Tiger]

92. K & R with pleasure!

:yourock:

[QC]

255. !

[The Wizard]

95. With

And happy to see your post.
We can disagree on the trivia, but on election day it's incumbent on us to ensure the lunatics don't get the keys to the asylum.

[AtomicKitten]

99. K&R. Girl, you've got spunk!

[felix_numinous]

100. Solidarity is not the same as lockstep.

Thank you for posting this. Good strategy involves picking your battles in ways that do not lose the war.

[butterfly77]

106. Kick,kick,kick &recommended!

:dem: :dem: :dem:

[mstinamotorcity]

107. Well said Ms.Nance

how soon they forget the previous hell we are trying to pull the country out of. Our President deserves our support even though we may not always agree with his decision. And as I have said before, our President makes his decisions based on the information he is presented that we may not be privy to.Such as statistics,intel reports,briefings,and heads of department concerns,and America as a whole.It is easy to be an armchair President sitting at home or on the computer.

[HughMoran]

112. Excellent post Nance!

I wish I could say it as well as you.

[azmouse]

115. This proud Obama supporter salutes you!

:patriot:

[jenmito]

116. Perfectly said! I always wanted to be the 64th rec! K&R. :)

[rosesaylavee]

118. I am voting in November and it will be DEM straight ticket.

I am not a happy Democrat by any means but to do otherwise, is simply irresponsible. The Republican party and/or any conservative has proven they are not to be trusted under any circumstances.

Who knew that stating the obvious would stir so much garbage up? Thanks for the post Nance. Have to say I am a bit shocked by some of these responses. Guess I have been more gone than here this past year... really surprised by some of the individuals too.

[JuniperLea]

124. Thank you, Nance...

:hug:

That was a very good read.

[Sheepshank]

125. *yawn* same old group with same old negativity.

of the same group with same down in the dumps comments. How can there not be an agenda with the neverending pattern of negativity....and this coming from the group that claims NG has some wierd secret agenda from the OP? As if there was something wrong with a positive opinion? well duh!

Then I read this: "If certain posters aren't intentionally trying to dampen enthusiasm for Dems in the midterms, why are they here? I agree with Nance that they are gleefully salivating over their anticipated "I told you so" moment. It's in-your-face, and it's inexcusable for a board called "Democratic Underground". "


So I'm *not* the only one that notices.



BTW....I'm with the OP that in the next few election cycles, there is an imperative. Pick a fucking side and if you don't like everything about that side work towards change. The party isn't a faceless nameless god (with a small g) that can't be poked and prodded.

[zipplewrath]

128. Actually, I'm the one poked and prodded

From day one many of us have been poked and prodded repeatedly. One can get a tad reflexive when you've been poked that often. And now that we have this cattle prod up our rear, we get told to "pick a side". Pick a side? I'm still trying to figure out how to get the battery out of the cattle prod so it will stop shocking me.

[Sheepshank]

129. I think you have some truth to what you say

so I'm going to run with that and add something. Rather that feeling overly kicked and picked and prodded by Obama or any of his crew, I feel it much more poingnantly from those on this very DB. Stating a positive observation, or making a supportive statement, only to constantly have the same posse rally around tearing it down with the same old, repeated hyperbole.

Yeah, give the political options, it didn't take much for me to pick a side and start to work to affect some change from within. It's pretty obvious that there are many who don't like the side I or others have picked (yup, here on DU) and will try and snark and badger for a change.

[zipplewrath]

140. There's plenty agreement about alot of the democrats in this election

I'm not really sure which democrats that folks think aren't going to get votes. I'm sure we could come up with a short list of democrats that many around here will have a hard time swallowing. Lincoln comes to mind. But the vast majority of candidates will get strong DU support. These broad generalizations about "picking a side" ignore some local races where there are some very hard choices to be made, not to mention the strength of the clothes pin that is needed on ones nose to pull that lever.

[Sheepshank]

144. Then the option is not to take someone's opinion on making choices so personally.

I absolutely agree re: Lincoln. She is a frustrating blue-dog that undermines the party as a whole. But you can't tell me that that there isn't the posse here at DU that are constantly pressing a different agenda for a different political group, NOT than one this site is named after? That same group of malcontents do much and say much in an attempt to undermine the Dems, and yet are here...to what end? Makes no sense if they are truly in political limbo. Why not ask them to pick a side? Nothing wrong with that imho.

[zipplewrath]

181. Well if I can't tell you

You seem to have drawn alot of judgments about this "posse". I'm not even sure what political group you are discussing. But since "I can't tell you", I guess there's not alot of reason to ask about them. I do know that not everyone here agrees what constitutes "undermining the dems", but I do suspect alot of people would classify a call to "either be with us or your against us" as one of them.

[orbitalman]

126. Yes...these are the times - that try mens'souls.

Nance, you're ALWAYS soo good. :yourock:

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

141. So well said.

Thanks!

:thumbsup:

[lumberjack_jeff]

142. Analogy fail.

When your kids decide to sell your house and move you into the cheapest possible nursing home, get back to us about "unwavering support".

This isn't about someone's choices on behalf of themselves. This is about their choices on your behalf.

[Name removed]

145. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

149. Deleted message

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

[rosesaylavee]

150. So you're not voting come November or voting something other than Dem?

[Techn0Girl]

168. That's a BS game that some people play to try to get someone's message deleted....

Heaven forbid we say the "wrong thing".
Welcome to my (growing <sigh>) ignore list.

[Ignis]

179. Yes, but have you stopped beating your wife yet?

:rofl:

Those who employ this line of loyalty questioning have obviously neither 1) lived through the 1950s, nor 2) studied the era.

[Name removed]

208. Deleted message

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

[rosesaylavee]

215. Somehow I don't think that will be a great loss on my part.

[Cherchez la Femme]

308. Being snide, snotty & superior is *such* a great tactic!

I see so many from those on 'a certain side' that I think it would be an interesting study to examine if they were genetically linked! :applause:

[rosesaylavee]

317. Thanks!

:hi:

[JNelson6563]

287. Like the fun game some play to get a thread locked.

Good clean fun, no? :-)

Julie

[mimitabby]

147. ah, the wise woman speaks again!!

i missed your posting. welcome back I agree with you completely

[Imagevision]

350. K&R ; -)

[Ignis]

151. Every single word in this OP is PERFECT!

Those who suggest your diction is divisive are guilty of TREASON! :patriot:

[placton]

152. pardon me, but BULLSHIT

same old same old from apologists for policies which are anti-democratic, because they are touted by "Democrats." Someone wiser than I once said "by their works shall you know them."

[theaocp]

153. I think the problem comes

about because the Democrats are asking people to vote more to keep the pukes at bay than FOR the Dems. The anybody-but-a-repuke meme has worn thin, but the Dems don't seem to realize this. I don't want to vote AGAINST the pukes! I want to vote FOR the Democrats! Democratic politicians: doing the right thing shouldn't be so fucking hard...

[carolinayellowdog]

154. This is divisive bullying

I've always voted for Democrats and always will. Don't need to be subjected to relentless denunciation of progressives by centrists to keep me in line.

[Cha]

156. No, it isn't.

[paulk]

371. LOL!

you make a convincing argument!

[VMI Dem]

159. Yes. It is.

:thumbsup:

[fishwax]

i agree n/t

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

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

[Cha]

161. ..

:bounce: :)

[Name removed]

162. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

171. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

174. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cha]

176. You're saying America in 2010 is reminiscent of nazi germany? Explain.

[Name removed]

192. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

198. Deleted message

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

[SemiCharmedQuark]

224. Im pretty sure most people think comparing the goings on of a website to the holocaust is a joke

A poor joke from a sick mind, but a joke nonetheless. Skinner could ban every one of us right now for no reason and comparing that to the holocaust would still be fevered delusion.

[Techn0Girl]

228. I'm pretty sure you are intentionally miscontruing my last 3 messages in an attempt to sidetrack

[puebloknot]

285. I will yield to Naomi Wolf to answer your question.

"Of course, the United States is not vulnerable to the violent, total closing-down of the system that followed Mussolini's march on Rome or Hitler's roundup of political prisoners. Our democratic habits are too resilient, and our military and judiciary too independent, for any kind of scenario like that.

"Rather, as other critics are noting, our experiment in democracy could be closed down by a process of erosion.

"It is a mistake to think that early in a fascist shift you see the profile of barbed wire against the sky. In the early days, things look normal on the surface; peasants were celebrating harvest festivals in Calabria in 1922; people were shopping and going to the movies in Berlin in 1931. Early on, as WH Auden put it, the horror is always elsewhere - while someone is being tortured, children are skating, ships are sailing: "dogs go on with their doggy life ... How everything turns away/ Quite leisurely from the disaster."

This link takes you to Naomi Wolf's Ten Steps to Fascism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment

Another highly recommended books is Defying Hitler, by Sebastian Haffner, a German jurist who endured the system for a time, then escaped to England with his Jewish wife. In it, he outlines the slow descent into fascism. Life went along with a degree of normalcy for a time, and then the Germany that was turned into a great horror.

[NanceGreggs]

172. True Democratic Progressives ...

... don't let power-drunk Republicans drive the country. They do whatever necessary to stop them.

And by the way, labeling one's self as a "true Democratic Progressive" doesn't make you one.

[Cha]

173. So true.

[Techn0Girl]

178. "whatever is necessary to stop them"

How about we support the revocation of our (formerly guaranteed) Constitutional liberties : a la The "Patriot" Act? (to make us appear to be on the side of security)

How about we put the people who wrecked this country's finances in charge of the Treasury (in order to secure votes and funding)?

How about we scrap a public option in order to become more "centrist (meaning appealing to more of the wealthy class)?

How about we keep 100,000 young men and woman in a two war front and continue to give Haliburton and Blackwater hundred million dollar contracts in order not to offend the military-industrial complex?

How about we tell those meddling Unions to go "Fuck Themselves" and start calling progressives with contrary viewpoints to all the above "The Professional Left"?

Oh by all means , let's do whatever is necessary.

If we do a good enough job then "they" will eventually become "us" .

[SaveOurDemocracy]

195. ...and we, them. Well said, Techn0Girl! n/t

[Cherchez la Femme]

309. Techn0Girl, you're wrong

we gave Haliburton and Blackwater contracts in the multi-billions!
Blackwater got from U.S. government issued contracts a total of 1.5 billion alone!

Otherwise, I agree wholeheartedly with you :hi: :hug:

[Name removed]

200. Deleted message

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

[Techn0Girl]

205. You're either FOR Canada or Against it ! There is NO Middle ground !

[Cha]

211. I like Nance's voice just fine!

[NanceGreggs]

212. You should read the memos, Dr. Phool ...

The "you live in Canada" meme failed to get traction the first time around, and the second. It's now decidedly old hat.

Yes, I live in Canada. And, yes, I'm a US citizen. And, yes, I vote.

[Techn0Girl]

216. Well what's wrong with living in the U.S.A., Nance?

I mean you're either a citizen that's proud to stand up for and live in our country while it's going through these difficult times .....

... or you're not.

Right?

How can you be active in your local Democratic Party when you live 300 miles away from America (or whatever)?
There are a LOT of loyal Brothers and sisters who spend their mornings knocking on doors and getting out the vote.

Do the have a OFCAE up there ?(Obama for Canadian expatriates)

[NanceGreggs]

223. Wrong.

I did not move to Canada for political reasons. Therefore, I would not move back to the US to make a political statement (which, for the life of me, I can't imagine would be any kind of statement at all).

I don't know about you, but the people I know choose where they live based on a myriad of reasons - career advancement, access to jobs in their field, personal ties, etc.

I love Toronto as a city - whether it's in Canada or the US doesn't change the fact that I love this city, and don't want to live anywhere else. It is ideal for me in more ways than I can count.

But, of course, I can see your point. If I left my job, my house, my friends and a place I am extremely happy living and moved back to NYC tomorrow, everything in the US would change for the better overnight by the fact of my having done so.

:sarcasm:

[Name removed]

227. Deleted message

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

[NanceGreggs]

232. Your reading comprehension ...

... seems to be a bit "off" tonight.

I didn't say I had better job opportunities here - I said that most people assess that as one of many criteria when choosing where to live.

If you think I'm telling anyone how to think or how to vote, again your comprehension is lacking. What I AM saying is that those who profess to be Democrats, and supportive of the Party's ideals and goals, should stand up for that Party when it comes to voting, and change it (if and when they think change is appropriate) from within. The Party is never changed by people refusing to vote, or by kvetching endlessly on a message board about what they don't like in lieu of being involved.

As for my not "buying American", or "not voting for local Dems or Congressmen - you are making assumptions that are, at best, laughable - not to mention totally ill-informed.

[Smashcut]

233. It's pretty astounding, isn't it?

[DevonRex]

313. How many posts of yours have been deleted because of personal attacks about Nance living in Canada?

What will it take for you to follow that simple rule about no personal attacks? Surely it's clear that you cannot attack posters simply because they are ex-pats. One would think you have had plenty of time to understood that.

[Smashcut]

214. !

Thank you!

[rhett o rick]

325. It was centrists Democrats that voted buddy buddy with Bush on the invasion of Iraq.

It was centrist DLC'ers that voted buddy buddy with Bush for the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act. It was centrists Blue Dogs that supported Bush's domestic spying and tax breaks for the rich. It appears that centrist Democrats do let power-drunk Republicans "drive the country". It has been the Blue Dog, centrist, that have voted buddy buddy with the Republicans to kill decent health care reform and good banking reform.

[Mimosa]

335. YOU decide who is a believer and who is a heretic? LOL

I think 99% of Dems at DU will vote for Dems and don't appreciate the divisive bullying tone of the OP.

[NanceGreggs]

337. I appreciate the irony ...

... of stating that I am being "divisive" by urging Dems to vote for Dems.

As for 99% of Dems at DU voting for their own, I hope you're right. But given the tone and volume of negative, anti-Dem, "your vote doesn't really matter anyway" OPs of late, that disgruntled one percent sure are a prolific bunch.

[Ignis]

346. Since there are SO many "anti-Dem" OPs at DU, it should be easy to cite a few.

Right? :shrug:

[NanceGreggs]

347. Once upon a time ...

... and under far different circumstances, citing anti-Dem OPs here would have been easily done. They were few and far between - and most got deleted before one had time enough to read them.

But that was then - this is now.

Check out the Greatest Page tonight - or any night over the last six to nine months.

To say one can't find anti-Dem rhetoric being picked-up and run with on a regular basis here of late is equivalent to saying, "I checked out FR, and couldn't find a single anti-Dem post."

I would cite specific examples of same, but won't fall into that trap - "calling out" fellow DUers and all.

Playing the disingenuous card (:shrug:) is, at this point, silly in the extreme.

[Cha]

163. I love that President Obama is such a

Democratic President and has been diligently reversing the bushcheney coup in his 18 months in Office..that's Progress.

[guyton]

177. "true progressives’, “true leftists”, “true Democrats"

Anyone actually referring to someone (or themselves) as a "true" anything should be immediately directed to read the wikipedia page on "No true Scotsman" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman).

It's a reliable indicator for a content-free posting.

[Spheric]

182. We have already "Picked. A. Fucking. Side." And it is obvious what side we are on,.

Your efforts to shut us up is met with contempt. As it should be. Yeh, I get it. Either you are for liberty and justice for all or you're not. Thanks for drawing the line in the sand.

[rug]

183. I'm still waiting for the Administration to Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side.

[whatchamacallit]

206. [phone]

Yep.

[MessiahRp]

276. It seems to me they've clearly picked a side.

Corporations win. We're just the "fucking retards".

Rp

[puebloknot]

321. As am I. The last two years have felt like being lost in ...

... a slow-motion movie, or a bad dream, waiting to wake up.

I miss Bill Clinton, with all his warts. I wish we had another Roosevelt to lead us through these rough economic times.

Leadership is simply not in existence today.

[JackDragna]

184. I have picked a side.

I'm on the side of the weak, the downtrodden, the used and abused. I'm on the side of the poor, for whom this administration has done damned next to nothing. I'm on the side of gay Americans, a group whose civil rights this administration does not support. I'm on the side of the Constitution, the document Obama tramples on every day with his support for continued extraordinary rendition and indefinite detention of "terror" suspects. I'm on the side of peace, when the president supports continual occupation in nations we invaded. I'm for standing up for progressives who hold public jobs, who the administration jettisons at the first sign of political flak from the right. I'm on the side of the American taxpayer, who has seen untold billions disappear into the coffers of corporate America, much of which has little strings attached.

Politics is not merely a game of chess, Ms. Greggs. I will not continue to support the illusion that the Democratic/Republican chess game is meaningful just because my side happens to all seem to be the same color on the board. I want the Democratic Party to be the engine of change and support for progressive ideals that it can be, but if it continues to knuckle under to the powerful, to the elite, to damn those who provide its very soul, then I posit it is the duty of those who support progressive politics to either remove those in the highest party echelons or take their political support elsewhere. I do not accept your position that the party, as a whole, is for progress, and it will rightly be criticized by those on this board until it is.

[Techn0Girl]

187. Posts like yours help me still have the audicity to Hope...

(because of our country's people and not it's politicians)

Thanks for providing balance :)

[Spheric]

189. Amen, brother or sister. /nt

[SaveOurDemocracy]

201. Thank you! It's like they're insisting we blinfold...

...ourselves, and sip from the cup being passed around, even as we hear bodies hitting the floor all around us.

[Smashcut]

209. +1

[Atticus]

225. " it is the duty of those who support progressive politics to either remove those in the highest

party echelons or take their political support elsewhere."

I will work with you to replace some of our "leaders", but, "take my political support elsewhere?"

Where?

How is this different, in a real sense, from simply staying home?

[JackDragna]

261. Because someone who supports worthy causes..

..will get my time, energy and political contributions. The actions of the national Democratic party violate not just my political sensibilities, but my personal sense of ethics. There comes a time when it's simply not enough to keep the "other guys" out of power.

[Steely_Dan]

253. Excellent Post Jack...

Thank you.

[puebloknot]

322. Perfect! The only reasonable loyalty is to principles. If a party ...

... supports those principles (as they make broadbrush claims to do), then support will follow as night follows day.

This OP is, once again, a call for unthinking fealty to a banner -- until we get through the next election, of course. Simplistic "thinking" has brought down more than one civilization.

[Mimosa]

336. Well said, JackDragna! n/t

[gkhouston]

364. Well said.

:applause:

[nolabear]

193. A. Fuckin. Men. Just look at the GOP and the Tea Party

I'm thanking the universe for sending along the likes of Beck, Palin, and the whole goofy TP crowd, who are sucking away GOP votes in the primaries and will continue to do so. I can't believe the laft would be so foolish as to cut off our respective noses to spite our faces. NO ONE is going to come in and make like a superhero; it cannot work that way.

Good to see you and to hear your voice of reason.

[Top Cat]

196. Thanks for the post Nancy I totally agree...

Either you're with the Dems or against... Nov 3rd will be to late to re-think your decision.

[grantcart]

207. I am picking your side and I just want to add

glad to know that we can still have sex on our 'fucking side'!

[Techn0Girl]

213. You do have a point ....

Because I've been pretty thoroughly fucked these past two years.

[grantcart]

218. I think matters of personal biography are better discussed in the lounge.

[Techn0Girl]

219. My Bad, I should have listend to my Party Officer so I know where to post.

[smiley_glad_hands]

265. I call horeshit and this comment is way over the top. eom

[Atticus]

220. Here's lookin' at you, kid! nt

[JoeyT]

222. "With us or against us" was never a good slogan.

I can't think of a single time it was used that it wasn't to demonize or dehumanize a group that wasn't part of the mainstream.

You know, just like you're using it now.

[gtar100]

234. It's unfortunate but we only get one of two choices each election.

Democratic or Republican. Period. Sucks but that's the way it is. Anyone who would choose to vote for anything other than the two is really throwing away a vote for the side they might otherwise fall on. (I think the R's understand that point better than the D's, but the T's have sort of upset that apple cart for them.)

In an ideal world, our vote would represent our greatest intentions and hopes, but because of the corruption rampant throughout politics, at best we can only throw our weight behind whichever direction appears better than the other to us. In this election cycle, our choice is to steer along a road filled with potholes and deep ruts (Democratic) or off the cliff that's on the right (Republicans).

Vote third Party or Republican at the peril of everyone, fools! No one's saying voting the Democratic ticket will be a bed of roses, but at least we'll have an opportunity to fix things. Republicans are out for blood - yours included.

[Number23]

238. 161 recs. Not bad, Nance!

:)

[JNelson6563]

240. Considering the unrec swarm hammered this.

I've noticed a few righteous screeds in this thread too. :rofl:

Julie

[HughMoran]

251. 90 unrecs for a post promoting pulling for Democrats on a Democratic board

The opposition has become surreal in so many ways.

[LiberalLovinLug]

239. Its just sad we have to pick between the lesser of the two corporate puppets

Those who can vote, will have the choice between another trained monkey for the GOP. (look how many positions McCain had to flipflop on to be "ready")

Or

a DLC (Democrats Loving Corporations) guided Obama, who was crafted as a "progressive" in order to win us over to make President, and is now molded into a "moderate/right", presumably to attract the independent voter, so he is acting like a Republican would 10 years ago. A Neo-Liberal, if you will.

It becomes a choice between who would do the country the LEAST harm.
From what Obama has done to the health care insurance "reform", I wonder what his next bi-partisan reform will be? I hope to gawd he doesn't fall for the reich wings demands of a Social Security overhaul. I shudder to think of what Obama's opening concession will be, and how those negotiations would end up.

[tiredtoo]

241. I reserve my right to complain about things I don't like

As far as I am concerned the current administration is far from what I had hoped for. I will,at my discretion, complain about their actions.
I will also continue to support Democratic candidates in all races both local and national. I will also call/write my representatives in Washington and express either my joy with what they did or my displeasure with what they did. Washington D.C. is under control of corporations and their lobbyists. The change we need is not here yet but it can happen if we continue our pressure. Join me in D.C. on Oct. 2 and show your support for change. The only thing politicians respect more then money is votes. A large turnout for our side would get their attention.

[Stinky The Clown]

245. You know . . . . when one considers the flavor of the nylon used to weave a donut hole in . . . .

. . . . my back yard, the flying baskervillians choose the framis method of collating the recidivist hair plugs some tout as green apple skins. Mind you, Nance, I don't. But some care to and often don't, no matter what discernible centrifugal lion cubs show up.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

257. Indubitably. n/t

[Diane R]

246. How many times can I recommend this? You've been missed, and we need your voice of reason.

I've noticed the most vocal and frequent posters in the Journal section have started bashing Obama on an absolutely daily basis. Often there are three journals from the same source on the Journals section at one time, all negative about Obama. In my mind, that is prime DU real estate, and it bother me a lot that it has been given over to an effort to discredit our President. I worry it will impact the next election and our country will return to 2000.

[skepticscott]

248. You were the same one

who insisted that Obama needed to promote reaching across the aisle and working with the Republicans, who you now refer to as "those who would see our nation move backwards in opposition to every step forward the Democrats have made".

Whatever makes a good rant on the day, I guess.

[NanceGreggs]

256. Actually ...

... I didn't insist that Obama reach across the aisle. But I did often defend him when he did so.

Telling the citizenry that you won't bother reaching across the aisle because you'll only get slapped down anyway has much less of an impact that actually doing so, and having the other side - very publicly - slap your hand away. That makes an impression, and leaves no wiggle room for the GOP to say, "We wouldn't have been the Party of NO if only we'd been asked to participate."

[CreekDog]

311. I wish you wouldn't lecture all of us on what you cannot possibly know about us

like what side me or anybody else is on.

i vote and plan to vote like i always have.

but i will not let you feel like you are helping to suggest that by complaining that such a thing means i'm on some other (fifth-column-like) side!

:grr:

[Time for change]

252. I don't agree

with the statement that "You're either with the Democratic Party or you're against it". It's not that simple.

There are many of us who are with the Democratic Party when they do things we believe in, and we are against them when they do things in support of the corporatocracy, at the expense of the rest of us. The Democratic Party has to a large extent been captured by corporate interests -- not as much as the Republican Party, but nevertheless to a very large extent -- including our president.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Time%20for%20change/579

I don't believe we should support that kind of stuff.

[Historic NY]

254. I picked my side in Nov 08 & I'm not turning back, NFW.

[BrklynLiberal]

258. Thanks for returning. Your posts have been missed.

[Lifelong Protester]

259. Thank YOU as I admire your posts and have missed you.

We need to understand, as you so eloquently point out, that support is not blind. I think we see always areas of improvement, but jeez-o-pete, we cannot let things go back to what they were in the dark ages of W. Just can't.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

260. Gee Nance, I don't know why you bother because no-one coments

on your posts.

You Rock! Keep on! some of us have loved you for years!

[smiley_glad_hands]

262. Excellent Nance, I miss your posts.

And I couldn't agree more.

[craigmatic]

263. It's not so simple as that. Liberals are realistic and too often that leads to pessimism (sp?).

That's not saying they're not for the party it just means they like to interpret fact and developments in their own way.

[katandmoon]

264. Unrec.

[smiley_glad_hands]

266. Rec.

[akbacchus_BC]

267. K&R. Glad to have you back Nance. Excellent post, thank you. n/t

[RetroLounge]

269. What a bunch of tripe...

:puke:

unrec

(guess I picked a side)

RL

[akbacchus_BC]

270. That's pigs intestines, I mean 'tripe'. I already countered your unrec!

[Cherchez la Femme]

310. Nyahh nyahh!

How I wish there was an emoticon with thumbs sticking in ears & waggling fingers for you!

Damn, life is so unfair!

[akbacchus_BC]

365. Could not help myself after seeing your post ... are you 10 yrs old?

[grendelsd]

274. I love you will you marry me

Unfortunately, I am a gay male. Hm... Do you have a brother?

Namaste,
Carmine

[NanceGreggs]

275. Alas, I have no brothers ...

... much to the chagrin of my late father, who wanted only one thing in this life: a son - and wound up with six daughters!

But welcome to the DU conversation, grendelsd!

:hi:

[lovemydog]

279. I agree

Nance, I joined here and started posting because I wanted to second one of your posts. It's been tough trying to get to know people here because I don't post much and because I enjoy reading. But I must say once again that I agree with your post. Yes, I'd like more democrats to be further progressive. Yes, I think their constituents should pressure them to do more work for the public interest. At the same time, I will vote D this time around because I am absolutely disgusted with the republican party's horrendous lying and failed policies and complete horse shit. I support our President and do not worship him.

[NanceGreggs]

280. Thank you, lovemydog ...

I think we've all been a little too quick on the trigger these days - labeling Obama supporters as worshipers, and labeling those with valid criticism of this administration as Obama-haters.

These debates are often fueled by a small-but-vocal group here who like to play the "let's you and him fight" game, bent on being disruptive and divisive in order to advance an agenda that has nothing to do with advancing Democratic ideals or goals.

[lovemydog]

282. Very well said

I read and understand the valid criticisms. I don't like the more over the top ones. Progress takes time and seriousness and patience over the long haul. It occurs, but not always at the pace we desire. I hope this next election democrats turn out in droves to reject the party of no (which is also the party of failed and increasingly insensitive policy). Then my goal is to pressure Congress to strengthen health care reform and reduce military spending.

[David Zephyr]

281. It's time.

K&R.

[DesertFlower]

283. well said my dear sister. nt

[earcandle]

284. Definitely with more than against. Would be a sure win if he appoints Elizabeth Warren to protect

us consumers from those greedy bastards at the top. 

[PBass]

286. Lets face it, there is a lot of histrionic negativity on DU,

often coming from people who really don't know what the hell they are complaining about.

One example that still comes to mind immediately - when Sherrod Brown won the Democratic nomination for the OH Senate race.

GOOD LORD, the sky was falling at DU, because Sherrod Brown was a terrible candidate and not a real Democrat, and so on. He just wasn't liberal at all!!!!! (etc)

Flash forward and Sherrod Brown is one of the best Senators the liberal Democrats have. I think there are very few informed Democrats who would disagree with that.

The wailing and moaning is one reason I don't post here very much, or even look at the forums. It's great that everyone at DU is allowed to express themselves... even people who lack all perspective, people who don't know what they are talking about, and so on. But the overwhelming negativity from some people really brings this website down. Some of these folks would complain about free ice cream. Maybe they are masochists.

[JNelson6563]

288. Well said friend. Agree 100%

Glad yo0u decided to post this. :toast:

Julie

[Cha]

303. There are more than a few

who feel this way..thanks for your post, PBass!~ :)

[rhett o rick]

294. I think you know that we all have chosen “fucking” sides. So why the OP?

You also know that most here have chosen the Democratic Party. So again, why the OP? You arent trying to convince the few trolls and Libertarians in here to change, I assume.

I read this OP as being aimed at people that you know have chosen the Democratic Party. People that were very active in getting Pres Obama elected. People with very strong Democratic principles. People that might be pushing to get out of Afghanistan, end the Patriot Act, end domestic spying, end DADT, getting more help for people losing homes, jobs and retirements, people that want Fair Trade in lieu of Free Trade, etc. I would hope you consider yourself on the same side as these people. I hope you are not telling these people to sit down and shut up. They wont because they are Democrats.

[LostinVA]

295. Great post!

[katandmoon]

298. Thank you.

[Gormy Cuss]

300. Telling people to put up or shut up isn't constructive.

Neither is using an idiotic statement made by W to bolster your case.
Honestly, is that the best we can do?

This statement is telling:
There are those among us who have labelled themselves as representative of “true progressives’, “true leftists”, “true Democrats”, and have, in the doing, labelled all of those who disagree with their every agenda item as somehow being less worthy, less valid, less sincere in our efforts to see this country move forward rather than backward, as though such labels – self-proclaimed and self-affixed – are to be accepted without question, or factual support.

So now people within that big tent of the Democratic party need to prove where they stand or they are dismissed? Where are the self-labeled centrists in that paragraph? I think it's time we questioned whether those people have provided factual support of that self definition. Maybe accepting them as centrists is the problem. Maybe they're really conservatives. Or -horrors-maybe they're leftists and just won't admit it.

[SunsetDreams]

304. My dear Nance, most excellent OP! Thank you!

I'm voting Democratic all the way! Always have, and always will!
The Republican Party can go screw itself if it thinks that it will EVER get my vote.

[CreekDog]

305. Cliff Notes version for busy people:

I believe we have often confused support for this Presidency as blind acquiescence – just as often as we’ve confused valid criticism of its policies as unsupported bashing.

Supporting the current Administration does not equate to agreement with its every decision; criticism of this Administration does not equate to bashing.

“You’re either with us or against us.” It’s a phrase that, once uttered by one G.W. Bush

You’re either with the Democratic Party, or you’re against it.

Pick. A. Fuckin'. Side.

[EFerrari]

315. Cliff Notes on Twitter.

I dn't write re controversy but channel W. Hang onto your guns and find yr place in the choir.

~~~~~~

I hope all those pieces have their safety on. :)

[CreekDog]

318. where did that come from?

a real tweet?

linky? :hi:

[BellaLuna]

307. "You’re either with the Democratic Party, or you’re against it."

hmmm who does this sound like????? oh yea.. George W Bush.

This black and white look at things is dangerous. Blind support is as bad as blind opposition.

I have always voted Democrat and always will but it's not strictly black and white with me. I want to make the party better and to do so I have to acknowledge weaknesses in it. I certainly don't want to think like a republican and not acknowledge the reality of where my party is.

[DemocraticPilgrim]

314. I'm totally with it, another great post.

[Jim_Shorts]

316. Who made you the "DECIDER"

of what democratic ideals and goals are? It's so great for you to have a job where you can use your real name and face and express your opinions. Some of us have jobs where if you use the word union openly - you will be fired. I watch the audacity of company's using the revolving door concept, ever searching for higher skilled, lower wage people.

If i put a "VOTE DEMOCRAT" sign in my yard, it's not going to sway any republicans to vote my way but it will show support for the other Dem's in my area. If i rant about how i want "REAL CHANGE", i'm not going to talk anyone into not voting but it might give hope to other like minded progressives.

You say "now" is not the time for dissent. When were we supposed to stop talking about the issues that matter to us - 1 month ago? - 6 months ago? I think i've heard this kind of talk before.

"JUST SHUT UP AND SING"

Here is more support for my brother progressives

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/09/05-0

[NanceGreggs]

323. Thank you for your comments ...

... about things I never said.

I did not set out the goals and ideals of the Democratic Party - I think we all know what they are, although we may differ greatly on how they can best be achieved.

However, I DO think we can agree that one of the main goals of the party is to elect Democrats to office.

I also didn't say that now is not the time for dissent. What I did say was that election time is the time to stand together as voters, and see to it that our candidates win - and Republicans lose.

A Democrat in office can be pressured by their constituents to move government in the direction we want to see it go. A Democrat who never attains office is of no value in accomplishing that goal.

[Cherchez la Femme]

370. "Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow

Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time.
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle.
Life is but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."

When is 'the time for dissent'?
It's never now.
It's never the right time.
Always too much on their plate at the moment.
Even though those they praise to the skies --Gandhi, Dr. King, et. al.-- wisely refused their oh-so-sage advice, we should heed it.
Just wait -- it'll happen. Have patience.

They'll get to it when more important, more pressing things are, first, all settled.

Tomorrow.



Again, when is 'the time for dissent'?

It's always "tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow..."

[tavalon]

319. Would that it were that simple for me

No side appears to represent me in any discernible fashion. And it galls to vote for the team that abuses me less - I'm still an abused spouse, either way. That said, I pick Democrat because they don't hurt me quite as much. So far.

[billh58]

352. I understand your

anger and frustration, and I believe that you have pointed out one of the reasons that Democrats have such a hard time agreeing on much of anything.

The Other Side has no problem with freely admitting that they are in the political game for nothing more than "what's in it for me?" Most Democrats, on the other hand, view politics in terms of "the greatest good, for the greatest number," with an emphasis on the under-served, the underprivileged, and the defenseless among us. But, being human, self-interest runs a close second for many Democrats.

Coming to the realization that there are not now, and never have been, "instant fixes" to our society's problems, much less for our own immediate needs and wants, is the first step in recognizing that the Constitution was written and designed for future generations of Americans. That fact was true in 1787 (adoption of the Constitution), was just as true in 1865 (end of the Civil War), was particularly true in 1964 (passage of the Civil Rights Act) and remains so today.

The very best we can hope for is to hold on to the gains that the Founders, our ancestors, and ALL Americans (but especially American Democrats) have worked so hard to win for our Nation, and to put in place the processes that will ensure continued progress for future generations of Americans.

[Uzybone]

328. belated KnR

Watching the swarm of griefers and trolls attack the OP is hilarious.

[Fire1]

329. Too late to rec but I can still 'kick!' n/t

[Autumn]

330. Oh I'm going to vote in November. I don't like who

I have to vote for, I have a choice between Buck or Bennet. I guess I better find a gas mask because I sure as hell am not going to let Buck win. But I really think it would be better for our "Democrats" to pick a side.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

341. We are going to beat them

[blaze]

349. Wow Nance!!!

You really riled folks up!!!

I'm not particularly thrilled with the D choice this year.... Bennet.... but I'll be damned if I'll vote for the alternative!!

Yes.

I. Picked. My. Fuckin'. Side.

:hi:

[Mefistofeles]

356. "You're either with us or against us"

Deja vu.

[gkhouston]

360. Takes me back to middle school. Didn't go over well then, either.

:thumbsdown:

[OhioBlue]

358. Great post Nance!!! n/t

[firedupdem]

362. Great Post Nance! n/t

[jpgray]

372. I disagree with, well, almost all of that.

To start at the end, you haven't chosen a side. I'll try to explain:

You see harsh critics of Obama as "against us," meaning against Democrats at large, if I follow you. You also see those you call "cheerleaders," who object to harsh criticism, as "with us," meaning they are with the Democrats.

But this caricature becomes laughable if harsh criticism induces Democrats to change policy. If tomorrow Obama and the leadership strongly advocated for a public option, or for gay marriage, or for withdrawal from Afghanistan, your line in the sand defining the harsh critics on those issues as forever against Democrats evaporates. You and the Democrats would now be -with- the precise people you painted as -against- the Democrats.

The vast majority of harsh criticism of the party from the left does not hold any inveterate hatred for the only major party that gives their views respect. They simply uphold certain ideals and values. Politicians and therefore political parties do not and cannot. Their stated values and ideals must necessarily shift with the political winds. Obama and all elected Democrats must make do with what they have, and must constantly shift their stated values if they are to accomplish anything substantial.

Let's say you spent all day every day right up to October 2009 defending Obama's campaign promise to heavily revise the Patriot Act. Then let's say he sides with the Republicans on its revision, and signs its re-authorization without critical civil liberties reforms in February 2010. Now let's say someone still wants the thing heavily revised or abolished. Has that person switched sides? Or have you?

(Incidentally if you can explain how criticism on an internet message board has sweeping electoral implications, I'd like to hear it.)

[NanceGreggs]

373. "You see harsh critics of Obama as against us ...

... meaning against Democrats at large, if I follow you, etc."

The fact is you don't follow me. That is not even close to what I said.

Criticism has always been a healthy part of the process, and always will be.

However, there are certain individuals here who consistently post every negative (towards Obama and/or the Dem party) article, op-ed, column they can find. Some are now doing it without even adding any comments of their own - they just post the text and move on. They just want to get it "out there".

I think it logical to question their motives, and conclude that they are definitely not "with us" - especially when they openly declare just that on other websites.