Will the Green Party stop taking Republican money?

[LoZoccolo]

Poll question: Will the Green Party stop taking Republican money?

[orpupilofnature57]

1. What is the biggest enemy of the Best ,the worst or good enough ?

[LoZoccolo]

3. You have completely messed up that saying.

It is supposed to be "perfect is the enemy of good".

[orpupilofnature57]

13. My wife says your right ,your right ,thanks

[Bjorn Against]

2. It depends on which Green Party member you are talking about

Not all Green's are Republicans like you would like to believe. Most of them are pissed that certain people in the party are taking Republican money.

Greens are swing voters, most of them do not vote a straight Green ticket. When they don't vote Green they vote Democratic.

If you want to lose those potential votes then keep smearing ordinary Greens, but if you want to convince Greens to vote for you then I would suggest that you talk about the issues and stop the attacks. Attack the candidates who take Republican money, but don't make broad smears.

[LoZoccolo]

5. I was asking a question.

You can answer "yes" or you can answer "no".

[Bjorn Against]

10. Answer my question...

Which Greens are you talking about?

It is not the whole party doing this, your question suggests it is. I won't answer a poll that is worded the way you have it, because it presents a false representation no matter which choice is made.

[LoZoccolo]

11. Which Green Party candidate has GIVEN BACK Republican money? n/t

[Bjorn Against]

15. You are avoiding the question.

I never defended any Green for taking Republican money, I believe it is wrong for them to knowingly do so. But I refuse to attack the entire party because of the actions of a few of the members.

I know many Greens, they are very committed to Progressive causes and most of them will vote Democratic sometimes. They hate being called Bush enablers however, and they have a hard time going Democratic when the Democratic Party is constantly attacking their character.

The way to win Greens to your side is to advocate instant runoff voting, an end to the War in Iraq, and Universal Health Care. It is possible to win Green votes, and it would be fairly easy to do if there weren't so many Democrats viciously attacking them.

[LoZoccolo]

30. See I see no reason for the Green Party at all.

I can't see any reason for them to exist except to try to intimidate the Democratic Party, to the delight of Republicans. Such intimidation is a substitute for the real political work of being compelling and putting together a consensus. If the Green Party could get enough people to believe in what they believe in, the Democrats could not ignore it. But instead they like to play little prankster games that risk the Democrats losing whether they give into the Green hijacking or not. Being effective would take work.

They hate being called Bush enablers however, and they have a hard time going Democratic when the Democratic Party is constantly attacking their character.

So it's our fault for telling it like it is? When will these people take some responsibility?

And instant runoff voting is stupid, and anyone who would get the Republicans elected over the fact that they can't vote for who they want first before who can get them more of what they want first is irresponsible. A vote is not a way of expressing yourself; it's an important decision that affects millions of lives whether you treat it that way or not. People who want to express themselves would do better to get a box of crayons and some construction paper. Or, as I said, express themselves to other people and build a consensus. But again, that would require work.

[Selatius]

80. Nice dodge of his question. You're not going to answer it, are you?

The fact that you're against IRV shows how narrow-minded you are at instituting reforms to allow more voices into the debate without punishing people for wanting more choices. The current system does that by handing victory to the side least fragmented by choices, which is inherently more authoritarian than one that doesn't punish the electorate for having several choices instead of only two. It is like saying the Titanic was a success because there were enough lifeboats for half the passengers.

[William769]

20. A green is a green. Does that answer your question.

[Bjorn Against]

22. Would it be fair to say a Democrat is a Democrat and then bring up...

Zell Miller?

Of course not. You should judge a party by its membership as a whole not just the bad apples.

Remember it was the Greens who fought for and invested the money to get a recount in Ohio, they are not Republicans. They spent their own party dollars to help get the election turned over to Kerry. Unfortunately they did not succeed, but it says a lot that they were willing to invest their money to help a Democrat. We should not forget that.

[William769]

23. Greens only vote Democrat when it's in their best interest.

This is a Democratc board. Fuck the Greens!

P.S. Zell Miller is a non factor. He's out of Office & if he wasn't Democrats wouldn't vote for him except for a few crazy one's.

If I said it once I'll say ay again if you want to promote anything Green go to their boards & leave ours alone.

[Bjorn Against]

25. I was not promoting any Green candidate...

I am trying to help Democrats, and I am getting attacked for it.

You say "Greens only vote for Democrats when it is in there best interest to do so", well then work to convince them it is in their best interest.

Personally attacking them will not convince them.

I am following the rules of this message board, do not tell me to leave. I did not promote any Green candidate over a Democrat in any of my posts, I simply want to defend good progressives from slanderous attacks. Most Greens are not Bush enablers, they are simply voters who feel they should be able to vote for a person who represents their interests. So go out and show them you represent their interests, right now you are certainly not doing that.

[William769]

26. I didn't tell you to leave

But I will tell you this, I will slander Greens here all day long. I don't like them I never have & I never will. I consider them the enemy right along with the Republicans.

[Bjorn Against]

27. Fine if you don't want their votes, then slander all you want

I just hope you realize the damage you are doing to your own party.

[William769]

28. Like in 2000?

Like in PA right now? Yea right! :eyes:

A vote for a Green is NOT a vote for a Democrat, thats the bottom line.

[Bjorn Against]

29. But you can convince many Greens to vote Democratic...

Instead you are making them angry, and that is no way to get them to vote for your candidate.

Believe me many Greens are pissed about the PA situation, you have a chance at getting their vote. But if you keep acting like that they may just not vote period. So do you want their vote or not? If not then why should it matter to you if they vote Green?

[catbert836]

48. I really wouldn't know what to do myself.

As much as I hate Santorum, the guy they have running against him is nothing but a Republican lite masquerading as a progressive. What a great choice.

[mitchtv]

71. the Greens are dead for another 20 yrs

because of PA ,on top of 2K. They have earned, and rightly so, the position of "totally owned subsidiary" of the GOP. I once flirted with Greens, but now, if I need a third party it will be Peace and Freedom Party.

[paulk]

89. there is no one else inside that voting booth with a Green voter

this whole idea that one has to be nice to Greens to get them to vote Democratic is bullshit.

It's the "I'll cut off my nose to spite my face" argument.

If Greens are happy with the current political situation, then they'll sit at home or vote against the Democrats.

If not - then they'll do the responsible thing and vote for a Democrat.

Trying to pin the responsibility for that vote on anyone but the voter is nonsense.

[Zhade]

56. 2000 - you mean when Gore won FL anyway?

When the Greens WEREN'T the ones who stole it for b*s*?

[William769]

66. Here are the final reults go ahead & try to spin them.

George W. Bush (W) 2,912,790 48.850 Republican
Al Gore 2,912,253 48.841 Democratic
Ralph Nader 97,421 1.633 Green
Patrick J. Buchanan 17,412 0.292 Reform
Harry Browne 16,102 0.270 Libertarian
John Hagelin 2,274 0.038 Natural Law/Reform
Howard Phillips 1,378 0.023 Constitution
Other 3,027 0.051 —
Total 5,962,657 100.00

[Zhade]

72. You're ignoring the uncounted ballots.

You're also ignoring the 50,000 FL Dems that voted for b*s*.

You're also ignoring the 90,000+ disenfranchised black FL voters.

You're also ignoring the one-time-only, non-precedental SCOTUS decision in Gore V Bush.

I think I've made my point.

[William769]

83. No your trying to sidestep the fact

That Ralph Nader Threw the election to to Bush. Like I said go ahead & spin away.

[Zhade]

95. In order for that to be fact, you'd have to:

1) prove Nader colluded with the Republican party (your assertion that he 'threw' the election means he intended to do so, which presupposes collusion)

2) disprove all the facts I listed (you can't)

3) prove that, had the ballots been counted (the counting of which the SCOTUS disallowed, which you'd know if you actually knew the history of the 2000 coup) Gore would have lost (again, you can't, because expert analysis that was to be released the week of 9/11 showed he would have won anyway)

Sorry ace, I've got history and facts on my side; you have irrational hatred for a man/group that, at best, had a small unwitting role in the 2000 coup.

[William769]

108. Facts on your side?

:rofl:

[Zhade]

115. Feel free to disprove any of the facts I've stated.

I'm sure we're all eager to hear you disprove what most people on this board were aware of when they joined up.

(You DO know this website was started as a protest of the STOLEN 2000 (s)election, right? I mean, it's in the site's About section and all.)

[William769]

118. All I can think os the Republicans that say

The fact are on my side. :rofl:

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

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

[Zhade]

55. This board is NOT a Democratic board.

It is a democratic board, that supports Dems. Big difference.

Christ, don't you people read the "About" section of websites you join?

And the poster wasn't promoting the Green party - that's as dishonest a take on it as the OP's push-poll.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

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

[Zhade]

73. No, so don't put words in my mouth.

NT!

[William769]

84. Classic response thanks!

[orpupilofnature57]

6. Like you would like to believe? whfff whffff

[JNelson6563]

14. Kinda ironic

to see someone urging Dems not to paint with a broad brush on this topic. Greens are notorious for having the broadest brushes around as well as high standards (for others of course, much like the GOP).

If nothing else this Rethug funding of Greens is a handy tool for whacking soap-boxes out from under Greens who proclaim their shit don't stink, as it were.

Julie

[Bjorn Against]

18. Kinda ironic you make a broad brush stroke condemning broad brush strokes

"Greens are notorious for having the broadest brushes around"

Do you see the irony here?

I never said that there are not any Greens who do broadbrush Democrats, there are some. That is not the whole party however.

There are very good Democrats and there are very good Greens, neither party is perfect and neither party is evil.

We need to unite Greens and Democrats the best we can, and it will probably be impossible to get complete unity but if we want to win we all have to try to come together. Attacks on Greens are not helping to build a progressive movement.

On edit: I should add attacks on Democrats do not help to build a movement either.

[JNelson6563]

45. Ain't irony grand?

Frankly I am so sick and tired of Green Party supporters, both in the real world and on the internets, who whine incessantly about every flaw they can find/imagine about the Dems. Mind you I didn't say "all Greens", but those who whine. Sadly it is the whiney bunch that helps the Greens, as a group, achieve notoriety.

And hey, let's face it, a key component to launching and maintaining any kind of alternative to what exists (like the Green party is in relation to the Dem party) is criticsm of the existing. It is all a part of the legitimization process. We exist because they suck, now let me tell you all the reasons they suck......

It's an age old method, often employed in launching new religions through the ages.

Julie

[catbert836]

49. Have you ever considered

whether the Democrats DO suck?

[LoZoccolo]

50. Have you ever considered

whether the Green Party sucks, whether they take Republican money while criticizing the Democrats' funding, whether they use Republicans to get on ballots, and whether they are an accomplice to the election of the worst Republican president in history?

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

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

[catbert836]

81. I don't support the Greens...

but I don't like the Dems much either. Especially the DLC right-wing opportunists who control the party. They're just as bad as the neo-cons. I'm allowed my opinion on this website, since I'm a progressive.

I find it annoying that many DUers would rather blame their fellow progressives for Democrats losing elections rather than focusing on the real problems, such as voters not being able to tell the difference between the two main parties. Such as Republicans stealing elections. Such as Democratic candidates being generally unappealing.

[greenman3610]

4. the Greens put Bush in power

to punish the rest of us of 'lower consciousness".

[orpupilofnature57]

8. Aptly put !!

[LostInAnomie]

21. Exactly

Greens get no respect from me. They can hurl all the rocks they want from their ivory towers. Afterall, it's easy to stay ideologically pure when they have no hopes of ever having to put their ideas into effect.

[citizen snips]

42. I agree

thank you Greens.
:sarcasm:

[catbert836]

47. Do you remember the recount?

I believe that it was the Republicans' campaign of lies and corruption that put Bush in the White House. And what about the 50,000+ Florida democrats who voted for Bush?

[Zhade]

58. Or the 90,000+ disenfranchised black FL voters?

Always easier to blame the Greens than face the coup, eh?

I'm sure the thieves love seeing the Greens painted as the entire culprit for their minor role, though - lets them continue to get away with it.

[Zhade]

57. Well, no, Gore won FL anyway.

The SCOTUS prevented the ballots from being counted, thus disallowing Gore the office he won.

</historical accuracy>

Greens just made it close. (If the Dems hadn't tacked rightward since Reagan, maybe that wouldn't have been possible.)

[Selatius]

79. I find it funny you ignore the SCOTUS decision in Bush v. Gore

It seems their halt of the recount did more to prevent Gore from becoming president than anything else. If all ballots were counted, it would've shown Gore as the winner, but the SCOTUS made sure that never happened.

[CarlVK]

86. That's a ludicrous assertion.

I remember the rumor, though. And a nutty one it is.

[Bjorn Against]

7. I seem to remember a lot of posts from you which had a Pro-Lieberman slant

What do you think about your man was taking Republican money while you put up all those polls suggesting Lamont supporters were traitors to the Democratic Party?

[orpupilofnature57]

9. Not taking their money, something worse ,Shrubs point of view.

[LoZoccolo]

12. The Greens criticize Democrats for having some Republican donors...

...and then turn around and do it themselves. The issue here is hypocrisy.

[Bjorn Against]

16. I don't deny it is hypocrisy...

I believe it is wrong for Greens to take tainted money. Period. My point is it is also hypocritical of you who before the primary was putting up all kinds of polls with a pro-Lieberman slant to criticize others for taking tainted money when your candidate was doing the same thing.

[LoZoccolo]

17. Lieberman never claimed to not have some bipartisan support.

Meanwhile, Greens are busy with their big green lie about there being no difference between the parties.

[orpupilofnature57]

19. Ralph Nader was a Traitor!!!

[ulysses]

35. to whom?

[orpupilofnature57]

36. America!

[MadHound]

38. How was he a traitor?

Because he dared to exercise his Constitutionally guaranteed right to run for any damn office he pleases? If this is your notion of being a traitor, I think that you had better go brush up on your civics and Constitution.

Geez, sometimes I wonder about this place, certain topics bring out screeds and stupidity that would make FR proud:eyes:

[orpupilofnature57]

39. Sorry it's not Ralph's fault , your absolutely right, I had no right.

[Zhade]

60. b*s* called, he needs his rhetoric back when you're done with it.

NT!

[Selatius]

78. Many betrayed America in 2000. I find it funny you name only one: Nader

Instead of--oh, I dunno--Katherine Harris for ethnically cleansing voter rolls of something like 55,000 predominantly Black and predominantly Democratic voters. Or Jeb Bush for ordering an "overhaul" of the voting rolls. Or Karl Rove for inciting that white collar bum rush to stop the recount in one of the polling stations. Or the fucking SUPREME COURT of the United States of America for rendering their decision in Bush v. Gore.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

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

[Jax]

82. Great question n/t

[LoZoccolo]

120. I wouldn't think it's still a question if I answered it.

It's only been up since yesterday.

[orleans]

24. nope. assholes. n/t

[chieftain]

31. The only way the Greens become a national force is to replace

the Democrats as the gathering place for Liberals and Progressives. Although individual Greens may float back and forth between each party, the leaders, Nader included, know that the Democrats have to be marginalized for them to emerge. They are willing to do lot of distasteful things to propel their party past the Democrats. Although I sympathize with the frustration felt by many Greens at the tepid Liberalism of today's Party of Jefferson, Jackson FDR and HST, I could not look myself in the mirror knowing that I had contributed to the selection of doofus as President.
Face it Democrats, we may have ideological affinity with the Greens but they are out to displace us and they are willing to subject the country to the biggest assortment of thugs and fools ever assembled. Helping Bush was the first act. Aiding Santorum is just a preview of things to come.

[skids]

37. Of course, that would be easier...

...done if there were no signifigant party to the right of the Dems. Those greens who don't have their heads up their ass realize this, and know that Republicans need to get so marginalized that the Democratic party can afford a splinter before the greens get anywhere. Either that or we need reforms in elections to allow cross-party nominations, like NY has, such that a Green/Dem alliance would be able to defeat the right rather than being forced into contention with each other.

Unfortunately, that's obviously not all greens, which I find very to be a very sad state of affairs. Were it up to me the greens would stop trying to appeal to people who just want a 3rd party at any cost, ang give them the boot.

Luckily those greens that do not have their heads up their ass know that Dems that do not seek allegiance with those Greens that aren't nutballs don't represent the best Dems have to offer, and will themselves end up marginalized eventually. So they don't really sweat these hatefests too much.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

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

[omega minimo]

33. Will ____ stop blaming Greens for Dem electibility problems?

LoZoccolo Response to Reply #15
30. "See I see no reason for the Green Party at all. I can't see any reason for them to exist except to try to intimidate the Democratic Party, to the delight of Republicans."

You're unaware that the Greens are an international party.

"Such intimidation is a substitute for the real political work of being compelling and putting together a consensus."

Funny. Democrats have problems with "the real political work of being compelling and putting together a consensus" and SOME prefer to blame-- and on DU intitmidate-- the Greens rather than do that work.

:evilfrown:

"If the Green Party could get enough people to believe in what they believe in, the Democrats could not ignore it. But instead they like to play little prankster games that risk the Democrats losing whether they give into the Green hijacking or not."

So you're deaf to the fact that many potential Democratic voters already "believe in what they believe in" and Democrats "ignore it" to their own detriment?

"Being effective would take work. They hate being called Bush enablers however, and they have a hard time going Democratic when the Democratic Party is constantly attacking their character. So it's our fault for telling it like it is? When will these people take some responsibility?"

You can't be serious. This directly applies to the Dems that obsessively demonize Greens.

[Zhade]

63. "You're unaware that the Greens are an international party."

Strange thing not to know for someone who claims to be SO involved in politics that he berates others for failing to do as much as he allegedly does.

Kinda reveals all that "I do so much, what are you doing???" bluster for what it was, doesn't it?

[ulysses]

34. will the dems stop taking repuke ideas?

:shrug:

[Zhade]

61. OP's push poll shows answer is - NO.

NT!

[citizen snips]

41. No

because they are republicans.

[Mark E. Smith]

43. The so-called "Green Party" is a GOP spoof

The question that should be asked is: "Will the Republicans quit giving money to the Republican enablers
currently operating under the name "Green Party?"

Think of it as the Green's allowance for being such good little boys and girls.

[catbert836]

46. Bullshit.

But I guess I should know, this country is only allowed two parties, so I should suck it up and vote Democratic, even when they're doing their best to be more conservative than the Republicans. :eyes:

[Zhade]

64. Can you prove that?

Or it it just another baseless assertion?

[William769]

69. Thats the ticket, lets go after Democrats!

[Zhade]

74. What does that have to do with my request for proof?

Nothing.

So, did you have a point? After all, only an idiot would equate asking for proof of the assertion that the Green party is a GOP plant with "going after Democrats".

[William769]

85. You are the point.

[Selatius]

76. Nice dodge of Zhade's inquiry n/t

[Mark E. Smith]

91. Prove what?

That the Greens take GOP cash, or that they assisted in the election
of George W. Bush in 2000 by smearing Gore as being a corporate
conservative?

Try to be specific and I'll be better able to help you.

[Zhade]

97. That they're an intentional part of the GOP machinery.

A "GOP spoof", as you described it.

[Mark E. Smith]

98. An intentional part of the GOP machinery ... hmmm.

Good question. I'm not sure they're quite that perceptive. Or thatthose few that
are would be ethical enough to care.

Here's an article for you to ponder.

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2006/08/1732035.php

[Zhade]

99. Indymedia isn't credible.

So I don't bother with it. Got something more credible, less of the "anyone can post whatever they make up" variety?

(I'm singularly declaring that Indymedia is not something I trust. I am open to other sources, for the record.)

[Mark E. Smith]

100. Please first explain why Indymedia isn't credible

You seem to have this blithe habit of making broad and unsubstantiated charges.

Here's a piece that backs up what Indymedia had to say. Can you supply something that refutes it?

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2006/08/10/deanzconvicted

[Zhade]

102. Because anyone can post anything to it?

I mean, I mentioned that IN the post you replied to!

Thank you for the second, credible link. That's all I was asking about (so I'll ignore your unwarranted comment).

[catbert836]

44. More importantly,

will self-proclaimed Democrats stop voting Republican? And will the Democrats stop trying to be better conservatives than the GOP? I find it hard to believe that people still blame the Green Party for the Democrats' electoral woes.

[saltpoint]

51. I'm not against the Green Party but when it takes Republican cash to

defeat Casey it is advancing Santorum, not its own tenets.

In my opinion that breaks faith with the people who have put their heart into building the Green Party in the U.S. and the only beneficiary is Rick Santorum and the far-right.

I would personally have wished that the Greens in PA return the cash to the Republicans on principle.

[Zhade]

54. Classic "push poll".

Which Green party groups do this?

How widespread is it?

Where's the proof?

(Not that you'll read this, since you probably put me on ignore when losing an argument. Again.)

[IChing]

62. That's why it got so many nominations

And being pushed so much as a major issue that is destroying this nation.
The greens are the major force that control the destiny of the Democratic Party and the US. Give me a break.



Do the DLC candidates money and philosophies whore around just as just as bad as Republican light?

[Name removed]

65. Deleted sub-thread

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

[LoZoccolo]

101. Or why 98% of people don't think Greens will stop whoring. n/t

[RangerSmith]

67. Akin to Chavez and Syria... the enemy of my enemy.... n/t

[Buzz Clik]

70. Yet another thread trolling for reactions about the Greens. How special.

Not.

[Selatius]

75. This thread is flamebait

There are lots of problems in Pennsylvania with Casey and Santorum, but you're unfairly generalizing everybody who may be a registered Green Party member. Just because Romanelli decided to take money doesn't mean every Green member would. It's like asking, "Will the Dems ever stop taking corporate cash?" You know the answer to that question would the same as the answer to this poll of yours...

...so your poll is nothing more than an invitation to divisiveness and flame wars.

[William769]

92. The bottome line is a vote for a Green is NOT a vote for a democrat.

What is so hard to understand about that?

[orpupilofnature57]

96. And thats what i meant when i said ,Nader let America down.

[CarlVK]

109. With Democrats like Lieberman and HRC, is that such a bad thing?

Perhaps a better course of action would be to turn the Democratic Party into more of an opposition to the GOP than an appeaser or mimicker of them. THEN, more people would vote for them instead of the Greens.

[Selatius]

112. OK, let's not support Bernie Sanders in Nov. then

Following that black-and-white, you're-either-with-us-or-against-us assertion of yours, we shouldn't back Sanders on the basis of him not being a Democrat. The world is rarely that simple. You can deal in absolutes, but I won't.

[LoZoccolo]

93. A national Green Party policy of giving back money...

...from Republican donors would solve the problem everywhere.

[Selatius]

113. It's a half-solution at best

But then again, I guess you conveniently forgot to also state the Democratic Party should also decide to give back corporate donations as well.

[LoZoccolo]

119. Where did I ever advocate that?

I don't think that the Democratic Party should give back donations because the Democratic Party doesn't sell itself as a party that never does that. Green and Naderite hypocrites ran around all before the 2004 election with this issue of who the Democrats got donations from versus the Green party. I didn't give a fuck, so I voted Democratic. Third-party voters had this ostensible reason to not care whether the Republicans got elected that has been proven to be bunk now.

The Green Party is completely meaningless and useless as anything but a show of vanity for its supporters, having not been able to get anyone elected, having gotten Republicans elected, and having not made any distinction between themselves and any other party in terms of donations. What was the purpose of the Green Party again? It's like the reason for the war in Iraq; it keeps changing.

[depakid]

104. Of course it is

The OP is a longtime DLC apologist who has an obsession with the Greens.

[CarlVK]

110. I agree. And, it's against the rules of DU that I read when joining.

There was a clear reference to a prohibition of "divisive" posts.

[AtomicKitten]

77. whores are whores

accepting $$$$ to do the Republics' dirty work - tsk, tsk, tsk
there is no honor in that

[OzarkDem]

88. and political narcissists

they can't tolerate anyone's POV on an issue besides their own.

[AtomicKitten]

90. commenting on money changing hands in campaigns

really doesn't equate to one's POV other than on that particular issue.

The fact that the Green Party (and I wrote for a Green newspaper for three years so I know of what I speak) is more contentious toward Democrats with whom they have much more in common than with Republics is suspect in my book. And taking money from the latter merely punctuates that and by definition makes them political whores.

[AtomicKitten]

103. my 20-year-old son just pointed out to me

that there is a real disconnect here at DU in the "progressive" POV regarding taking campaign money.

They harshly condemn Democrats for taking money from corporations, calling them political whores, corporatists, DLC _____ (fill in the blank), and sell-outs, but apparently Greens taking money directly from Republicans is free speech and those that disagree with that notion "can't tolerate anyone's POV on an issue besides their own."

I'm calling BULLSHIT on that.

And I'm the proud mother of a 20-year-old new voter who gets it!

[Zhade]

106. Well, I'm a progressive and I get it, too.

Surely you're not suggesting that EVERY progressive gives a pass to Greens taking GOP/corporate (essentially the same thing!) cash? That would be dishonest.

And, of course, you're allowing for the distinction between corporate contributions from union-destroying corporations like Wal-Mart and companies like Costco that treat their workers well, pay them fairly, etc?

[AtomicKitten]

111. of course not

and thank you for pointing that out.

Some DU'ers, however, don't get the dichotomy my son pointed out, and I think it's important for people to gain a little insight into this particular issue. Not doing so has a tendency to make one's opinion harsh and black & white, and usually those people are the ones that take politics personally and lash out.

No candidate is perfect and neither is any particular political party (to say the least), but I think it's important to apply standards across the board and stop making excuses for entities we already favor and condemning those we already don't like. That's the Republican way of doing things, and I would like to think we on the other side of the aisle are smarter and fairer than that.

And in acknowledgment of your civil discourse :), here is a picture of a monkey washing a cat:

[Zhade]

114. We're on the same page.

Nice when that happens, eh?

(And that pic is hilarious!)

[AtomicKitten]

116. yes it is nice

Perhaps I can interest you in a picture of my Renfield and Seven snoozing together.

[Zhade]

117. I'm a sucker for dogs in bandannas.

(See, even flamebait threads can have nice endings! :) )

[AtomicKitten]

94. UPDATE: Will Greens stop taking developers' money?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2819636

[paulk]

105. oh, my.....

:wow:


:rofl:

[CarlVK]

107. Why is there such animosity toward the Green Party here?

They are clearly in the Left/Progressive camp and have been founded on the idea of environmental safety and sensible consumption. Far too many Democrats (I suspect they may be of the 2004DLC-GOP lite types) have this idea that the Green Party exists to put fascists in power. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Here in Mesquite Nevada we have Green activists who do things like go door to door before elections and get out the vote for Greens, Democrats, Progressives or Independents. This silly animosity toward them seems embarrasingly partisan only, and without any real logic.

Don't forget, your circle of allies may be much wider than you suspect, so try not to burn more bridges than you will actually need during the charge.

[The Magistrate]

121. Locking

This has become a flame-war.