My issue with Mr. Grayson is and always will be his "follow the money" support of SeaWorld. Sorry.

I don't get their newsletter.

But you're getting close. Since you didn't ask nicely, I've used it to respond to someone else who thinks that Grayson is a progressive politician. What irritates me is that so many otherwise intelligent people here (myself included for a long time) got sucked into it.

Because Alan isn't very progressive after all.

I've watched him talk down to them and sneer at their opinion if it's different than his. He uses intimidation to appear like he's the one who knows better than anyone else.

re: "I've watched him talk down to them and sneer at their opinion if it's different than his."

He behaves the same way toward men, no?

But in my experience, I've seen him try to intimidate women in a different way, than he would with a man. And I am not alone in that opinion of him. But I thought that before I read and heard anyone else saying the same.

image people would like to project of Mr. In-it-for-himself-Grayson as being a liberal, those people ignore that. The poster could have asked nicely, instead of using the snide comment, and I would have gladly posted it. He/she did not, so I didn't. Respect is earned. Thank you.

I think someone wants to keep me from bringing the Sea World thing up I guess.

who asks how. Some of us can't spend so much time here that we have seen everything everyone posted however many times. But, I can't believe someone alerted on your post! Glad to see the jury was almost unanimously right this time.

I lost a lot of sleep wondering about this.

I'm guessing this is something more than naming a penguin "Greyson".

How about multiple choice? Can you give us at least a hint?

Does is start with an r...maybe rape?

How about f....financial indiscretions?

C? Child abuse?

D? Dino...actually favors retaining low minimum wage?

I think we should consider both personal and public life, especially when a candidate is running for the first time.

I don't think a person with bad personal morals/ethics in his or personal life is suddenly going to have great ones only in public life, where, usually, more power and bigger bucks are involved than in personal life.

On the other hand, even a moral/ethical person in private life can get corrupted after he or she gets into office and the money and power people come a-courting. Still, good morals and ethics in private life would be a point in his or favor, IMO.

down. It seems that all of the outspoken Democrats get "caught" doing something wrong (or their wives). That or killed. Sadly the DINO's among us look the other way.

we rarely hear any details about those who are careful never to speak out against Wall St?

The Third Way doesn't look the other way, they participate in any smear campaign against a Progressive Democrat.

And they never need proof. They count on getting the smears out fast, hoping that even if they are proven to be false, some of the mud will stick.

outspoken? Dennis Kucinich? Gov Seigelman? Eliot Spitzer Weiner Wellstone now Grayson.

I hope Sen Warren doesnt have any skeletons in her closet, because I bet the NSA is looking.

then we need some strategy. Instead of abandoning the targets of these smear campaigns, we should do what Republicans do, rally around them and reelect them IF their policies are the ones we support and they have a record of fighting for.

I don't want to know about anyone's personal divorces, don't even want to know about my friends' and neighbors' personal lives. Divorces especially where there are children, are no way to judge people, they are nasty even when the people themselves are not normally nasty.

I support Grayson based on the work he has done for the PEOPLE.

With his stance on Sea World, he proved he's just another politician in it for himself and the $. Of course there will be crickets to this because there always is... because it doesn't fit the profile that so many want to paint of him as a true progressive.

That said, I have no idea what happened with his personal life and it should be left alone.


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-08-19/business/os-seaworld-osha-grayson-20100819_1_dawn-brancheau-killer-whale-performances-marine-parks-and-aquariums

it is that you are alleging?

If that is what you are condemning him on, my assumption is that you just don't like him for some other reason. Too feisty or whatever.

That's not a liberal. That "say the right thing for the money." Of course, if he were Republican... but he sports a D so of course pandering to corporations over people is okay. We're better than that. We can find better than a man who's in it for himself. The D doesn't, and never will, make it okay.

And Boxer and Feinstein and Nelson FL and Bob Casey PA and Susan Davis and others but I got tired looking up the names and political parties.

1,000, $2,500 or $5,000 contribution to each and Alan only got the middle amount.

So Alan will get millions in contributions and what does this paltry amount mean to you.

his head say to you?

Sorry, but he had no reason to do this other than personal. I'm betting he got a heck of a lot more than those donations. Sorry, I don't trust the guy and he's definitely not the progressive that some would like to see him proclaimed. Warts. They all have them. We need to stop sticking them up on pedestals.

with fond memories of Sea World. There are two sides to the Sea World story and although I have mixed feelings about it, one cannot deny that without its existence and influence most of us would be without knowledge of how beautiful and intelligent these creatures are. The same applies to zoos.

The exact same forums we now question (or abhor, in some cases) were the ones that ignited are love of animals. Sea World has been the inspiration for many of the sea life protection regulations that have been installed.

Perhaps, working with these agencies to further protections instead of completely demonizing them would be a better solution.

Last edited Tue Mar 25, 2014, 03:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Because this is not a pattern and the vast majority of his positions are for the people, in terms of logic it tends to argue that this is really about him really believing what he says, not for the money.

I do recognize that Parks like this are a necessary evil. If it was not for water parks the general public would be much more ignorant and not as supportive of conservation efforts for these mammals in general.

We don't know what conversation occurred. Likely he was just getting information, which he has a right to do as a representative. Again, I think you can look at the record as a whole to help determine what is likely.

Seems to me Grayson could be justified in honestly believing that they are an asset to the people he represents.

I firmly believe that regulating corporations is absolutely necessary and that they should be punished for their transgressions, but you have certainly not made the case that Grayson sold out to an Evil Corporation for $2500.

cause you cannot really run a country with just two "Liberals" that you get to decide are "Liberal" enough for everyone else to support.

He is not. He is just like the rest.

You will not see me banging the drum for any of our current politicians too often because they all have warts. It behooves us to realize that.

a legitimate question WHO does meet your "expectations" Are there enough to run the country? If not...THAT could really be a problem huh?

who meets my "expectations" is myself. However, I am raising a child and cannot run. But I will, most definitely not turn our politicians into political superheroes as so many tend to do. I vote D even when I don't find them to be progressive. Mr. Grayson is far from a firebrand. I am campaigning for Wendy Davis here in Texas because she is what we have. I abhor her stance on gun control, but... I'm not running. I will, however, hold her feet to the fire if she is elected. It's what we're supposed to do instead of crowning them on high over all. I have always and will always be that way. Bringing reality to the discussion as it were.

I hope that answers your question.

interesting....

He is off. Sorry. I know a lot of you don't like it because you really like him for some reason. I will never get it. His ACA comments were grandstanding that hurt over helping.

does not compute...

and links. It comes down to this: don't turn people into more than they are. I don't defend the indefensible. I made the mistake of attempting to defend Edwards even though his son of a mill worker post was pure pablum BS. How wrong I was. Mr. Grayson is cut from that cloth in my opinion, and he proves it all the time.

but the conclusions you are drawing from them that I find fascinating...

It sounds to me like you are asserting that any politician who ever has any interaction with a corporation in any context other than expressing the opinion that "corporations, each and every one, are evil bad" is now a panderer and not progressive. You didnt use those words, but It seems to be the implication. Maybe you could express it in your own words?

I'm confused about what exactly he did wrong there, as well. Did he take a bribe? Was he bought with corporate donations? Is there any indication that he actually used undue pressure to do anything? Would that be in character with the pattern of behavior he has exhibited in other instances?

Although I don't agree with his intervention in the Sea World probe, I don't think I'll be throwing him under the bus just yet. In his mind, he was protecting hundreds of Florida jobs. Sure it was wrong-headed. Who is the politician who agrees with me 100% of the time?

Here is the list:

His ACA comments on the floor hurt, not helped, the cause. He with his theatrics, an absolute zero. I will support the real people, doing the real things. It was not necessary for him to even be involved. That's a HUGE red flag.

You go on with supporting a DINO though. Sorry, but that was beyond the pale, and no, it can't be swept under the rug.

and, gasp, has received $3,500 from SeaWorld, so he's a DINO? That's a lot of fail.

The SeaWorld issue is fair game, I'm glad you bring it to people's attention.

Perspective is important. I've watched Grayson go hard against very powerful interests, consistently. He's one of the very best we have, as far as I can tell.

Kucinich is drawing a psycheck from Roger Ailes. Just sayin'.

I realize it was not a check from Roger Ailes, but it not starving, either.

If I were more at ease speaking publicly, I would take gladly take a check to present leftist views on Fox. If Kucinich were spewing rw bullshit on Fox, that would be a valid criticism.

and Massa, but I am not sure there was a choice as to Massa and Weiner, both of whom let things spill over (as it were) to Congress, Massa with his employees and Weiner instagramming from the Congressional gym.

Still, when Pelosi promised to "drain the swamp" as she took the Speaker's gavel in 2007, I foolishly assumed that she meant Republicans. The only Republican I can recall being targeted was Ensign and that was so public, there was hardly a choice.

No doubt, there were reasons to go after some of the Democrats, but I have a feeling equally or more compelling reasons exist for almost everyone who was in the House then.

Howard Dean
Van Jones
Cynthia McKinney

You can be sure the NSA and the DLC is scouring the closets of Warren as well as Wendy Davis.

And then you'll find the same lost children in here lambasting them for their horrible domestic indiscretions.

"We live in a Democracy, we live in a Democracy, we live....."

"I am free as long as I get to vote, I am free as long as I get to......"

Please pass the Cool-Aid. I prefer cherry.

He was a Republican and had worked at Goldman Sachs as an investment banker and partner. Remember the allegations Jeri Ryan made against him that were made very public?

because at the time his wife was fairly high profile as an actress.

Because it's what they are. They can't help themselves. If you think about it for a minute, what is it that they have in common with Democrats? It's the knee-jerk phenomenon. We use facts when we jerk, they sling mud when they jerk. Seriously, it's the perfect litmus test in recognizing who you're dealing with.

with regard to Sea World. I haven't thought of him as a liberal since then, soooo....

is the way he posts on DU. He posts something, asks for money, and then disappears. I'd love to engage him in discussion as I am sure other DUer's would, also. Elizabeth Edwards discussed things here over the years on occasion.

The alerts we received from people that night accusing someone of using her name to post were hilarious.

I was a member of his fb page, donated money, and then actually delved into what he stands for and there are so many other bright and shining stars who are more worthy of my money and time. I really believe he's in it for himself. And himself, alone.

in only black and white; no gray areas or compromise. If someone doesn't care for Grayson, then they are automatically no good and not a true dem. That's way too rigid.
I don't care for Grayson for my own personal reasons. Does that make me a DINO? But I'd vote for Warren and Sanders in a heartbeat over HRC.

I support our pres, but not in everything, but still get accused by some like you, in being an apologist.

When and if I ever read you offering any constructive alternative solutions and THE MEANS to accomplish them, then and only then will you have any credibility with me.

I said the DINO's hate Grayson and other outspoken Democrats on the left. And for the record, I have never called you an "apologist".

Sometimes there is no easy answer but hell if I am going to accept policies that further harm the 99%.

Some would say that we need to be pragmatic and accept the 50 lashes because it's better than 100. I say crap with that and intend to scream bloody murder in either case.

Straw man victimhood.

wouldnt throw him a line if he was drowning. But they dont hate him.

I may not care enough to vote for him if I could. But I would throw him a line if he were drowning.

Actually, I can't hardly think of anyone I wouldn't do that for. No matter who they are.

I don't have to hate someone, if I disagree with them. I may not like them much, but it takes a lot for most good people to hate as you're describing.

Especially people in the BOG. You won't find much hate there.
You're probably banned from there though, aren't you?

Especially people in the BOG. You must not know the BOG well if you think there is no hate there or coming from its members. I mean, there may not be any hate in the BOG as it is just one big lovefest for Obama, but there is hate there, they just ban those who say things they hate, doesn't mean there isn't hate from the BOGgers though. There was a thread posted by Grayson and BOGgers were ridiculing him immediately in it. Very rude. Most of the posts on DU that ridicule people without discussing policy at all are from BOGgers.

I don't know why you are after Rhett on this thread, but it is unwarranted, as is your defense of the BOG.

But Rhett is a big boy. I think he can take care of himself. Only two posts are far from being unwarranted. I had a problem with his broad-brush, rigid announcements. He mentioned the BOG, so I wanted to say something about it.

You have a problem with my liking the BOG, so you posted to me. Not much difference there, that I can see.

And my defense of the BOG is quite warranted as I have a number of friends there and I am a member. So please do not deign to tell me that I not familiar with it. The rudeness and immaturity displayed in GD is outrageous at times. The BOG is a place of peace and respect for our POTUS for me and for it's members.

That's why there's vanilla, chocolate and strawberry, ya know?

Maybe he was saying something about Obama that the Boggers didn't like? Do you expect Boggers to do other than disagree in that case, and why does that have to mean they "hate" him?

What is it with the victim thing? Grayson even lost his seat. Is that because the voters hate him?