Southerners and women and gays and Catholics all suck

:eyes:

I started a thread yesterday praising DU as being a safe and wise port in the storm. When something bad happens (9/11, the war, the blackout), there is no better place than this.

Conversely, we also seem amazingly adept at eating ourselves. I don't know how we do it, but we do it. We manage to offend women, Catholics, homosexuals, southerners, northerners, etc. Why does this happen? Is it all trolls?

No. It is what it is. People, for all their liberal leanings, can be as stupid and bigoted and narrow-minded as any freeper. People can be the product of their environment. If that environment touts these things, it is going to come through.

Anyone who loves women, southerners, northerners, homosexuals, Catholics, etc., drop your name in below. Maybe we need to remind people that ignorance is not a badge of honor, not worthy of us, and something to be repudiated.

eom

Good God man, Freepers are vermin.

The South went solidly for Bush. Al Gore, a distinguished native son of the South, didn't carry his own state of Tennessee. Some say this is a strike against Gore. I say it's a strike against Tennessee. I mean, really! How can anybody honestly have thought that George Bush was more qualified than Al Gore.

As Forrest Gump says: Ignorant is as ignorant does.

This attitude needs to stop!!!!

How states vote makes a difference in how people from other states see them. States that consistently vote Republican shouldn't really expect that their support of Republican issues will be overlooked. And Republicans stand for some really nasty things: militarism, government secrecy, anti-environmentalism, opposition to the separation of Church and State, support for the death penalty, and union busting.

These ugly things, when freely chosen by majorities of the states' voters, reflect poorly on these states as a whole. It is not unfair to judge people by their own actions, their own choices. Perhaps it can be argued that a number of technical factors obscure voters' choices, such as gerrymandering or voter fraud, etc. But it's substantially more likely that states that vote Republican do so because they support Republican values: militarism, secrecy, anti-environmentalism, etc.

Voting matters. The choices people make regarding our future as a nation affect all of us. Look at the mess Bush has gotten us into! He inherited peace and prosperity, and now there's war and hardship. Because some states chose that future for us, we can't celebrate them equally as those which did not.

in very high regard, either. The so-called Bible Belt has brought us more prejudice, intolerance and backwards thinking than you find almost anywhere else. Slavery came from there - the original dump-on-the-worker idea where the haves got the have-nots to work for free. And take, Tennessee (please!) - which turned its back on its own favorite son, Al Gore. I'm STILL trying to understand that one.

I'm sorry for sounding fairly intolerant, myself, but it's a hot night here and I'm just so sick and tired of waking up every day with a groan in my gut, feeling like I'm being held hostage in Nightmare Land. Every day I sacrifice time on/with my work and my family because I feel compelled to keep calling my congressman (and other people's) to make my voice heard, because there's just too much that's disgusting that's going on. And everybody seems to still love that asshole in the White House and find little if anything wrong in what he's doing.

And the rethugs are getting away with it in Florida. They're getting away with it in South Dakota. They're getting away with it in Texas. They're getting away with it here in California, too. And there's NOTHING in the media as far as taking on these schmucks! If Clinton were pulling this crap, they'd have him drawn, quartered, and his head on a stick outside the palace gate by now. But because it's Bush...

YES, I blame the South! They still don't get it.

Sorry. My apologies. As I said, I'm just incredibly downhearted at the moment. The bad guys keep winning. And keep winning. And keep winning. And keep winning. And the pendulum is NOT swinging. It's not even moving. It swung rightward and got GLUED there.

Take your anti-south bigotry and shove it where the sun don't shine!!!

I didn't detect any anti-south bigotry, and I LIVED in the south for 24 years.

There are also indications that Al Gore did in fact win Tennessee, were all the votes properly counted.

By the way, if you didn't notice, Tennessee now has a DEMOCRATIC governor, unlike Minnesota, New York, and some other fine states you seem to think more of than those here in Dixie.

Sure, we've got some attitude problems, but a lot of it lies with education and religion. However, I've even heard some of the people down here referring to Dubya as the "anti-christ"...so do not abandon all hope yet.

And please stop the southern bashing. It really grates on me.

When the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court makes a cause celebre of his refusal to remove the Ten Commandments from a courthouse, it makes Alabama look bad. But it doesn't bother people who don't live in Alabama. What does bother us about Alabama politics is the way those voters act in national elections. They routinely, consistently and reliably vote for militarism, anti-environmentalism, government secrecy, union busting and the death penalty.

How does a beady-eyed religious zealot like Chief Justice Moore get to be the head of the Supreme Court of any state? What is wrong with those people?

and sometimes taking a lot of shit for it.

My mother is the only Democrat in her office. She takes shit every day from the people around her. Come election time, they ask her how it feels to know her vote is worthless and why does she even bother voting.

So, thanks. Thanks a hell of a lot for supporting the Southerners who bother to show up here for some like-minded dicussion and some incentive to keep fighting the good fight.

Jeez - if I thought the Republicans were going to implode, I overlooked my own party. I'm thinking of going green or independent because if this is the state of the Democratic party, I have no use for it.

When Justice Roy Moore lost his appeal and decided to defy a Federal court order to remove the Ten Commandments from his courthouse, I looked at an Alabama political discussion group. Most of the posts were supportive of Justice Moore, but here's an example of one that was not:

Ol' Roy ... just another good ole southern boy, huh? Deeply rooted in his religion, right? Great, good for Mr. Moore. But this is the chief justice of our supreme court and if he won't obey a direct order of a higher court, even after losing an appeal, then he should be impeached. Simple as that. Leadership is by example, not by cheap grandstanding.

This was posted by a Southerner who is aware of what it looks like when a high ranking Southern judge acts like a fool. It brings ridicule upon the Southern judiciary, and in a larger sense it brings ridicule down on the South as a whole. There's really no escaping it.

When Southerners give enthusiastic, vocal support to Justice Roy Moore, it really doesn't matter that there are a few dissenting voices. The lives of such dissenters must be quite difficult, and I'm not unsympathetic. But political reality is political reality. People are judged by their actions.

Let's try this--maybe it will help you get the point, since nothing else has worked:

I DID NOT VOTE FOR THE SON OF A BITCH!

Is the use of qualifiers like "some," "many" or even "most" really so far beyond your abilities? Do you not understand that your trollish persistence in making simpleminded, broad-bush generalizations in the face of contrary evidence is what pisses people off so much?

I don't even live in Alabama.

But I think I'll take QC's advise now.

Oh and by the way - you might want to check out the thread that has the list of the 10 most segregated cities in the country. None are in the South. It's easy to tell people what they SHOULD be doing when you aren't living their reality.

the logical fallacy of going from the particular to the universal.

Just cuz one southerner is wack doesn't mean the whole region is.

In 1960, John F. Kennedy carried the South. He didn't carry Mississippi, Virginia or Tennessee, but as a generalization it's still valid. http://www.multied.com/elections/1960state.html

Since then, the only way the Democrats can win the South is to nominate a Southerner. It seems that any old fool of a Republican can stay popular in the South. Bush's job performance has been abysmal, but he still gets high approval ratings. The 2004 election won't be close in the South. Bush will win handily.

who shoved a plunger up Abner Louima's ass

It wasn't a southern sheriff who put forty two shots in Abdu Diallo

It wasn't a southern lynch mob that beat Rodney King within an inch of his life.

It wasn't a southern police chief that said blacks were immune to the choke hold because they were different physiologically.


I lived in the South almsot all my life and usually the biggest racists were folks who moved from up north.

TN gave 48% of its votes to Gore; MN gave 49%. Therefore TN is solidly R and MN is entirely spotless. I stood up for you when you were being unfairly attacked, and now see you relentlessly and unfairly attacking an entire region. Read my post and link on scapegoating, look at the percentage of Bush votes in states carried by Gore, and PLEASE LAY OFF THIS "SOLID" BULLSHIT.

It's fair to say that the South is solidly behind George Bush. Despite all his demonstrated incompetence, he'll easily win re-election in the South. This is a huge, ongoing problem for Democrats.

The differences between parties aren't arbitrary, like preferences for one flavor of ice cream over another. Southerners actually choose such things as militarism, government secrecy, anti-environmentalism, union busting and the death penalty. True, not all Southerners choose these ugly things, but in national elections - the ones that affect all of us - Republicans enjoy comfortable majorities throughout the South.

Southerners love George Bush. It's our biggest problem as Democrats. Their affection for Bush has nothing to do with his performance in office, which has been abysmal. In their estimation he can do no wrong. What is wrong with those people?

OK, by ignoring the 40%+ of Southerners who voted against *, and the 40%+ of non-Southerners who voted for *, by relentlessly assigning collective blame to entire states full of people and absolving other states full of people based on *a few percentage points* you have earned my enmity. And until today I was inclined to feel friendly towards you.

By relentlessly alienating Southern liberal Dems, whose purposes are you serving? Karl Rove is delighted when he sees Democrats devoting all their energy to attacking other Democrats. He's playing you like a violin. You've become an instrument of Satan without knowing it. So go to hell.

The point is that Democrats have no chance of fielding a candidate that will appeal to Southern voters. Tennessee voters rejected even Al Gore. Republicans win so comfortably in the South that they have no incentive to modify their positions on militarism, environmentalism, secrecy in government, civil liberties, taxation, the death penalty or the rights of working people.

The obstinacy of Southern voters frustrates politics. It's unhealthy that one party is so dominant that there's no political give and take. This is not natural. Once again I return to the same question: What is wrong with these people?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=67898&mesg_id=67898

I wouldn't be so gung ho to write off an entire region of people, else I might have to ask, WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?

Forty-two percent of Southerners now question the administration's decision to commit troops, according to a poll by the Scripps Howard News Service and Ohio University. The poll found a broad drop in Southerners' commitment to U.S. involvement in Iraq since early May, when President Bush declared an end to major military operations there.

At the time, less than one-third of Southerners were uncertain about the war. But as the postwar occupation drags on and the promised weapons of mass destruction fail to appear, doubts are increasing.

This is a man-bites-dog story. It's so unusual that Southerners express doubts about Bush's performance that it's newsworthy. The shift may actually be only 10%, from 32% to 42%. And the definition of "question" is imprecise. We don't know how many of the respondents believe Bush has been too liberal.

The numbers indicate that Southerners still support the war, but not as uncritically as they did when it was thought to be a cake walk. Bush is still very popular in the South, and will easily defeat any Democratic nominee in 2004.

There's no reason that Republicans should dominate Southern politics to such an extent that they don't give an inch on a number of national issues. For example, aren't Southerners concerned with preservation of the environment? The rights of working people? Secrecy in government? Granted that the South is not a monolith, but why do these important issues never swing Southern elections?

sheesh!

So you probably ought to attack the Mountain West too. Attack Wyoming, the state where Matthew Shepherd was brutally murdered. Attack Alaska. Pretty solidly republican there. Attack South Dakota and many of the other plains states. Its not like the Republicans in the South deserve anymore lambasting than they do in any other part of the country. I have seen "southerner" equated with "mullet-wearing." Happens in every state. I have seen it equated with conservative. Conservatives live in every state. I have seen it equated with racism. Name a state where there is not racism. Bush is not the South's fault. "Liberal" states are not without conservatives at all levels of representation. Why is everyone so obsessed with the South?

I just moved to Tallahasee, Florida. What was I warned about by a trusted professor? "Oh, look out that is the 'deep south.'" Sorry about the stereotypes, but they don't always hold. Southerners are supposed to be polite. I have encountered more rude people here than in Missouri. They are supposed to be conservative. Wow...I guess that explains all the democrats they elect here. Its supposed to be super-racist in the south. Well, I can tell ya, day to day life as I have seen it suggests otherwise. It certainly is no more racist here in Springfield. I haven't seen any hangings yet that were chalked up to "accidental death."

ALL YOUR PROBLEMS AND THE PROBLEMS THAT WE FACE ARE NOT ALL THE SOUTH'S FAULT!!!! By repeating that mantra over and over again, you are alienating yourself.

It's just easier to blame one region than to admit that the entire country seems to be becoming more conservative.

I turned out liberal as Hell.

Why is everyone so obsessed with the South?

It's not really an obsession so much as an intractable problem. Nothing seems to work with those people. They are locked into the Republican party and there's no apparent way to present issues to lure them away from their willy-nilly commitment to the GOP. I find it difficult to believe that Southern values map one-to-one to Republican values, but that's how Southerners vote in national elections.

It doesn't help us elect Democrats if we ignore the obstinate behavior of Southern voters. No matter how abysmally Bush performs in office, he has a lock on re-election in Southern states. Why is that? Don't Southerners care about national issues? Why isn't there more of a political give-and-take among them?

We need to get a handle on this. It's a real problem, not an invention of a bigoted mind. We can't just ignore the fact that no matter how you try to appeal to Southerners, they just won't vote Democratic.

with the same brush.

"Nothing seems to work with those people. They are locked into the Republican party and there's no apparent way to present issues to lure them away from their willy-nilly commitment to the GOP."

Stubborness is a pan-human characteristic. Some people will NEVER be changed. I have known my share of democrats who were republicans in spirit, and would NEVER vote republican because Dad/Grandad demonized it.

"It doesn't help us elect Democrats if we ignore the obstinate behavior of Southern voters."

Wouldn't it be more helpful to work on people who were less obstinant, regardless of reason? And if we are going to work on obstinate people, why not people in Alaska? Utah? Missouri? Maine? Wyoming?

"No matter how abysmally Bush performs in office, he has a lock on re-election in Southern states."

I think you will find that there are a lot of states that Bush has locked in.

"Don't Southerners care about national issues?"

They do. People starve there too. You will find that issues are just as important to them. Many of them just have a different stance than you.

"It's a real problem, not an invention of a bigoted mind. We can't just ignore the fact that no matter how you try to appeal to Southerners, they just won't vote Democratic."

Have you not seen people from the South on here? Have you not been to Dave Leip's Atlas, and seen all the red counties (in presidential elections) in the South? I LIVE IN ONE!!!!

I'm Catholic (nominally), a native Chicagoan (northerner) who also considers Kentucky (the South) his adopted home, and is Gay, I guess its sort of tough to take all these little prejudices seriously......

but I think a lot of other people do.

so youre anti woman!!


jk :)

but the title's acting like salt right now. :shrug:

Ever had a cold sore in your mouth? Salt cleans.

...but spewing vitriol does nothing but put people off to your point of view. In several threads recently I have been accused of "the truth according to Phenyx." How is this post any different or better?

spewing vitriol does nothing but put people off to your point of view

The difference is that Will's post is the antithesis of what you describe in those other threads.

...but thanks for playing. He is still advocating the "think exactly like we do" mentality that is the driving those other threads.

The vitriol in those other threads comes from people who think like you do and feel they need to discount others by suggesting there is something wrong with the way they feel and percieve things. You flatter yourself.

...people who feel threatened by a differing point of view and feel the need to personally attack anyone who disagrees with them.

Of course you are going to beleive what you wish. You have no desire to actually debate the topic, only to continue to harange and misrepresent those who disagree with you, or your select coterie. It is impossible for there to be any otehr way of viewing the world, so the rest of us must be wrong. This is fine, if you wish to continue to believe this. It is terminally short sighted and flawed. But it is your right.

It is amazing that the very things you are accusing me of, are the things you do with others on various threads.

"It is amazing that the very things you are accusing me of, are the things you do with others on various threads."

Nice try, But that doesn't work with me.

Of course you are going to beleive what you wish. You have no desire to actually debate the topic, only to continue to harange and misrepresent those who disagree with you..."

Go look up projection.

Perhaps you could consider that most people are AT LEAST as smart as you are. You are not entitled to the last word on what people "should" think or "should" feel. It's never enough for you to simply disagree. You force feed it and demand the last word.

It is amusing that you don't try and refute my claims. You simply sidestep them and avoid contact.

I am amazed at what DU is becoming. This is NOT good.

The sad thing is, I am or have been all those things on your list with the exception of one (gay).

Does that mean I've been insulted times 4?

And the people who have been insulted like you go and insult right back, and we go round and round like a stupid dog with its own tail in its teeth.

don't waste my time. In case you hadn't noticed, I only respond to and become involved in the voting machine threads anymore.

Anything else is simply a waste of effort around here.

Threads like this just don't help! :(
If someone has a problem with something posted by another hit alert.
That's why they call it alert! :)
Ignore 'em all and let the Mod's sort 'em out! ;-)

ANTI South ? .. because of a FEW miscreants who violate logic and cast aspersions by area ? .....

Nah: .... THAT isnt DU: .... those are rude individuals who either werent thinking very well that moment, ... or never think very well .... ever .....

DONT paint all of DU with such a wide brush: .... even as an old Jersey Boy, (transplanted to CA) .... I reject VEHEMENTLY any assertions that cast ALL southerners in a bad light .... its a ridiculous sweeping generalization fallacy ....

One MIGHT agree: ... there is MORE of some things in the south: ... like Shrimp eating and cajun food and southern baptists ... but hey: .. the NORTH has its idiots and foolish manners ....

We should recognize this: .. NEVER identify an ENTIRE population with the faults of a few ..... that includes BOTH the South and the North .....

And it includes DU as well ..

Thank you.

I never had problems with the Joisey folks or the NY'ers or PA folks.

Joisey and NY builds the best in the World pizza!!!! I am hungry for some of that crunchy hand-tossed pizza now!!!

My suspicions is that the South-bashing involves a certain number of overly puritanical individuals from New England states such as Rhode Island, Mass. Maine, Vermont etc. I really don't think it's our friends who live 'on the border' of the Mason-Dixon.

toward the state of the world as we know it. BushCo, unjust war, shitty economy, general insecurity. I think many of us our unraveling. Many people reveal their basest instincts when they're under pressure.

But a lot of this is getting old...particularly the Southern and anti-gay threads.

...one of those infamous "anti-gay" threads on here. Amazingly they jsut don't seem to exist. *scratches head* Could be wrong, but I just don't think so. Not in this case anyway.

but somehow degenerate into anti-gay threads.

Sort of the way this thread has gone.

As I have pointed out previously, it is entirely possible the threads simple aren't a-G and don't become a-G.

that all people who live in the South voted for Bush.

...that I would ahve to agree with, in part anyway. It isn't everyone by a long shot, but some very loud people. Since I live in the south, and did not vote for Bush, I can state for a fact that not everyone down here did.

btw - I love your quote!

Here's my reply:

 I sort of see what you are saying.
It's like "if only the South would straighten up its act; we could win the Presidency back!"
Now that sounds ludicrous - but it's scarey as hell when you put it in terms of "If only the WOMEN would shut up about reproductive choice, equal pay, nonsexist language and stereotyping. Then, THEN we could win back the White House."
or how about this "Those damn 'fairies'. Why do they need civil rights? Why don't they just shut the f--k up so we can win back the White House?"
I'm sick of it and am wondering why I even bother coming around anymore.

n/t

Some of my best friends are those, and I am some of those. Huh. Know you are being sarcastic. LOL.

I'm a(lapsed)Catholic woman from the north who has lived in the south and my brother was gay,and I am definitely on the same page as you are about all this(although I can't express it as eloquently as you did)

I'm big tent all the way. I have never insulted anyone on our team ever in this forum. I'm not that stupid ignorant narrow minded person. I am a team playa

i here to discuss jr. and his bunch of merry suckers who need to be thrown out of this country , and maybe even sent to iraq for there deeds

I'm dropping my name here, because I am a very tolerant individual.
I'm Catholic, I love women, I love America - all regions have their positive and negatives...
I love people in general regardless of their race or sexual preference.
Yes, I may sound a bit naive but I am not.

plus men, straight people, kids, the elderly, and supporters of all the Democratic candidates.

I've heard that caged animals display an alarming level of aggression toward each other. Perhaps our flame wars are a symptom of our shared anger, fear and anxiety. We are terrified that Democracy itself is slipping away and we are afraid we can't stop it. Those responsible have shielded themselves from our reach, and they don't even hear us. Maybe it's our frustration that causes us to beat each other up sometimes.

idiots


:kick:
J4Clark

You are right. Ignorance won.

(Trust me on that one ..... )

My dadda is from Tennessee ....

My momma is catholic, ... as was I when I was not in control of my life ....

Sometimes: ... somebody is happy and gay in my immediate family ... (not MUCH since 2000 Florida .... ) ...

Your SO mean Will !! .....

Its the same problem in any grouping that values individuality and tolerance. You will get people going off in all sorts of different directions. We each come with our own individual agendas and drums. Sometimes we click. Sometimes we beat the living daylights out of the other's drums.

Being tolerant doesn't mean we agree with others. And when we are trying to make progress we can become frustrated when someone does not understand our point. We don't KNOW the absolute right answer. We each have a bit of a puzzle and we don't even know if they are all part of the same puzzle. We will always eat our own. And then we will realize we have goofed and try again. This is our nature. When we do get in lock step we can know we goofed somewhere cuz life is not that easy.

Republicans have little women.

(Include me on the list above, I know and love individuals in all those categories listed above...)

And, though it is sometimes unimaginable, we have to see beyond the stereotype of the "ignorant" republicans. I speak not to the extremes here, but to the bulk of people. People are not stupid, they are not impenetrable. It is self-defeating to assume that, and act that way.

We need to find ways to engage in discussions with those whose minds are a lot more open than we give them credit for. I think this revolves around finding the mental symbols those folks are comfortable with, and entering that arena to engage in the discussion, rather than trying to use our mental symbols and force them upon those folks.

For example. The upside down flag. *We* all know what that means. But, I'll bet you that many, many people are turned off by that because they don't know what it truly means, and take it as a sign of disrespect.

all i have to add is that after almost a half century as a guest here on this Earth, about all i have learned is that there is no one out there worthy of my hate. Whatever energetic being i am confronted with, i still have to remember they are but a reflection of my inner psyche, clothed in my own prejudices.

Apologies to anyone i may have offended in the past here in my moments of forgetting what little wisdom i may have gained along the way. No one, self included, is perfect.
With what little time we are alloted, Love makes that time make more sense.

thanks for the reminder.
dp

Bush and his band of thugs. Everyone else is okay. Well, I don't like bigots much, either. Does that make me a bigot, too? Hope not. Oh, and people who talk on their cell phones and drive at the same time. Hate them, actually. That's about it.

it can be very intimidating at times. I love everybody here except the asshole that called me stupid this week. I will remember that. (Trying to develop that thick skin.):shrug:

As one of THOSE, and as a Southerner, I get it double. And I'm about as big-tent as they come. I just get tired of having to defend myself.

It's not that DU is intolerant. We've just got some loudmouthed dumbasses who hang around here. (You, Will, are most definitely NOT one of those!).

Bake

I'm assuming that if you don't sign this thread you are a racist, mysoginistic, homophobic, athiest or something.

C'mon Will. You are better than this.

All I can say is, if the shoe fits . . .

Bake

...yet another broad brush "you're either with us or against us" thread isn't what we need, and definately not what I would have expected from him.

:eyes:

More's the pity.

Anybody home? WTH was that all about? Yeesh, Will calls for a little human decency and you bitch, he criticises and you bitch...tell me, can he do anything that doesn't piss you off?(*NOTE general use of "you" here your post just illustrates it)

Then again maybe pissing people off is good. Pissed off people tend to get up and DO something, good or bad. Action is usually better than inaction, imho. This is my pissed off weekend. The time to tangle with people who want to stop me from speaking my mind and those who want to make my loved ones disappear because they aren't snowy white in skin-color. Now THAT'S something to be PISSED about!

...which would be why I pointed out that he is better than this.

"The time to tangle with people who want to stop me from speaking my mind"

If this is true then you should be pissed off about the threads in question. In these threads people who wish to speak their mind, who might have a POV that differs from what is LC (Liberally Correct), are being shouted down and vilified.

How'd atheist get in that list of hate? Just asking.

to stop generalizing people. That's some powerful interpretive imagination you've got there unless the point was to come in and shit on the space...I rather suspect the latter.

I would expect nothing less from you. You have made your opinion quite clear. Unfortunately, as usual, you completely missed everything that was left out of the original post.

Good to see Skittles showed up to cheerlead again too.

This was hardly a call for unity. It reads more like a call for some form of group-think.

and over rated. It was a post to point out that while there are many great things about DU, there is also a destructive component that rears its ugly head cloaked as free speech and is actually bigotry.

The ridiculous thing is some don't get it when they do it

Guess it was all that worrying about being too PC that made everyone less concerned with the fact that human beings with feelings read these posts.

I think for myself and if someone posts something I would agree with I don't see the harm in sharing agreement.

TO mock it as group think is a put down shielded as some semblance of intellect...except that I notice you are pretty automatic when it comes to using terms such as "PC" and "group think." Intellect and automaticity seem to oppose one another.

...and some of them bash men too, and you are right. Some of them don't get it. They can't see the hypocrasy in their own views.

Waht I put down as group think is the opinon that you ahve to believe exactly as we do or you aren't one of us. Liberals aren't monolithic in their world view. Nor should we be. WHy are there so many people on this board that want to make us so?

were from men who know that it was directed at a few disruptive types who believe the real purpose of FREE SPEECH is SOLELY to offend the living shit out of others.

No one wants to make you more like them but as one who seems to often simply shit on a conversation for the sake of shitting on a conversation...I wouldn't mind making you less like you.

n/t

of certain persons in this thread.

Many liberals with whom I agree on almost everything else seem to demonstrate a disturbing proclivity toward shouting "bigot" at those whose thinking doesn't precisely match theirs.

I can't think of any other reason why someone would have a hair up their ass about anything in the original post.

...broad sweaping generalizations about people who differ in opinion on a few specific subjects? No, I guess you are right. No reason to be upset about support for hypocrasy and intolerance. Hell, I can't believe I was so wrong.

your spelling skills. No one asked for monolithic ideology...simply a little respect and a bit less bigotry.

You really enjoy playing these little semantic games though don't you?

...you devolve into attacks on my typing. How quaint.

<on edit>

For what it's worth it's spelled "hypocrisy". Even you got it wrong, dear.

YOu took a thread that asked people to weigh in on a source of division, i.e. bigotry and people posted their thoughts.

You completely twisted the spirit of the thread into some perverted notion that asking people to have a bit of respect for gender, religion, lack of religion, sexuality etc. equates to telling them WHAT to think rather than asking them to express their solidarity against the notion that bigotry is anything but ignorance.

I guess it's not group think when you and your buddies run around crying PC, PC, PC at every corner, eh?

...I hate PC. I think it is the worst evil perpetuated by the left.

You have never said that "bigotry is anything but ignorance". Your posts have been hyper-emotional rants about how this person or that person is evil, or wrong, or...whatever it is you are going off on this week. You fail to see how your posts are as bad as the things you are railing against. Hypocritical at best. At worst? Well...you aren't quite there yet. However unless people talk and act exactly as you think they should you go off and begin labeling them. You have some influance here. Your coterie rushes to your defense and pats your ego tell you that you are just and right, ganging up on your selected target. This is not always the case.

Becasue I, or anyother poster, don't say exactly the right thing, or agree with every idea that come out from your pet ideology then we are evil and lower than scum. You place the worst label you can think on us by calling us "un-Liberal". "You are either for us or against us". That is your motto from what I have seen. "Our way or the highway". This is also,unfortunately, a mantra that the Democratic party is using more and more lately.

There has been a lot of crap thrown about on this thread about southern voters and states. Want to know why we can't take southern states? Ask the NASCAR Dads. They will tell you that the Democratic party no longer represents them at the national level. These are our own people, registered Democrats, who feel that their own party no longer represents them.

Topics talking about "Neanderthal men", "testosterone poisoned men", "evil men" are not going to win these voters back. I use your topic because it is one we are both familier with. Imagine what your response would be to a topic about "irrational estrogen crazed women."

That's just one of the hypocritical view that I have seen on this board. It's insane! It's stupid! It does nothing to forward our real agendas, and everything to drag us down and keep us losing elections.

It is absolutely group think when, in a group the size of ours, that you insist that everyone think, act, and speak exactly the same way. If you have no tolerance for differences of view and expression then it is Fascism. Pure and simple. From what I have seen of your views...you aren't far from it.

I hate PC. I think it is the worst evil perpetuated by the left.

You assume that all PC was perpetrated by the left. A big for instance that it wasn't, was in the mid to late 80's certain institutions began calling their janitors "environmental services technicians. This was a practice brought on by MANAGEMENT not labor and not to elevate the janitor but to give them a title while they were whittling down their hours so as to not provide full benefits.

The new POLITICALLY CORRECT lately is to be as offensive as possible. It's born of the same fantasy as reality TV. It is nothing more than shock jockery. It takes little to no intellect and has FAR WORSE consequences as a backlash to PC than did PC. Your hatred for what YOU presume to be PC is obvious but I really don't know you and therefore can't speak to whether that hatred for PC is rooted in hatred less obvious to you.

In my experience, those who rail the most against PC and attribute every request for decency to PC, tend to be pretty hateful people that don't want to be called on their bigotry.

I don't know you so I can't speak for whether you fit that bill. I can only cite what I know.

I would also note that terms such as PC and feminazi and other terms are language set forth by Rush and his ilk. Their goal - group think. You are a verite performance act where that is concerned.


You have never said that "bigotry is anything but ignorance".

I have made that very clear in the past. Much of my coterie (that's nice you were able to get them and me in one portion of a sentence) can attest to that fact.

Your posts have been hyper-emotional rants about how this person or that person is evil, or wrong, or...whatever it is you are going off on this week. You fail to see how your posts are as bad as the things you are railing against. Hypocritical at best. At worst? Well...you aren't quite there yet.

My posts have been on a very wide range of subjects and run the gamut for informative regarding privatization of the military, educational regarding tort reform and yes you are correct RAILING against racism, sexism and those who will cut and paste from right wing sites as though right wingers are informative on matters involving inclusion.

As far as the claim of hyper-emotional...your posts are filled with hyperemotional hatred of me...and have been since the DAY you came to DU. You don't like me. I'll live.


However unless people talk and act exactly as you think they should you go off and begin labeling them. You have some influance here. Your coterie rushes to your defense and pats your ego tell you that you are just and right, ganging up on your selected target. This is not always the case.

Simply put. You are hallucinating. I have no inside track here. I post at the pleasure of admin and the mods as do you. If I have a problem with something, I either make a case for WHAT my problem is or back off. YOu don't like that. Too bad. I don't post here at your pleasure.

As far as selected targets. YOu post...I respond. That's really all that's going on.



Becasue I, or anyother poster, don't say exactly the right thing, or agree with every idea that come out from your pet ideology then we are evil and lower than scum. You place the worst label you can think on us by calling us "un-Liberal". "You are either for us or against us". That is your motto from what I have seen. "Our way or the highway". This is also,unfortunately, a mantra that the Democratic party is using more and more lately.


No it's real simple. Because you or some poster posts a SLUR..I will call you on it. You don't like that. Too bad.

Funny, it seems to me the party saying "our way or the highway" is the Republicans.

I challenge thoughts. This is a discussion board. Maybe you aren't up for a genuine challenge and can only cling to your standard phrases such as PC..language police without making the case for defending the poor behavior itself.


There has been a lot of crap thrown about on this thread about southern voters and states. Want to know why we can't take southern states? Ask the NASCAR Dads. They will tell you that the Democratic party no longer represents them at the national level. These are our own people, registered Democrats, who feel that their own party no longer represents them.

And what is it they feel we no longer represent them for? That we support women's rights, a workplace free of sexual harrassment where women don't have to tolerate being GROPED to stay on ythe job and the rights of minorities. NASCAR dads btw is the new PC term for angry white males (see you aren't immune). They are made angry because somebody told them to be angry. Somebody told them that if a woman or a black person gets a job, they are taking THEIR job away.

As for the rest of your claim, please PROVE it. The Republican party did find an inroad appealing to those who have racist tendencies....so what are you suggesting...that we embrace more racism and sexism to get votes?

Topics talking about "Neanderthal men", "testosterone poisoned men", "evil men" are not going to win these voters back. I use your topic because it is one we are both familier with. Imagine what your response would be to a topic about "irrational estrogen crazed women."

Quite a few MEN posted rather supportively on that thread in case you didn't notice. They were clear that it was not a rant about ALL men but that I was giving a group of men (some group thinkers who think as a group it's fun to be offensive to women on a message board)a TASTE OF THEIR OWN MEDICINE. You didn't like it.

BTW, I have never used the term "evil men" on this board. A lot of male Du'ers know me and know I love men.

Don't think I've used "testosterone poisoned" either but it's funny that out of one side of your mouth you call me emotional and out of the other side you feign offense at the phrase testosterone poisoned men. BTW, it isn't hypocritical, it's ironic.

I only regret that I may have unfairly perpetrated against people who burp and fart but aren't chest pounding neanderthals.

That's just one of the hypocritical view that I have seen on this board. It's insane! It's stupid! It does nothing to forward our real agendas, and everything to drag us down and keep us losing elections.

That is assigning false cause. Prove that being LESS OFFENSIVE and trying to be MORE inclusive by offending less people is what is losing elections.

BTW, I am really wary of people who toss the word HYPOCRISY around. It is simply an ad hominem for those who are under the mistaken impression that they don't think in a binary fashion ( one has to be a bit of an absolutist to toss the word HYPOCRITE around so cheaply)

It is absolutely group think when, in a group the size of ours, that you insist that everyone think, act, and speak exactly the same way. If you have no tolerance for differences of view and expression then it is Fascism. Pure and simple. From what I have seen of your views...you aren't far from it.

It isn't FASCISM but it doesn't surprise me that you don't know what fascism is either.

I have tolerance for a great many views. I find your rather annoying. They really aren't based in the principles of freedom. If they were, you would be free to offend and I would be free to call you on it.

I was hoping you'd actually try. Was a waste of my time. Night.

So now I MUST agree with you if we are to have any possible terms? I supported my thoughts with back-up and that isn't enough for you?

That's funny...thanks for the unintended chuckle.

.. declare victory and leave. :eyes:

I'm still here. Gonna quack for me again?

you simply made statements. No backup, no actual thought. You proved again that you are close minded, have no interest in actually helping the party, or forward any sort of agenda that promotes everyone, only one that promotes your littel niche group. Your statement about "men getting theirs back" shows you for what I figured. A militant feminist lesbian with no desire for true equality. thank you for proving my point for me. I appreciate it.

First of all, I raise money for the party, register voters and work with political action committees. I am assuming you do also and must have me beat for activism.

My statement about SOME MEN getting theirs back" was a taste of their own medicine. You had a problem with inlflammatory language...good...so do I....treat me the way you want to be treated.

Again, with the Rushian lingo though...militant lesbian...ROFLMAO....

I think YOu just proved my point.

Again, look up the phrase "veritas en media" you really have it mastered.

on edit: Now that you have brilliantly demonstrated yourself and your limitations better than I ever could, I will leave this little triangulating conversation. I'd rather let you get the last word and let your posts speak for themselves.

to make sure I didn't respond to you out of the emotion of the moment. In the light of day I still think there are some points you need to hear.

First, as a southerner I find your sweeping generalizations about "NASCAR dads" offensive in the extreme. There are plenty of good and decent southern men who love women and treat them with respect. Yes there are plenty of sexists, but guess what, there are plenty of sexists in other parts of the country. I find your unwillingness to consider what we could do to win back the support of working class folks in the south most confusing. We know that voting Dem is in their best interests and need to find ways to build bridges and to show them that. Have you considered the possibility that we bring them into the fold on the issues where we agree and then we have some leverage and a relationship where we can educate them. That maybe if they come to know and trust us that they would listen to our arguments about racism and sexism and homophobia and take them more seriously. I think your post shows that you know nothing about the south and the psychology of southerners nor do you wish to. You are operating out of ignorance and stereotypes and I would expect better from someone who calls people on the carpet for doing the exact same thing to women.

Second, I'm not sure how "A lot of male Du'ers know me and know I love men" is all that different from the old cliche "But I have black friends". Specious reasoning there - having male friends doesn't mean you love all men. Guess what, the gentleman you're fighting with...he has female friends on this board who "know" he loves women. But you aren't going to believe that just like he isn't going to believe you at this point.

Finally, while yes, there were many men who agreed with you and showed support on the "neanderthal" thread the other day (and I appreciate their support of your basic point, which I agree with, I'm tired of hearing men toss the words bitch and slut around like they were synonymns for woman), remember that there were some women who did not agree with you 100%. Specifically because of the way you made your point.

I'd kinda like to grab several of you on this thread and bang your heads together. Didn't your mommas teach y'all any better manners than to call each other names? Ah manners...must be a southern thing. ;-)

Darth Velma

I probably do.

I would challenge however that there even IS a demographic called NASCAR DADS or SOCCER MOMS. What they are are euphamisms made up to label a certain sect but who is that sect and what are their real concerns? I hear them brought up when the environment is invoked, or racism, or sexism or religion or other concerns. Who are they really? What are their REAL CONCERNS and what must be given up to reach them ? The entire Dem platform?

Secondly, if you as a southerner, think I was targetting southern men, I find that curious since I mostly defend southerners at DU. Maybe you are selectively editing my posts to see that which fits your impressions.

I realize some didn't like the way I made my point. I wasn't terribly appreciative of the way I made my point either. I frankly wish some had gotten the message the other 9000 times the subject was addressed politely. But interestingly enough, there haven't been a hell of a lot of SLUT posts since then. Something about taking away the payoff that handles that one.

At any rate, you do raise a good point. I have lost the hearts and minds of some and you haven't. I can't wine them all...I will let you deal with them as you see fit. YOu have an insight into them that I don't. I concede.

any of the Dem platform to "get them".

We just have to explain the parts of the Dem platform that are in their best interest and show them how the Repubs are hurting them. Then once we've got 'em on those issues we can sit down and talk about other issues and try to educate and sway them. The same I think holds true for working class folks all over the US who vote Repub against their own best interest.

We also need to treat them with dignity and respect that they don't often see from people outside the south (I know I'm often loathe to leave the friendly confines because so many people hear my accent and automatically deduct 30 IQ points). Most people in the South, like most people anywyere, genuinely want to believe they are nice people. They don't go around trying to hurt people on purpose. Hollering at them and treating them like they're too stupid to know any better only gets you an ugly knee-jerk reaction.

I am glad to know it is not an anti-Southern thing. I admit to being on and off DU several times in the last couple of years and may have missed posts where you defended me and my fellow southerners (which given the level of attack yesterday and today I can appreciate) - I had only what you said in this thread to go on.

Please don't concede - to me that implies an end to dialogue. And we all need to sit down and talk about these thing rather than letting them fester and drive wedges between Dems.

-V-

as the ones that had the guts to confront the race issues head on. They had to.

I am clear that the south was manipulated by the very large business interests that manipulated the hearts and minds of the south over 100 years ago..i.e. mining, in Louisiana the plastics industry, in Georgia other business interests...in fact the OVERNIGHT strike (teamsters) got its steam in GA and power company workers in GA are feeling the sting of the anti-worker policies of many CORPORATIONS in the south.

This is no different than the banking and insurance industries manipulating the states of Delaware and Connecticut in my book.

These industries represent JOBS due to that concentration of wealth and the genuine absorption of competition made possible by relaxed mergers and international competition.

The posters I have hollered at are the ones who will invoke the logic and language of right wing funded sites to make their point at DU (regarding rape, sexism and race). If one doesn't trust the Scaife foundation to address the Clinton impeachment, why is their agenda so accepted when they fund studies to undermine women's issues via their grants to Christina Hoff Somers and a few other repeatedly cited academics?

Nice self contained little worldview you've got there, Nothing.

I'm struck by how instantaneously your "love and peace" posts in response to those who agree precisely with you change into "eat shit and die" posts aimed at those who display thoughts at variance with your absolutist views of permitted liberal thinking.

word QUEER as being derogatory but have no empathy where language concerning women is concerned.

The absolutist views you accuse me of are what is being filtered through your ability to interpret.

I've never defined liberal thinking, I've simply asked you to think. Sorry if that was an affront.

*blush*

Only someone who is defensive about their right (mission?) to offend others would see it that way.

...the original post left out male bashing, mention women though, left out a few other key groups, and basically pushed the LC view as being the right thinking and less bigoted way.

{sarcasm} OK, I give. You are right. {/sarcasm}

QUACK!

Awwwwwwwww, your are so cute! Come and give us a little kiss.

Please. You haven't said anything yet. You've made accusations, and inuslts, but haven't even tried to enguage in a discussion. The quacking is pathetic and childish to say the least.

:D

to look into a person's face and say, "This could be me." We have to know that what separates us is almost nothing, and what unites us is the whole world. There is something calming and rejuvenating about the idea that a tear has the same salt content as a drop of ocean - that's how close we are. Everything else is ignorance or greed.

and just a step away from 'that is me'.

take a giant step outside the mind.
dp

Occasionally someone will post something that is unintentionally offensive. Instead of a query trying to determine the intent of the post, often the response will be accusatory in nature, forcing the first poster onto the defensive. A flame war soon erupts...

So, next time someone posts something in questionable language, attempt to educate before lighting the flamethrower.

Well spoken.

Occasionally someone will post something that is unintentionally offensive

The key here is unintentional.

That's not the same as the ones who repeatedly make the same bigoted arguments after having it pointed out to them. These are people who jump into the same sensitive subjects all the time to tell others that they are just being over sensitive, and there is something "wrong" with the people trying to educate them if they don't see things the way you do.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, poops like a duck, it's a DUCK!

n/t

:hurts:

And one of the offenders who makes the most noise when it's pointed out. That's called DENIAL.

QUACK!

...you really are that childish. Amazing. Wonder how long you'll keep quacking. This should be interesting.

and you are frustrated at that.

It's alright...no one's perfect.

Southerners reliably vote for Republicans, and for all the ugly things that Republicans stand for: union busting, militarism, anti-environmentalism ... the list goes on.

The difference between Southerners as a group and the other groups (gays, Catholics, women) is the choices they make as a voting bloc. It's difficult for me to respect people who vote in some of America's ugliest politicians.

THIS SOUTHERNER DID ***NOT*** VOTE FOR THE CHIMP!!

Those states that the Chimp DID carry, weren't exactly a landslide. There are a lot of Dems in those states!! But there you go, as if EVERY SINGLE SOUTHERNER voted for Bush!!

I'm guessing Gore didn't carry the Blue states 100% either.

And how about the dumbass Minnesotans who elected that dipshit Coleman? Does that make EVERY Minnesotan a dumbass? Of course not!

I just fucking give up...

Bake

you can do unless you want to keep answering all of these. Been there, sometimes I just don't seem to care to have to do it anymore. From Kansas here where we are all religious, stupid and republican.

The majority of Southerners vote for Republicans and the ugly things that Republicans stand for. That's a very deep hole to dig out of, in my opinion.

You can not say the same thing about Minnesotans. Those people do not reliably, consistently and constantly vote for Republicans. Yes, there are many Southerners who are worthy of respect. But they are not in the majority.

so what?

Blue states get more respect than red states. Red states stand for ugly things like militarism, anti-environmentalism, union busting and opposition to civil liberties.

This is not a prejudice. I judge people by their actions. When they vote for militarism, anti-environmentalism, etc., I do not have as much respect for them. That's just how it is.

...knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, pea-brains that vote for Republicans?

Gee thanks. I guess I'll go start oppressing someone; I'm behind schedule.

knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, pea-brains

I didn't say that; you did. I said that the South is full of Republicans. Southerners reliably vote in favor of politicians and ideas to which I am very much opposed. In my opinion, that says bad things about the region. No doubt there's much that redeems the South, but here in a political forum, it's not inappropriate for me to notice the way Southerners vote.

southerners"? Otherwise, you run the risk of being mistaken for a narrow-minded bigot.

I've made no judgement on Southerners as people, except insofar as voters are people. My remarks have been limited to Southerners as voters, and that they support some really ugly things: militarism, union-busting, anti-environmentalism, government secrecy, and opposition to the separation of church and state.

These are all Republican values, and because Southerners vote reliably and consistently Republican, it's not unfair to conclude that these are Southern values.

It's how they are gerrymandered.

As Democrats, the South is our biggest problem. No matter how abysmally Bush performs in office, he enjoys high approval ratings among Southerners.

No matter what we do, it doesn't have any impact. There's no reason Bush should look forward to a comfortable re-election campaign in any part of the country. The South just loves George Bush.

"No doubt there's much that redeems the South, but here in a political forum, it's not inappropriate for me to notice the way SOME or MOST Southerners vote."

I think there are a lot of morons who vote contrary to their station in life. I thnk they're idiots. However, I said those people voted for Republicans. Smart people, like I try to be, do not. We share the same space, not the same ideology. I distance myself from them when I can. I would think you could make the differentiation in your posts so as not to be confrontational.

I have no trouble with the truth. The truth is that Texas is majority Republican. However, there is a vocal minority that is quite active. Just last Saturday, 5,000 of my closest friends rallied at the Capitol in the 100-degree heat. There were even some Republicans there ON OUR SIDE! Don't lump us in with those other people...

I'm a new Texan... here about 9 months. And, overall, I don't really like it yet. BUT, I have NEVER in my life seen such Democratic activism as I have in this state. People in blue states don't have much to fight for. We do. I wonder if blue-staters would do the same, faced with the same odds? My guess is no. Look what's happening in California. Look at NE states that elect Repugs to US congress Senate, KNOWING that those congresspeople will side with southern Repugs? WTF is up with that?

Hm, which state was that... I'm thinking DE or MD... which suffered a big mayoral defeat due to Democratic apathy? That would never happen down here. We are active, we are fighting, we are ready.

:hi:

May I ask you to clarify that? Do you mean me? I am a Southerner. However, I consistently vote for the Democratic candidate.

You have painted all southerners with the same broad brush. Do you see how that demeans the efforts of those of us liberals who live here?

It is a valid generalization that the South votes Republican. The state of Tennessee could not bring itself to vote for its native son Al Gore in the last presidential election. I think that's pathetic.

It implies that in the last election the majority of Tennesseeans believed that George Bush was better qualified than Al Gore. What a disgrace. Say what you will about Tennessee, the fact of how those people vote says ugly things about them.

Your last sentence "how those people vote"...very nearly half of them did NOT vote for Bush.

I don't like that the majority of voter are Republican in my state (TX). But, I'm working to change that.

I think of Texas as a red state, one that supports militarism and the death penalty, and opposes environmentalism and civil liberties. It is the state that gave us Tom Delay, Dick Armey and - God help us - George Bush.

Yes, I'm aware that I should be thinking about Willie Nelson and the Dixie Chicks, but they are musicians, not politicians. Try as I will I don't automatically associate the word "Texas" with anything good. I'm working on it.

My Congressman, Lloyd Doggett and Sheila Jackson Lee...to name 2 of the 17 Democratic House Members. We have 15 Republicans in the House. Now you know why Tom DeLay wants to redistrict.

Or weren't you aware of some serious irregularities with the COUNTING of the votes in Tennessee in 2000? Or that people (minorities, Democrats) were turned away from the polls in Tennessee????

God, you're as bad as Gringo. And that's saying a lot.

Bake

You can argue that Gore would have carried his home state but for voting irregularities, but it really shouldn't have been close. I mean, what is wrong with those people? How could so many of them possibly think that Bush would make a better president than native son Al Gore?

I don't have much information to rely on here. The South has lots and lots of redeeming qualities, and perhaps I put too much emphasis on where it stands politically. Unfortunately, by that reckoning, it doesn't look good.

The South stands for militarism, government secrecy, suspension of civil liberties, anti-environmentalism, and union busting, all of them very ugly. Perhaps you can argue that Southerners vote Republican not realizing that that's what it implies. But I'd rather think that Southerners know what they are voting for when they form a solid mass of red states behind Republican candidates.

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

Al Gore didn't lose Tennessee because of marketing. They knew who he was; they knew who his father was. There's really no reason Tennesseeans should have chosen the inept George Bush over Al Gore. It doesn't speak well of them.

Tennesseeans chose to be part of the mass of red states that vote consistently and reliably for Republican values, which include militarism, government secrecy, opposition to the separation of church and state, union busting and anti-environmentalism. The South may be a wonderful place in many aspects, but there's only one word that describes how they vote: ugly.

a generalization does not include particulars, thus exceptions, such as the particular voters who did NOT vote for the *moron.
whether they are from Tenn, NC,SC,GA,ALA,FLA, etc.

generalizations are principles, conclusions, and opinions based on meager and insufficient facts and information.

and says more about you, than about us Southerners.

dp

OK, you want to toss out the word generalization because you say because it goes from the particular to the general without sufficient evidence. That's what I'd call an "invalid generalization" and some generalizations are indeed invalid. However, not all of them are.

If generalization won't do you, what word do you use? Do you just stop thinking in those terms? How do you describe the range of a disease like Lupus, which disproportionately affects women? In fact, what do you use in place of the branch of statistics which validates hypotheses?

and Maine has Collins and Snowe... your point is??

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

Now we're a damn "voting bloc"

That's nothing new. Nixon is credited with inventing the "Southern Strategy" but it probably predates him by many years. There's certainly a Southern Strategy in effect now. It's very late to argue that there isn't one.

When Southerners vote consistently, reliably, and constantly for Republicans, it's reasonable to assume that the majority of Southerners endorse militarism, government secrecy, opposition to the separation of church and state, anti-environmentalism and union-busting. It's pretty ugly. If I were you, I'd back away from it too.

'Nuff said?

there is a small minority of conservatives tolerated on this board. they're not liberals, but are allowed to stay (because they say they will vote dem, i guess :eyes: ) even after they spew their homophobic, or racist or misogynistic crap.

jeez, i remember when DU really was a liberal BBS. :(

Because, really, I wonder why I even stick around here.

I feel like a lot of people here fit the bill of being liberal only because they are young and will jump ship as soon as they get a mortage and a few kids.

rather the opposite. Progressive/liberal/leftist leaning people such as most of us apparently are are far more likely to be independent thinkers, and hence much more opinionated than the sheeple who follow the wingnut party line. Add in a touch of unavoidable pedantry usually embraced by educated people and you have the inevitable tendency to keep things in a factual perspective.

Which is of course at the same time our greatest strength and greatest weakness, depending on the goal. There is some ironic truth to the old saw "nice guys finish last", unfortunately.
:eyes:

edit: typo

and I'm not too proud to admit it. :D

*message deleted by author for sexual content*

:hi:

and I'll do it with anyone of the oppressed and downtrodden that aren't butt ugly republicans.

Every Republican I see these days seems so UGLY to me. Sometimes we have to remember who the enemy really is. We in Texas know full well. So do you in CA.

TYY

I Love PEOPLE. I'm one of those freaks who just flat loves humanity for humanity's sake. We're the most brilliant and conversely the most idiotic species on the planet and none of the rest of the BS matters.

We devour ourselves because we're stupid, and we advance because we're brilliant. It's a constant battle, brilliance vs. stupid greed. I keep hoping the brilliance will win out, the reason and problem solving, but it doesn't seem to work that way most of the time.

Ahhh well. Maybe with Kucinich in the WH...(shameless plug for my man!):P

Aren't liberals known as notoriously tolerant? Let's live up to it

all though, remember some people agrue from a feeling they are right, and a lot of these questions have no answer. but i'm sure i see DUers all the time in the street and they are kind and friendly, but we all have our days. William Pitt is correct, deep down i love them all...yep, i love them all.

Y'all that are bashing all Southerners better read up on the history of the greatest :dem: president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

That man created the Tennessee Valley Authority that brought rural electrification to thousands of formerly poverty-stricken residents of Tennessee and the hills of NC, AL, and (I think?) WV.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was a Democrat who emphasized governmental investment in long-lasting infrastructure. His Works are still seen all across the country as PWA projects, CCC park improvements, TVA power plants and dams, and the like. Not to mention WWII and the defeat of nazi Germany.

I am getting so sick and tired of the South-bashing around here that I am almost ready to vote Third Party.. I really cannot stand how the post-1968 Democrats are so tied-up-in-knots over being 'politically correct' but don't care a hoot about investing in electrical/transit/road/ infrastructure or protecting U.S. jobs from $0.50/hr. competiton from China-India.

Y'all probably don't care, because I won't vote Ralph Nader or Green in any election. My vote won't pull off the northeast Dem base, either. In November 2004, if someone like Pat Buchanan runs on a populist platform with a reasonable program, I am considering voting for such a third parties that is socially-conservative-but-in-favor-of-U.S. jobs-staying-in-the-U.S. I will vote for trade barriers to protect American workers.

Unfortunately, certain 'liberal' segments of the Democratic party see trade barriers as being 'politically incorrect' and refuse to oppose them....meanwhile the *Repukes are using free-trade to run away with professional-level U.S. jobs to third-world countries and thus turn the U.S. standard of living to THIRD WORLD LEVEL!!!

has been excellently made in the body of this thread, for both good and ill.

....bases loaded, nobody out. :-)

Tie game.

..the Sox game (from your perspective) has turned to fertilizer.

It's always the same offenders who squeal the loudest when it's pointed out.

It's not that they don't "get it". It's that they refuse to.

*sigh*

I, being new here, sat back and followed it. It seems even the best thought out thread can go downhill. I agree with you and thanks for the lesson.

it is what you've allowed yourself to become.

If by no other means than by ignorance/lack of being in another's shoes. I recognize that I tend to have less tolerance of certain groups than of others. I can't tell you how SICK and TIRED I am of white males!!! ;) Okay, that last part was said in jest, but I think ya'll probably know what I mean. It's impossible to be 100% prejudice-free. All we can strive to be is tolerant and accepting of each other and their views.

I don't generalize people by what their lifestyle is or where they are from, even some moderate republicans (although I don't vote for them). I work with the poor and disadvantaged and have learned you have to lose labeling people very quickly or you will become burned and cynical.

Appreciate your words of wisdom ... especially on the South bashing .. I'm getting kind of sick of it myself. You are going to love it here when you visit next month. The Carolinas are great.

to this but I don't have a clue as to what it might be. It seems that women and the religious have among the toughest times here with the exception of maybe pro lifers. I am amazed that some of the names women get called here (I mean public figures not specific DU women) are tolerated by anyone. It is literally unimaginable that a thread entitled "Clarence Thomas is a generic anti black name" would be defended here at all yet "Ann Coulter is a slut" is acceptable by all too many. People are getting mad and frustrated. They have every right to.

they suck too.

as do those who are too far left.

or too far right

or too in the middle

and the sexist pigs who post on DU using poisonous words like "slut" and "whore" and "sexist" and "pig"

and the ones who drive SUVs (although they really DO suck)

not to mention the bible thumpers and the atheists. Best I can tell BOTH of those groups suck.

Oh oh oh! and let's not forget the Yankees fans. Talk about suck!

I think that's the tongue in cheek point.

We are almost getting to the point where the population of any "clump" is 1.

We all have one overriding job--Get the Bush Junta out of power asap.

In the stream of life they come in all shapes, sizes and colors. They are constantly rubbing against each other, softening sharp edges. DU is a torrent. We are the pebbles. We tend to get stirred up more often. Thus the constant abrasion or "rubbing each other the wrong way"! I don't let a little jostling or joshing get me down! Thanks for this thread. I hope you bring a good speech to Seattle next week. I'll be in the crowd!

Not to be too misanthropic but us post-ice age technobabies have a crisis of acclerated cultural growth without the requisite evolutionary changes required for us to survive in a world mainly of our own making(bluntly at war often with the rest of nature). Too much stress and atavism. Too much willing to roll in the banana patches grooming lice and trying to settle for paradise on earth.

And getting even more stupidly combative among each other when tribal ignorance doesn't work, when abandonned instincts don't work, when a "tamed" nature goes bad on us, when our progressive democracy goes medieval, when our highest esteem for the "compassionate" has us curiously groping about instead for a crucifix and nails.

This is a time of crisis. I know it is normal, even good fun for the excitement say of a lively political campaign, but we might as well get serious. Because the "serious" people running things are REALLY nuts about really effective hatreds.

We are all, as a species, insufficient. Even Scripture tells us so. Just that today we proving it in truly spectacular fashion. We are going to have to EARN the right to try for something better. Or we have proved the mortality of the race as a whole is our destiny.

can explain but does not excuse individual and group behavior. sometimes i wonder if the dark side hasn't exploited this somewhat new field. they sure seem to push the right buttons. we must transend the unsuitable, immoral aspects of our heritage while embracing the rest in both the biological & cultural realms. otherwise we are doomed.if so, i suppose that "we" deserve it. just hate to see us take the rest of multiceller life down with us.

as an aside , quit bashing animals! calling repubs snakes or reptiles is quite unfair. not to mention this Chimp buisness!
"animals don't hire lawyers"

and I am in good company here in my hate.

Here's a thought. People in groups act and do things they would not do by themselves. We are all somewhat swayed by the group we are in. For example, I feel an affinity with most who post here at DU and I don't even know anyone here personally. But I think that's a natural human tendency - to feel protective and/or close to those we identify with - for whatever reason..

The other side of that coin is, it's also easy for an individual to feel threatened by a group that we do not belong to. Perhaps, when we don't belong we feel excluded. Ever notice how little kids will automatically be suspicious of the new toddler climbing into the sand box. Sometimes he/she is rejected - or even hit and goes crying to Mom.

I think we all learn at an early age, from experiences like that, to be suspicious of groups that we are not members of.

I think it takes some serious socialization / learning to grow up and be open to other groups and not suspicious of them. We have to suspend our self-protection instinct long enough to give the group a chance - or learn the skills of earning acceptance. But if we have a bad experience - like getting beat up by a particular racial group at school it can be very difficult to keep an open mind later in life - about that particular group or any group that we are not a member of.

I used to think that most who get past that childhood group behaviour thing end up as liberals - and those who don't end up as conservatives.

But I am often dissapointed by some of the posts I read here. Some who call themselves liberals can be very biggoted against some groups. But biggotry is an unjustified hatred.

If some group, like movement conservatives, say hateful things about me, like calling me un-American, then I believe I have every right to mistrust them and dislike them as a group - and individually, until they show me otherwise - and I do.

I am an white ango=saxon male and i feel really threatened by you guys. Did you pinkos know that 4 out of 5 men vote repulican. Sorry guys I hate all you guts.

We fail the Anglo-saxon part of it.

...from the other side of the aisle. Nice object lesson that the two sides really aren't that different.

Red Sox fans?!?!?

:evilgrin:

...I love women - my girlfriend is one ;) - and more seriously, I find it easier for me to write about female characters than about male characters.

I have no problem whatsoever with gays, and while it's true that I oppose gay marriage, I oppose hetero marriage by the same token.

I hate the United States as a whole and not parts of it; nonetheless, I find Southerners so religious and pro-gun that it makes me nuts - but then again, that attitude is more American than Southern.

I might have respected Catholics had it not been for the facts that it took them damn long to start doing something about sexual abuse by priests and, more importantly, that the Pope's opposition to all forms of birth control has resulted in at least 120 million unwanted births, perhaps more (I don't remember if it's 120 million children or 120 million mothers; in the latter case, the number of children ma be close to 300 million).

It's the Catholic HIERARCHY that wouldn't address sexual abuse by priests and took a hard stand on birth control. No need to hold that against the rest of the Catholic members.

You've pretty much described my family (except for the omission of "men," "children," "heterosexuals," "Jews" and "Protestants."). And I love them all dearly. Some of them may make me crazy at times, but I know enough to not condemn an entire segment of society by their actions.

Only a dimwit judges harshly by the group -- you take people -- all people -- one at a time.

I am ultra-left liberal, southern, catholic and female. I don't hate any one until now. Now I think I hate neo-conservatives and their friends and what they are doing to our nation. My frustration is so great that I feel as though I could tear my hair out or beat my head against a wall. I have never felt such anger in my life.

PS--Caught your speech on C-Span. It was great. Keep up the fight.

I too am a left-wing nut (as the Governor of my state called all liberals on his weekly talk show), southern, catholic and female! That's two of us, do we qualify as a "focus group" yet, or do you think we need more members? :)

it's nice to know i'm not all alone down here. do you think we should start our own thread?

:hi: (well, not really, but it's what works here at DU)

and I love women; I am one. As for the rest, if it doesn't hurt anyone, I could care less. I can't say I'm always open minded and tolerant; that would be a lie. I can say that I consciously work to grow, evolve, and become more tolerant of others, and that I'm making progress.

Gays, Catholics, and Southerners don't fall into my list of groups I'm less than tolerant of.

I'm intolerant of:

liars
cheats
thieves
self-centered,self-serving greedy folk
adult ignorance
the arrogant and the shallow
temper tantrums
bullies

Any assistance, suggestions, or advice along the path of learning tolerance is humbly welcomed.

I-don't-hate-anybody column.

Julie

and as Dame Edith Sitwell once said:
"I am patient with stupidity, but not with those who are proud of it."

Unfortunately that applies to anyone who voted for * and is still proud of that after everything that's been shown to them.

That said, I've heard from various stripes of people admitting that they DID vote for *, and are now regretting it. So I forgive them, and don't waste my time spouting "rhetoric". I just gently guide them to alternative viewpoints available on the Internet through a leaflet I print out. They can take it from there, and spread the word.

:kick:

Thanks. :D

But otherwise I agree with Mr. Pitt wholeheartedly!

;-)

A loathing of the Catholic church's overall historical performance is not a personal attack on any particular individual who happens to have been raised in the catholic church.

A well-articulated criticism of the tendency among gay men to hyper-promiscuous sex is not a personal attack on me, simply because I am gay.

Too many DUers, IMHO, have skin of tissue paper when they encounter issues close to their own home.

The charge of "bigotry" is much too loosely tossed around here.

That said, thank god for DU. We're all human.

America's "argument culture" has gotten out of hand.

Too many smear all pro-lifers with the same broad, stereotypical brush: the right-wing, anti-woman, religious fundie who not only supports the death penalty whether the accused is guilty or not, he also lets the baby starve to death or otherwise die a slow, torturous death, after he or she is born. I'm not that kind of pro-lifer. At least I have a consistent human life ethic, in that I oppose the death penalty and starting wars, but I also favor strengthing civil rights laws, including affirmative action when necessary.

Nevertheless, even we neo-progressive pro-lifers are treated like lepers on DU. I am tired of being treated like a second-class DUer because I'm a practicing Catholic and a pro-life feminist. As my name goes, I am fed2dneck with being branded a conservative--because I'm not!

right to choose. What I want to know is how you are able to vote liberally based on your stance on abortion rights? No offence, please, just curious. I agree on the death penalty and cannot begin to understand how "pro-lifers" can uphold the death penalty and find waging war okay. There is far too much bashing here and way too little respect for others. I find labels and name calling to be the result of prejudice, no matter what kind of "freedom of speech" issue is used to support it.

I'm an open minded person. A lot of that has to do with my upbringing and the people I was around.

I'm sensitive to women's issues because of my mom.
My father's side of the family is from Tennessee.
I'm from Ohio and I don't hate myself for that.
I have relatives who are homosexuals.
I'm an atheist but I'm tolerant of believers because of my upbringing in church.

About the only group of people I have a problem with is Republicans, and I think we can all agree on that.

They have not one redeeming trait; it is them we should be bashing.

As for the South, Catholics, Jews, women, gays..etc, those who would rail against them deserve to be plastered every chance we get.

We are being urged to overlook the fact that despite his abysmal performance in office, George Bush still enjoys enormous popularity throughout the South. He can do no wrong! The worse he does, the more they love him.

As a Democrat I am completely frustrated at the stubbornness of Southerners. There is nothing we can do to get them to stop voting for militarism, union busting, government secrecy, anti-environmentalism, the death penalty, and assaults on the separation of Church and State.

There is no reason to defend these people. What is wrong with them?