anti-ABBers only...

from the rumblings inside this group, I get the feeling that when Kerry is nominated in Boston (maybe even sooner) that we will not be allowed to say anything bad about JFK.

What I don't understand, is why would they do that? I can't believe the DU will only allow happy Kerry talk and nothing else?

What do y'all think?



Dave (AmyStrange.com) Ayotte
Please, regularly check the One Missing Person (is one person too many) searchable website for the latest (and archived) missing person news stories:

http://NEWS.OneMissingPerson.org/




Serious Serial Killer discussion:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SK-Cafe/

but no personal attacks.

It sounds reasonable to me..

"Once the Democratic party officially nominates its candidate for president, then the time for fighting is over and the negative attacks against candidates must stop. The administrators of this website do not wish for our message board to be used as a platform to attack and tear down the only progressive on the planet with any hope of defeating George W. Bush. Constructive criticism and even outright disappointment with the candidate may be expressed, but partisan negative attacks will not be welcome. If you wish to contribute to the defeat of the Democratic candidate for president, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website. As the election season draws closer, we may expand this rule to include Democratic candidates for other political offices."

In other words: It depends on how you do it.


You can find it in this thread by Skinner

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=366795#366837

The results will be:

Bannings and tombstonings by the dozens (or more).

A game being made out of the alert system to shut down criticism of Botox.

Another mass exodus from DU.

Another near disaster when it comes to the next fundraiser.

A resultant message forum that is no more than an Amen Chorus for the establishment candidate and the business as usual DLC philosophy.



Oh joy.

And what is scary is that there are so many advocates for that kind of scorched earth, enforced conformity policy on this board these days.

And almost all of them come from the Kerry camp.

In their zeal to control thought and deny any and all discussion of the weaknesses of their candidate, they would happily turn this forum into a ghost-town.

And I fear that if they succeed, DU will run out of funds and cease to function within the year.

"If you wish to contribute to the defeat of the Democratic candidate for president, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website."

"The administrators of this website do not wish for our message board to be used as a platform to attack and tear down the only progressive on the planet with any hope of defeating George W. Bush."

Since Kerry is no progressive, and he doesn't have a chance in hell of beating Bush, this would not apply to criticism of him.

your misguided opinion.

Kerry is far more liberal than Dean ever was, and he's the only candidate who beats Bush in the polls TODAY AND has won more than 1 primary. he's won 18 of 'em, in fact.

I know you'd prefer to see him lose so you can go "neener-neener" in November, but perhaps there are other sites where you can rally against the Democratic nominee. I can think of one or two off the top of my head.

that's why he sealed his records.

wasn't that rule made long before the iowa caucus ? at a time when kerry was down in the polls ? if so, did you complain about the rules then ?

and i think criticism is allowed, but not the crap some tried to pull when arnold running in california and people kept saying gray davis needed to resign or arnold wasn't so bad and other crap like that.

They're afraid we'll post something that Rove and his 163,000 volunteers haven't already thought of. :eyes:

Criticism isn't being suppressed.

probably evil commies any way

We're all to the left here. Some more so than others. Some less so than others.

You can't define "left" by a few issues.

But we all fall at least slightly to the left on the political spectrum or we wouldn't be here on DU.

You have a DLC logo in your signature. What exactly are you to the left of?

wherein 'left' includes Nixon.

who would laught hysterically at your suggestion that they're not left.

I describe left as pro-choice
pro-progressive taxation
pro-affirmative action
pro-separation of church and state
pro-equal opportunity for all, special privileges for none
pro-environment

I do not believe that a strong military is the exclusive domain of the right.

So, yes, DLC and proud of it. Clinton democrat and proud of it.

The further left, however, has some hang-up with claiming exclusive dibs on the term "left." They are what Michael Moore has starting calling "the professional left."

Sorry, whine all you want - the democratic party is America's major party of the left and we come in all shapes, sizes, colors, and frame of mind.

you can find me on globalfreepress.com.

http://www.counterpunch.org/donnelly02092004.html

Funny! Is that how you really see it?

-- Allen

people can PM me for the link.

I don't know if I'll get banned before I have to stifle myself to the point of oblivion/abandonment. And frankly the other forums don't have the same appeal (juice) they once did.

Nobody gets banned for telling the truth and being respectful.

Perhaps the other sites have lost their juice because the candidate they're centered around is out of the race.

tell the truth about Kerry and fuck the consequences.
I have spent the last 4 years working for progressive causes, protesting the war, etc... and I won't let anyone tell me to shut up.

SHUT UP! SHUT UP! SHUT UP!

and the machine keeps ticking like clockwork

It's alright, we told you what to dream.

ABB ABB ABB ABB!
REmember vote for us - or terrible things will happen to you and your family and it will be all your fault. If your not with us, you're against us.
ABB ABB ABB

Shut Up ! Shut Up! Shut Up!

If the "truth about Kerry" has already been told here - over and over - repeating "the truth" becomes attacking.

You might not be "shut up." But if you attack Kerry (or whoever the nominee is), your "attacks" won't be heard here.

Just MY advice. Heed it if you wish. Employ faux defiance if you wish. DU isn't publically owned and tax payer financed. Your only "rights" to speech here are what the board owners allow.

The fact that so many of Kerry's supporters/DLC robots are already pushing for censorship with the nomination far from over, speaks volumes as far as I'm concerned.

By truth I assume you mean criticisms and by consequences I assume you mean another 4 years of Bush, foreign wars, Americans out of work, jobs overseas, environmental suicide, corporate sponsorship of government, fewer rights for women and gays, and the further polarization of America?

Yeah, those consequences scare the crap out of me. I stand united with the party that will put a president in the White House who may not be the guy I picked in August of last year but, one that sure as hell lands on my side of the political spectrum.

we are not the enemy,

check this out:
http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/

Have the rules changed since you started here?

I don't understand why you're confused. Why would a website dedicated to Democrats and defeating Bush want to encourage members dedicated to defeating the Democratic nominee?

Constructive criticism is still allowed. Considering you are only soliciting anti-ABBers, I somehow think that's not enough.

the rules were made before kerry won any election and i believe he was low in the polls at the time they were made. and they apply no matter which candidate wins. it's not rules that were put in place only if kerry wins.

I would also like to point out that despite the widespread and rampant rumors to the contrary, "criticism" of the nominee is not outlawed. We are not going to be banning people who speak badly about the nominee. We are forbidding partisan attacks and organizing against the nominee, and hopefully we won't have to ban anyone to enforce that, but who knows... but let's try and not make the rules out to be something they're not, they even state:

"Constructive criticism and even outright disappointment with the candidate may be expressed, but partisan negative attacks will not be welcome."

Elad

If we experience the same vitriol we did during the early stages before the primaries (constant reposting of negative articles by the same group of people, "innocent questions" that have already been discussed over and over), much of which I participated in during the Clark vs. Dean battles, will this not equate to partisan negative attacks against the nominee?

(of course I admit to taking the gloves off before the nominee is chosen - but once he is chosen, he gets my support and defense 100%)

I'm not your messenger boy.

and then ask him if it's okay for me to use profanity when attacking Nader. Okay?

Thanks in advance.

-- Allen

I'm not your messenger boy either.

I'm just swamped here. :hi:

-- Allen

:)

You'd better use FedEx or we're DOOOOOMED!!!

The internet tends to be more progressive because it is better informed and not monopolized by mainstream media dictates of groupthink. When centrist choices dominate, are progressive views and choices--and the truth drowned out?

If he doesn't want HIS site being used to critize OUR nominee then everyone should respect that!

You want to bash our nominee? Go get your own website!

It's that simple!

read my post above.

Looks like the thread got taken over by the ABB crowd. They really don't want us to have a discussion. They also seem to want to tighten up Skinner's rule, both its meaning and the timeframe covered. Leaves nothing left to discuss, I guess.

We're going to have to restrain ourselves from saying stuff like:

- He doesn't appeal to my narcissistic needs.
- I have no tolerance for ambiguity or sense of political timing and I need my egotistical feeling of moral superiority reaffirmed Right Now.
- I prefer to be a righteous blowhard rather than wise, let alone careful with the evidence.
- I insist that there is a dogmatic One Right Answer to this never before resolved issue in human history.
- In my secret philosophical system I have no need to understand the situation involved, I reduce all things to abstractions and compute The Truth immediately! Here It Is, peons!
- On my planet it *is* 1988 all the time, so there.
- The German Communists of 1933 were geniuses of compromise like me.
- If only I had an actual grasp of the issue and stuff like that, I'd be the nominee, easily.
- Here is a Point Of Principle I will throw at you that is not a principle, just an excuse to justify some championing of a bad idea that I embrace because I live the unexamined life.
- Here is a Republican talking point but I won't tell you that.
- Hey, I live to stab my leaders in the back. It has something to do with my unhappy upbringing but, really, I don't care.
- So I grabbed it out of my ass. It is chocolate, as I see it.
- I am unable to overcome my Inner Conservative, aka Teenage Ideologue Moronic Brat.
- I'm in a Nietzschean Superman phase, I just don't know it, nor can I tell that everyone else can tell. I invented it, it's so original and such an awesome secret I'm gonna flaunt it abusively.
- The nominee said or did what I believe he did, not what he actually said or did. People I don't like never do anything that is right, never say what is true. And worst of all, he doesn't say it in my narrow little dialect or refer to things in my narrow frame of references.
- I call myself a liberal but don't tolerate anything outside Leftist dogma. I'm a Lenin Liberal.
- Hey, poor minorities or classes of people other than my own- lord forbid they have higher nominal status than me- don't actually matter.
- I hate corporations but if they paid me more or gave more to my candidate I'd be increasingly understanding of the plight involved.
- I'm in denial that I gave a ridiculous amount of money to a bad candidate because he appealed to my ego like no other.

It's gonna be horrible.

I like them all - especially..

"I am unable to overcome my Inner Conservative, aka Teenage Ideologue Moronic Brat'

One person several levels beyond such places...............(Ralph, this is your cue, please step in)

:yourock:

:hi:

Simply beautiful! My hat is off to you, Sir!

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

Two Thumbs up!

It was unacceptable.

When I don't do MY job, I get fired.

And, frankly, more than half of DU can't wait for that day.

I have no plans to stick around when DU becomes johnkerrycheerleaders.com, do you?

Kerry becomes the nominee (gasp...maybe even because most democrats vote for him). Do you run off to TohellwithmypartyifIdontgetmyway.com?

www.mypartyfuckedmeoverandsoldouttobushoneveryimportantissueandiwontfallinlineforthem.com

I'm anti-ABB as a guiding principle in the Primary. I think it's entirely too low a bar to set for selecting a nominee to go against the Commander in Thief.

Now once the nominee is slected, I may point out matters I think are hurting the GE campaign, however I won't contribute things that might give the GOP something to use against the Democratic Nominee.

I'm ABB, but only AFTER the Convention, period.

In the meantime, I'll hold EVERY candidates feet to the fire to ferret out the best one to run against Bush. So far not one has come anywhere near to Kucinich on the issues that matter most to me, nor have they shown themselves to be thoroughly loyal to the people who elected them the way he has. He's earned my loyalty by being loyal to me and the people who need it most. Until such time as he's effectively drummed out of the race, I'll support him in the face of any and all odds good or bad. After Convention, I'll be busting my butt for the Dem. Nominee and also to make sure he stays in Congress if that's how it works out.

Unity- the demand for it pisses me off royally, but the intelligent voice in the back of my mind tells me it's our only hope. The trouble is some are calling for it before the race is finished and I'm not abandoning the only candidate who speaks for me no matter how ugly the odds may look.

Anyway, to finally get to my point, there is a time and place for battling within the party. That time is NOW during the race to decide the nominee. After the nominee is chosen we need to band together and defend them against anything the GOP dishes out. It's only going to get uglier after the convention and the last thing we need is in-fighting when we most need to put forth a united front. To that end, the idea is to have criticism that does something to improve the Democratic campaign rather than to fuel GOP attacks.

but then told Kucinich and Dean supporters that they should 'stop dreaming' and 'get a clue' and other such wonderfully persuasive advice.

This will be an interesting year.

Go if you want to. We'll get along just fine.

nt.

DUer's for * ? This whole thing is getting out hand. I tried to be reasonable, not to step on other's toes when ever possible. Found a candidate, supported him spiritually, financially, and yada yada yada.

It didn't work out, I should blame it on myself, fine. This the problem, they have already picked out the candidate. Giving him all kinds of (bad) press for free. Do you think it would be a good idea to take a half a loaf when I might be able to get a whole loaf in four years?

Being pre-handicaped is not a place one needs to dwell, Look at it another way. If successful, half of the job will be accomplished }(