Just popping in to say hello!

I trust everyone is well?

Is this because of what I said out in GD:P land Yael?

You are a kool-aid drinker.

This board is for grown-ups, not political neophytes who are as malleable as silly putty.

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

:rofl:

After all, I remember when you were normal.

Here, this is on me, your favorite beverage:

I'm even game for some friendly back-and-forth over nonsense.

But if you're only interested in being shitty, save it.

There are lots of Clinton supporters that can somehow manage to be able to have civil conversations, or even friendly slap-fights over BS. Sadly, I don't think that groups includes you.

putting me reluctantly into the HRC Camp.

I TRUST her, which is more than I can say for that shill Obama.

At least the RIGHT WING HATES her. She is doing something correctly for that, yet they embrace Obama and his "bi-partisanship".

Obama...UGGHHHHHHHHHH

So my only response is:

OK, thanks for sharing.

There are plenty of opportunities to do just that. I look forward to seeing you on some of those threads.

Not everyone who expresses reservations about the Obama candidacy or Obama supporters is a Clinton supporter, and not everyone sees it as constructive to engage in the all-or-nothing for-us-or-against-us ongoing food fight.

I can't wait for this party to come back together and end this damn war. My dream is that we sweep congress to the point that healthcare becomes a conversation again as opposed to its current position as fodder for the blogosphere when new co-sponsors are added and HR676 languishes in subcommittee.

One thing I do feel very peaceful about is that whoever wins this thing -- John will be a key part of the administration. Why he is staying above the fray, IMO.

GD-P is a nightmare. We have fought tooth and nail in here to keep that stuff out so we can talk about other things. That sometimes means criticizing the Obama phenomenon, or the state of the party, and many of us are not happy with the choice between the two remaining candidates and wish to express that without getting beat to a pulp or being shouted down. This is being perceived by Obama true believers as opposition to their candidate - the campaign is a take-no-prisoners all-or-nothing for-us-or-against-us affair. No Clinton supporter has attacked me yet, and I say again and again that I do not support Clinton and I challenge them on remarks I don't agree with. The same cannot be said for Obama supporters. Any hint of disaffection or the mildest criticism of the Obama phenomenon is certain to elicit mean-spirited personal attacks. The contrast is stunning and undeniable.

No doubt Obama will "win." The damage being done in the meantime is incalculable and will probably destroy the party. Since the party is long overdue for collapse and re-organization, and has some serious fundamental problems that continue to fester, that may not be a bad thing and is probably inevitable. As this train wreck unfolds, it is pretty chaotic and miserable.

I was informed by ClericJohn that Obama's supporters are not welcome here, and it seems he's quite right.

Thanks for being the exception to the rule, though. Look forward to seeing you around the boards. :)

Dragging candidate flame fests in here is the only problem, not which candidate someone supports. We had a couple of people come in here evangelizing for their candidate and trying to start GD-P feuds. Since CJP has consistently been dead on accurate about this dozens of times, and has built trust with many of us here, he has much credibility on this subject, with me and I think with others as well.

I was told this, verbatim.

What has CJP been "dead accurate" about?

He's insulted me to a degree that I no longer respect him.

Don't know what all the commotion is about, but I do know that the Edwards forum is more than one or two people - AND it does my heart good that you still proudly display Edwards' pic in your posts.

I assume whomever you now endorse was your second or third choice, so you must have gone through a lot of disappointment like the rest of us when our guy "suspended". Nice to see you stop by.

I miss all of you guys. :hug: I miss the days that any Edwards thread was rec'd into the stratosphere and the polls were all so lopsided as to make them comical. :D

Was on Catchaway's thread last night and felt homesick, so thought I would pop in.

Obama was my second choice and it took several weeks. I was in a pretty big funk through mid-Feb. John still has my heart.

Through my work (I am in IT), we have an annual user conference. In March 2009, it is in New Orleans. I just heard 2 weeks ago that my suggestion to contact the Poverty Center (that the Senator and Elizabeth started) was accepted by the conference organizers -- and they are working to have 2 days either before or after to hold a rebuilding weekend with the Poverty Center organizing. I can't WAIT for that. His causes are my causes.

Have a great week! :hi:

with the Poverty Center. That's important work that will benefit many of the people John Edwards sought to help. His vision lives on in all of us. Please keep us posted.

Right back at ya, Yael! :hi:

I have no time for self-appointed thread police, such as Yael, who was last seen compiling hit lists for future banning. That type of poster has no place in what for them, is the ironically named Democratic Underground. Her middle name is "ALERT".

Guess some people here are cowed from entering GDP. I can understand that, but ask people here who still, like me, tread, where most avoid. Some of us want to keep it real or honest, till the hold of the moderate/conservative left is shattered for good.

strong populist, and denounced his IWR vote. His early Senate voting record reflected his constituency, and it was somewhat conservative.

John became who he was, by living and experiencing for himself. He had a big house and could afford $400 haircuts.

None of that mattered to me. I spent days and hours in GDP working to dispel his detractors.


I do not understand the intense nature of your mean-spirited and vitriolic attacks on people who are after all, just being people.....and a true contradiction to what John Edwards stands for.

pretty awful things out there in GD-P and to varying degrees, you have and still are making attempts to proselytize, attack, and/or drive those who don't agree with you out of the party.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5554117&mesg_id=5569990


It's interesting how some see only what they choose to see.

I have been rather shocked at some of the things I've seen both of you say when you were out there in GD-P after you came in here and made nice and I really don't think it would be all that hard to find.

and pretend like it doesn't matter, and that your perceptions are correct, and go on about your business of claiming that one side is worse.

Nevermind. I didn't think I'd get a reasonable response anyway.


edit: I capitalized ONE because there are more... not that those who only see what they want to will care.

and yes, I remember when you were normal.

You dare to come into this little haven and corner of the world, where we look for respite from the likes of your GDP proselytizing, only for me to come in here to find you claiming yopurself "aggrieved", and trying to paint me as a Machiavellian figure.

Like your candidate, Obama, methinks thou doth protest too much.

Too bad your little bandwagon attempt to smear me with my friends didn;t work. You disgust me.

We're all smarter than you redqueen. Take your pitiful schemes with you to GDP. You're gonna need them. Obama is sinking like a rock.

By the way. Give my regards to Yael. Tell her I'll amass the threads where she threatened anyone who wasn't an Obamite for her "hit list" of future bannings. You are ALL pathetic.

Now that is something to be shocked about.

So tell me, how did I shock you?

By posting a link to an article about Hillary? By supporting Obama? By moving on and not joining you and the others who are led around by the nose by the likes of blustery blunderbuss and dark shadows Cleric????


Nothing is every as bad as it seems or as good as it seems.

John Edwards is NOT perfect. And had he might have overtaken Obama if he hadn't voted for the IWR. in fact, if Edwards hadn't voted for the IWR, he most likely would have hammered both Hillary and Obama early in the year, and been the de-facto nominee.

Edwards was not able to overcome his early political mistakes and flaws. Not this time, not this year.

I was furious with Edwards for dropping out. I argued with those who apologized for him and excused him and they took offense as though they had been personally criticized or attacked.

As far as that goes, people seem to forget that I was the one (with some help from autorank and bluebear and others) who broke the Penn story wide open about Clinton, and criticized her campaign for months. Clinton supporters attacks me as the enemy of all things good and righteous for weeks and weeks. Those criticisms I made about Clinton were far harsher and pointed and damning than anything I have ever said about Obama. Of course, no Obama supporters use those to persuade Clinton supporters. That is odd. That can only be because this has become a good versus evil morality play for Obama supporters, not a rational political discussion. Smearing Clinton and lauding Obama in extreme and melodramatic terms is emotionally satisfying, and even though there are rational arguments to make against Clinton, and in favor of Obama, they are not used. Destroying the evil ones is the goal, not persuading friends and allies. That hurts the Obama campaign, it doesn't help it, and it hurts the party and the country. Yet we who are critical of this should be silent lest we offend some true believers or hurt their feelings?

I have not treated Obama any differently than I did Edwards or Clinton. I argue against a mindset of candidate loyalty and cult of personality no matter who the candidate is, and those loyal to the personality always feel "hurt" and "offended" and imagine that they are personally under attack. A certain amount of hero worship happens with every politician, unfortunately, and that is a serious barrier to intelligent conversation and critical thinking. I strongly believe that most of us who challenge the various cults of personality work very hard to say the things that we believe are important to say without personally attacking anyone. It is a very difficult task, because once a person "supports" a candidate - which really means give themselves over emotionally to the celebrity and personally identify with the celebrity - they become very intolerant of any hint of criticism, or even perceived disloyalty to the object of their affections, the personality in whom they have invested their personal hopes, dreams, and fears.

I haven't changed, and my message hasn't changed. What has changed is people's loyalties, which personality they now identify with. Obama has a stronger hold over people's emotions than any other candidate in recent memory, so we see the projection and defensiveness more than we have with other candidates. Obama supporters brag about his ability to do this to people in one context, then deny it in another. The difference is this - if one sees the candidate and everything he does as good, then anything can be said about him and supporters will tolerate it, or even celebrate it. If one refuses to see everything about the candidate and what they do as good, then the same observations or opinions will not be tolerated by Obama supporters. That is hero worship, and hero worship is a poor substitute for effective politics, and that means that all who sincerely care about the fortunes of the party are obligated to speak out against it when it grows to the point that it has with the Obama campaign.

The bitter resistance to any hint of criticism of Obama is a symptom of hero worship run amok, not a refutation of it as too many Obama supporters try to claim. Choosing to personally identify with a candidate to an extreme degree is the cause of then later feeling personally attacked when the candidate is criticized - it is not the fault of the critics.

You are well and truly Dick Cheney! (or Barbara Bush?)

Otherwise, why wouldn't you love all Democrats and all their actions?

:sarcasm:

I have this delusion I can't seem to shake - I think of our government as a representative democracy, view politicians as our representatives and not the other way around, think that we should support the greatest good for the greatest number rather than our personal preferences and choices, and think that politics is and always has been about power and economics.

It's pretty sad that on a progressive website, such a view is apparently not widely shared.

What you have said is very important stuff.

I can see now that it is o.k. to feel anger toward Edwards for dropping out. I know I felt the anger before, but it came with excuses because I liked him so much; his platform, and what I saw as genuinie and honest a personality one could hope to find in a candidate. I am angry that he quit. He quit me and my country. He quit us poor. He quit us who believed he was honest about taking our country from the jaws of the corporate-elite. I was at least a little blinded by my own hero worship of the human who is just a human like me.

Politicians are of course far from saintly. Some may be good politicians, good leaders, but they are just human like us. We have to accept them WITH all of their warts or we fall into a false belief of something that doesn't exist. If we believe them to be without fault then they will eventually have to fall from that altar and smash along with all our false hopes.

The personality worship we see happening here with Obama has taken on a life of its own. It is built on a manufactured personality and it is cult-like. It is the easy way out because it requires no real, hard work. The savior is counted on to do everything. The built up personality is accepted as real and takes the burden off of any nagging question of validity. When things get uncomfortable and faults show through, just look the other way and chant the mantras. Obama has hardly shown his warts. When they are revealed little by little, or in big revelations there will be a lot of confusion. As we have seen with the Wright episode for example, his most ardent supporters will find any way to excuse him for his lack of handling the situation in an honest way. If Obama crashes from the pedastal what can we expect from the ardent supporters who have invested so much emotion and hope in the great man?

I am not as good as some here at jumping into threads and trying to convert the converted. I just don't want to engage the lunacy. It gets nowhere. Criticism is met with clubs and pitchforks. I tend to nicely back down after offending. Sometimes that is best, because sometimes I may not be accurate in my assessments, or I wish to regain a kinder position. Sometimes I could be braver or invest more energy to make a valid point about my perceptions of the Obamaphenomenon.

You are correct in saying that Obama supporters could point out Clinton's deficiencies in a level-headed and straight-forward way and have plenty to discuss.

At least with Edwards he was open to criticism. He always admitted he wasn't perfect and he had made mistakes. But those admissions said a lot of good things about him. Those admissions were brave and came from a fair amount of wisdom. I don't see the same kind of character with Obama.

"I can see now that it is o.k. to feel anger toward Edwards for dropping out. I know I felt the anger before, but it came with excuses because I liked him so much; his platform, and what I saw as genuine and honest a personality one could hope to find in a candidate. I am angry that he quit. He quit me and my country. He quit us poor. He quit us who believed he was honest about taking our country from the jaws of the corporate-elite. I was at least a little blinded by my own hero worship of the human who is just a human like me."

Well said. Here is the deal - we can be angry and recognize his mistake, and still see that it is a forgivable mistake he made, although disappointing, because it is so much like the same mistakes we are all making all the time. We lack confidence in our convictions, we are afraid to swim against the current and take risks, we are unwilling to give up on "the way the game is played," and reluctant to challenge conventional wisdom. We keep hoping for an easier way out, keep hoping that things are not as bad as they seem, keep hoping that this won't require of us anything to dangerous or drastic.

Edwards had people like Trippi around him telling him about the "facts" and the "reality" and "practicality" and saying "it isn't so bad" and "we don't need to go down fighting" and all of that soothing (and deadly) stuff we all hear all of the time. When we start fighting back against the smug and smooth, arrogant and self-satisfied arguments from the know-it-alls among us, that will lead to having more access to the politicians. As it is, there is a palace guard of upscale "winners" - dominating bullies in the activist community (with a pleasant and winning exterior until you cross them or challenge them in any way, then the daggers come out)- who keep all of us in line and keep feeding us the sedatives of "going slow" and "being patient" and "taking baby steps" and "being practical and realistic" and "not getting too radical" and all of the rest of that discouraging and confusing crap.

The Democratic party and the liberal activist establishment have completely sold us out and I can prove that to the satisfaction of any open minded listener. They aren't kinda sorta on our side, are not "spineless," or any of the other excuses we give them. They are working against us, and "speaking truth to power" will never work. We need to speak the truth to the powerless, and hear the truth back from the powerless, acknowledge and face the truth about ourselves, and then take the powerful down.

I said this to someone here recently, and they responded with an expression of eternal and uncritical loyalty to the Democratic party based on a list of accomplishments by the party. Every single item on the list of 20 accomplishments - positive and important accomplishments - was from 40, 50, 60, and 70 years ago. There were no accomplishments listed from the last 40 years. That means that after 4 decades of the Democrats fighting for the people, we have now had 4 decades of the opposite of that: compromising, waffling, pandering, losing, betraying - according to the most zealous and loyal defenders of the party, by their own inadvertent admission.

frothing at the mouth...sputtering and word-smithing and trying your best to herd the cats so they won't leave you in your misery and move on to make a choice.

You are the master mixer of Kool-Aid, and have amassed a handful of followers.

Sad sad sad.

Ninga?

Are things that slow in GDP you have to come in here for converts?

Scram.

Isn't it amazing that the only alternative a person could imagine to a cult would be forming an opposing cult? The projection going on is fascinating to watch.

And now, time for a prayer according to the rite of the High Church of the Nobamans...

You have frothed and by that frothing gathered us, oh ClericJohnPreston our light and our lord; we, your small handful of faithful followers - weak and unworthy as we are - are here to do your bidding. We will no longer worship the Obama god, and come now to you on bended knee to swear our undying admiration and loyalty. The Obama god has been smitten and proven to be a false god, and you are now our salvation and our hope. We believe we will be changed by your presence. You are the one we have been waiting for and we are the you and you are the we. We are becoming the hope we wish to believe, and the change on the floor of the rest room. Guide us, oh wise one!

Oh please please please!!!

like the Cleric.

Good for you. You are now a member of his club.

Imagine that I am actually good natured and hold no animosity toward you - that I am a good and loyal friend. That really is the truth.

I expressed my opinion, the reservations and worries I have about some aspects of the Obama following. I don't want to attack or tear people down, and would not follow you around and judge or criticize you. But you are uncomfortable with the opinions some of us are expressing, and you drew first blood by telling us what is wrong with us, and by characterizing us - those who criticize the Obama campaign, or even merely fail to be enthusiastic and zealous about it - in various negative ways. So I responded - not with vicious attacks, but rather I poked fun a little bit at what I see as over the top zealotry, defensiveness and hyper-sensitivity, rather than to respond in kind.

What would you have us do? How can we restore communications with you? Must we be silent about what we see in the Obama phenomenon in order to get along with you and not be scolded and criticized and analyzed? I never said that you were this or that or named you or attacked you. You took what I was saying as though it were directed at you, when it wasn't, and then accused me of less than honorable motives. How should I respond to that?

You decided to take personal offense at criticisms of Obama, and then attacked those who would criticize Obama. No one decided to attack you. See the difference? Discuss this with respect and consideration, and I promise you that people will respond in the same way.

I may be wrong about what I see ion the Obama phenomenon. But I am being truthful and sincere about it, and I think I can make a good case to support the validity of my observations. I am not dreaming up clever things out of thin air for the purpose of hurting you.

going though the process of trying to make a choice.

You lurk to wait for that one word, that one opinion, that one article, that one link that PROVES to you that a once sane person has left the pool of indecision, the one you swim in as a shark.

It is uncalled for, and when someone like me has the gaul to call you on it, you try to laugh it off and you start all over again.


I care not to convert anyone.

Perhaps I should just dismiss the uncalled for personal attacks you level on those who differ from you, as cowardliness.

Goeth in peace before the multitude hordes of my Nobamans cometh to GDP to smite with sputtering words, all thoseth thateth don't quite "get it".

Harken ye of smallish mind, to those of your herd and leteth them knoweth that the wordsmiths are on the march. We are armed with only truth and reason as our weapons, yet being free thinkers, we are dangerous to the ones who cede all proportion and all individualism, to the cult of Obama.

Scrameth from this place of wordsmiths, lest we sputter in your general direction, and chase thee down with no more than our logic, which is death to mindlessly numb hordes, who seeketh conversion of our reason into drone-like liketh stupidity.

Out, out, I say. Go back from whence thou came unclean spirit.

Fine and busy!:hi: