From the left.... of the Democratic party.

[dave29]

This question (aka short novel) is not written out of spite, although it certainly could be with the animus percolating around the bubbling cauldron of DU. As I have stated many times before, I have gotten sucked into the angry back and forth on DU with more and more frequency in the last year. I have been here since 2002, and have watched the spectacle of other long time posters getting drawn into this and tombstoned while the flame wars persist, and grow. This was obvious to be the case with a Democratic President in power for the first time since DU's inception, however, there are factors that have made this worse than it needs to be, and addressing one of those is the point of this question.

In 2000, as a young man of 28, I voted, in Texas, for Ralph Nader. I was fresh off having just gotten married, and I distinctly remember one night staying up with my wife, and watching Nader accept the Green Party nomination on TV. We sat, awestruck, agreeing with every word that was coming out of his mouth. He spoke directly to my idealism, he was against corporate malfeasance, wanted stronger more vibrant communities, to stop our dependence on foreign oil, you name it, I agreed with it. And to this day, in spirit, still do with many of these concepts, if not on how to get there.

Having said that, I was, and am a Democrat. I supported Al Gore, and Bill Clinton before him... and virtuously saw my vote for Nader as a protest vote against what I thought were two parties that were marginally different, enough to make me only luke-warm in my support for Al Gore (who subsequently became a hero of mine post 2000, and whom I had supported because he was a firebrand for the environment). After Watching Bill Clinton go through impeachment, I was ready to throw my protest vote in the hopes of moving the country to the left. I figured, what the hell, I'm in Texas.

So I did.

But much changed for me in the 10 years following. This is not to say there is anything wrong with the Green Party or it's supporters, save some very real issues I have with it being reported on many ocassions -- a financial collaboration between Greens and the GOP to get on the ballot. I am not here to refight those battles from 2000, but I will say the second I saw Nader willing to accept GOP money, I was done with him.

Many circumstances, particularly health issues and especially the Presidency of George W Bush made me realize I was far left... but not that far left. I was on the far left of the Democratic Party.

I also gained valuable real-world experience working at a variety of jobs, and as such had to meet people of all types... from the ultra-wealthy, to military families, to self absorbed, if not well-intentioned Democrats whom I helped make a movie about Karl Rove with (the film did well, but it could have done so much better had those involved not been prima donas). One job, as an audio-visual technician at a Country Club/Conference Resort opened my eyes to the world of the haves and the have nots in a way I had not contemplated it previously. There were those that had inherited their money, and those that earned it, and a wide gap between the two in terms of personality. 90% of these folks were GOP, but it made me realize even the GOP was not a monolithic block of cave-dwellers. This is not to say I think they have any merit when it comes to political views, but it made me see a few of them, at least, as human beings rather than racist, homophobic trust fund babies.

In turn this made me think about the scope and breadth of the Democratic Party itself and just how diverse we are as a party, with all of our special interests and needs. This was a very important moment for me.

I joined the Democratic Underground in 2002 to talk with other Democrats and soak up like a sponge those elements I did not understand, and in time, became more of a "pragmatic idealist" because it was important to me to make what progress we can now, not completely tear down the system today. I came to see that concept as misguided at best, when I took into account the breadth and width of our party alone, and what it would take to enact actual change. I stayed away from the Nader/Gore flame fests, as best I could, only recently chiming in here and there as my view on the differences between the GOP and the Democratic Party have changed dramatically... and I perceived that Greens on the board were starting to become more of a disruptive force. A very important note... I came to DU specifically because I wanted to be amongst Democrats working towards goals in the party platform, not to discuss with Greens how to rock the boat, or be told that I had to.

And yesterday, as I sat arguing with a self professed Green on the board whose only purpose in his three locked threads of the day was to disrupt... it hit me.

Why am I arguing with Green Voters at DU? I find it hard enough to try and wrestle with the ideologies ingrained in our own party than getting into pissing matches with someone who will absolutely never agree with me, and on top of that seems more content to inject very real hate in the direction of Democrats.

Suddenly in the last year I went from being regarded as progressive.. to an apologist, a corporatist, cheerleader, a troll, and a paid one at that, simply because I support our Democratic President. Not even on every subject. But the invective hurled against him at the site has been so demoralizing and anger inducing... It is EXTREMELY difficult not to fight back against that. In fact, as a Democrat, I feel I HAVE TO fight back against that. I am more than happy to do that with those who are Democrats, in good faith.

I think an honest accounting shows there have been a great many good discussions between Greens and Democrats at DU since it's inception. But an honest accounting of the last year alone would suggest the opposite is true. I do not think it has been helpful, or even useful to have members of the Green Party allowed to post here if their only intent is to disrupt, and many have shown that repeatedly. They are not Democrats, they do not agree with Democratic Party tactics in the least, and they are more than willing to stop "an otherwise thoughtful discussion" in order to stomp their feet at what a lot of them now see as their site.

There has been an aggressive and concerted effort to re-define what it means to be progressive, in my opinion, and it has not been helpful to Democratic causes.

I simply disagree that it is useful to the discourse here to have those that are vaguely aligned with us on the left (moreso in spirit than tactics), more than happy to demoralize us, confuse us, and call us out for being stupid... allowed to continue posting their invective against our party and it's members.

I am not calling for a change in the rules, but that will not stop me from saying, as many others have, that I would ask you with respect, to consider revisiting them. There are countless sites on the web for Progressives to organize. DU is one of them, but I fear the balance is being tipped too far in the direction of a Party that will actively work against Democrats of all stripes, given the opportunity.

If I could change the rules, it would be a simple change that stated this: criticism is allowed, all view points are accepted from the left... of the Democratic Party.

I know this will not stop the fighting, and that's a good thing. Fighting is healthy, to a point. But I feel we may be more apt to find common ground, when it's not being pulled out from beneath us time and time again.

I understand the value of "ignore" -- and I realize most likely any response to this will encourage my use of it.

But I hope you understand, I did not come here to ignore people. I came here to talk with Democrats. Disruptors are a fact of life on the intertubes, but why leave the door wide open to them?

So, after all that, my question is this: what is the reasoning behind allowing Green Party activists to post here at the Democratic Underground?


I leave with this food for thought:



http://articles.sfgate.com/2004-07-09/news/17435056_1_nader-voters-nader-s-campaign-presidential-candidate-ralph-nader

Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader -- still not on the ballot in a single state -- has received a recent windfall of contributions from deep-pocketed Republicans with a history of big contributions to the party, an analysis of federal records show.

Nearly one in 10 of Nader's major donors -- those writing checks of $1, 000 or more -- have given in recent months to the Bush-Cheney campaign, the latest documents show. GOP fund-raisers also have "bundled" contributions -- gathering hefty donations for maximum effect to help Nader, who has criticized the practice in the past.

The donations from wealthy Republicans -- combined with increasingly vocal Democratic charges that they represent a stealth GOP effort to wound Democrat John Kerry -- prompted Nader's vice presidential running mate, Green Party member Peter Camejo, to suggest the consumer advocate reject the money that doesn't come from loyal Nader voters.


http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/13/in-arizona-the-greens-see-red.html

Court hearings are scheduled today in Arizona to further explore allegations of voter fraud among the state’s Green Party candidates. The actions come just as a new group, Truth AZ (TruthAZ.com), has registered with the Arizona secretary of state as an independent expenditure committee in order to fight what it calls rampant corruption ahead of the upcoming elections.
The Green Party has tried to kick some candidates off its slate, alleging they were recruited by the state Republican Party to siphon votes from the Democrats. And a Truth AZ member and local business leader has released recorded phone conversations with potential Green Party candidates that appear to support the sham allegations. (Hear recordings of those calls on the Truth AZ site.)
The controversy has been roiling since a district-court judge last week ruled that nine people who are running on the Green Party line may have their names printed on ballots, despite complaints that they are sham candidates. However, legal teams can still submit more court filings contesting the validity of the candidates and asserting the rights of the Green Party.


http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/state/stories/060610dntexballot.243bca8.html



GOP consultant in Arizona pulls strings to get Green Party on Texas ballot
01:11 AM CDT on Sunday, June 6, 2010

By WAYNE SLATER / The Dallas Morning News
AUSTIN – The liberal Green Party's uphill battle to get on the Texas ballot this fall has been fueled by a surprising benefactor: an out-of-state Republican consultant with a history of helping conservative causes and GOP candidates.


If the state validates the petitions the consultant arranged for the party – for free – a Green Party slate could drain support from Democrat Bill White in his bid to oust Republican Gov. Rick Perry.

What's unknown is who paid for the previously undisclosed arrangement, pieced together by The Dallas Morning News . Green Party officials said they don't know who funded the effort. The Perry campaign denied any involvement. And Arizona Republican operative Tim Mooney, who set up the petition drive, refused to say.


http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/001256.php
Republicans Sponsor Green Candidate in PA Senate Race

It's worse than we knew. Is the Green Party candidacy in the race for Rick Santorum's seat a wholly Republican sponsored affair?

As reported today by the AP and the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Green Party managed to get their candidate Carl Romanelli on the ballot with a costly petition drive, which was mostly funded by contributors who had also given to Rick Santorum's campaign. The party raised $66,000 for the effort, all of which they spent on a private company to collect signatures. TPMmuckraker was able to establish that at least $55,000 of that came from conservatives.

Virginia Davis, Santorum's spokeswoman, told the Inquirer that their office had encouraged the contributions. Why? Because a challenge from the left is seen as a liability for the Dem candidate, Bob Casey.

[Skinner]

1. I think you have a point.

I don't have a problem with people criticizing President Obama. But if someone is trashing him here on DU, and that person has no intention of voting for him in the 2012 general election, I think it is a problem.

The http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html">DU Rules have said this for many years:

"Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office."

There it is, right there in black and white: "Members are expected ... to support Democratic candidates for political office." By posting on this site, everyone here agrees to these rules. We have enforced that section of the rules for as long as it has been in the rules, by deleting posts that advocate not voting for Democrats. But I am starting to think that we should be a lot more aggressive about enforcement.

[dave29]

2. Thank you

for looking at this, I appreciate the response.

-Dave

[dave29]

3. This is what I am talking about.

I'd like to follow up with a thread from today:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x8902#11059

Which includes a whole bunch of sentiments, a lot of them valid, and understandable, some of them clearly tin-foily. Mixed in the thread however are outright suggestions of giving up on the party. There are also a good number of posts from folks with fewer than 15-75 posts that seem to cheer on the giving up mentality.

This is exactly the stuff I am talking about. They are not just attacking Obama... they are attacking the party.

I understand this thread was more of a catharsis for those involved, but when these same folks turn around and start attacking everything being done from this same position, I feel this board has been allowed to drift from the very rule you underline. Should not these sentiments, if allowed, as they were in this thread, at the very least be relegated to the Lounge?


Quotes from the thread:

"Welcome to Reality...

The Democrats are NOT going to help us. They have proven since Obama was elected that they will tie themselves in knots to make sure they do not offend their corporate benefactors by helping the middle class.

I will say it one more time - THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DOES NOT GIVE A RAT'S ASS ABOUT YOU!!!!"

----

"I have firmly and totally moved into the camp of "let it crash" because this "reform" is

accomplishing nothing except continuing the problem because there is no "reform."

The DemoPub party is in control and will not allow any significant modification to the system they both have established.

My hope is that things get so bad that enough people get fed up enough to take action. And I think that is what will happen because those in charge are so removed from the reality that the 99% of us face and so god damned greedy that they cannot stop themselves from killing the golden goose. Once it is dead and those golden eggs stop landing in their lap, it will take a little time to bring them down. But it will happen.

All empires fall."


----

"Yes. I'm at the point where if someone starts whining about problems, I just ask:

who did you vote for? If they mention any repuke, then I just say, "Well, then you got what you wanted." and turn away."

Followed by the response:

"That's not what this OP is about.

Really, do you not see that? It's the same result either way."

Followed by:

That's the way I feel

"It feels like the dominoes are already set-up in advance for us. I won't stay home for the next election though and if there are no other options, then I'll just write in none-of-the-above as a protest vote"

----

"Oh, I care. Just not in a constructive way."

----

"We are all witnessing the

Decline of the American Empire. The wealthy are stealing whatever isn't nailed down. No one in DC cares about you or me. We're on our own.

I'm in Dumfukistan, the former state of Ohio, and just going out to do simple errands is a pain. Everyone is in a sour mood.

I just want to go into hiding.

I used to go from Anger to Despair. Now, I've reached Acceptance. It's over.

I actually hope that Canada buys Ohio, I mean Dumfukistan."

----

"we need a labor party; anything but this piece of shit we have"

----

" Me too. Been betrayed by too many elected officials.

About the only one we could trust, Grayson, is voted out come next year. So to hell with them."

----

"wow..... you just read my mind!

I am absolutely agree with you.
I don't like Republicans, but I have to admit that they are more united than the Democrat.
On the other hand, we had 60 seat in the Senate and 70+ in the house, but we couldn't even establish a proper health reform bill, instead we got this watered-down reform."

----

(small break to discuss how Al Franken is a sellout)

----

"The more things change....the more they stay the same...

It seems to me that the only meaningful change in the political atmosphere in this country will come, once again, at the point of a gun."

----

"I have resolved to push hard for a primary candidate to oppose Obama. I can't vote Republican. I can't vote Obama. It's quite dishearteneing."

----