HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » DavidL » Journal
Page: 1 2 Next »


Profile Information

Name: David
Gender: Male
Hometown: New England
Home country: USA
Current location: London, back next week to vote
Member since: Sun Aug 12, 2012, 07:20 AM
Number of posts: 384

About Me

Back in the UK, for a few days, back to the Boston area next week. Will vote in the USA, absentee or otherwise.

Journal Archives

5 Randomly selected posters voted to ban un-thinkable thoughts

Face it: we need about 2 out of 3 swing states to win this, and we might not get them all, it actually MIGHT happen that Obama loses, (no, I don't want this, but what if it happens, what do we, as progresisive Democrats do next?)

Do we have a plan?
A Jury voted 5-1 to hide this post on Sun Oct 21, 2012, 09:08 PM. Reason: This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See Community Standards.) When the original post in a discussion thread is hidden by Jury decision, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

Creative thinking is NOT allowed on DU. Five out of six posters voted to stop this, after only one anonymous person complained.

Of course, there's not a reasonable chance that Obama will lose, but there's a possibility that he will. Not a great possibility but a smal one. Evidently DU people don't want to think about that option, even before there is a small chance DU'ers might face that.
Either way, no one can discuss this on DU today....I chalk it up to emotions and love for Obama, bot some people simply don NOT want to discuss the possibility, so they make sure such discussion is banned from DU.

Thank you, DU, for such closed minded people who pay you all money and censor free thoughts. I will be SURE never to give you money, and be sure NOT to recommend this site to people who want to think openly......this is NOT the site for that, as 5 out of six so blatantly show us today.


Any of the "HIDE IT" posters want to have the guts to say why they voted to hide my thinking? I thought not!

A religion forum, and no mention of Billy Graham?

Billy Graham just endorsed Mitt Romney this week, they met and Billy gave his blessings, or whatever... he chose to stop intellectual warfare from Evangalical preachers against the cult of Mormonism.

GEEZE... one group of fantasy thinkers agrees NOT to wage a publicity campaign against another (non military) group of fantasy thinkers, both of whom have made billions of dollars over the past century convincing millions of Americans to give them, (one of the two) 10% of those millions' of Americans' income, TAX FREE!!!

Billy Graham, Mitt Romney, two VERY SUCCESSFUL religious leaders of MILLIONS OF FOLLOWERS in the USA, both claiming to be Christians, both claiming all sorts of fanciful stories about revelations, visions, feelings, moments, denials of temptations, and on and on and on.

So, does anyone know the net worth of Billy Graham, his ministries, or Mitt Romney, his ministries?

Mitt Romney vetoed over 800 bills while Governor of Massachusetts, almost ALL of them over-ridden by the legislature.

Just sayin...

Why did I throw THAT FACT in? Just saying, it only takes a few tens of thousands to to commit 10% of their income to Mitt Romney's church, which I see every day as I drive down state route #2 on Mass from Concord to Boston..I see that monstrosity of a church on the hill overlooking Boston, in Belmont or Arlington, (not sure which, Belmont, I think). And then I see Billy Graham billboards in NH, and CT and NY and NC, trying to convince me that the reason my life isn't right is because I haven't accepted Jesus as my Savior. It's either one form of guilt-tripping, or it's another... both of which don't really have anything to do with anything about me, but about taking my money.

That's what Billy Graham, and Republicanism and Mitt Romney are all about. Strange there's not a word of discussion of this bastardization of "religious" activity in America here on this liberal DU forum on "religion". Why so?

My First Day in CATHOLIC High School

Published on Oct 16, 2012 by Matt Koval
True story of how I tried to blend in as a Catholic school boy -- and didn't.

(David Corn, back in June, 2012) "A Case of Romnesia"

Mitt Romney has a history problem.

It's not only that past events and stances—say, his implementation of an Obamacare-like reform in Massachusetts, or his 1994 call for "full equality" for gay and lesbians—undermine his current efforts by calling into question his political integrity. Romney often distorts—or is detached from—significant realities of his personal past.

Voters and the media world received a glimpse of this last month when the Washington Post disclosed that Romney, while attending an elite prep school, once led a posse of schoolmates to assault a fellow student who was thought to be gay. Though the newspaper cited five sources, including several participants in the brutal episode, Romney, through a spokeswoman, claimed he had "no memory" of the matter. After the story appeared, Romney, still insisting not to recall the event, apologized for pranks that "might have gone too far." Yet his lack of recollection was tough to believe, especially given the searing memories the attack had left within others. More important, Romney's blank-out was in keeping with a pattern of selective and manipulative presentations of his past. He's not merely a flip-flopper; he's a self-revisionist.

I. The Father
Romney has a wonderfully colorful and much-storied family past. His great-great grandfather Miles Archibald Romney, an English carpenter, was one of the first Brits to convert to Mormonism. Following the call, Miles immigrated to Illinois. Three generations later—after plenty of family drama intertwined with the rise of the Mormon Church—the Romney family would yield George, Mitt's father. He would become an innovative auto executive, a well-regarded governor of Michigan (who in 1964 walked out of the Republican National Convention to protest nominee Barry Goldwater's opposition to civil rights legislation), and a presidential candidate.

Much much more good reading at:


Since this word will now be in every dictionary from this day forth, let's give credit to the guy who wrote so well about it back in June.

Here's why the polls are rigged, reasons you can relate to...

1) About 1 in 3 people who are registered to vote and voted in 2008 do NOT NOW have home land-line phones. These are the "likely voters", but two million people have gone from being 14 to being 18 between those years, almost ALL of them have cell phones!

2) Only some of those people with only cell phones answer calls from unknown numbers, (they are smart enough to wait for the message ...if there is one... and reply by calling back to a number they do not recognize), and no polls take call-backs.

3) People who have already voted don't bother with polls, they are NOT about to say that they are "undecided", or voting for Romney even if they already voted for Romney.. they simply won't answer, won't participate. So a few of the 25% Romney early voters don't reply to polls, figure that in, they don't bother to reply, which means about 1-3% of the total likely voters are actually early voters are not counted, since they don't answer polls. (This is kind of convoluted, but it says that Romney voters answer polls only because they haven't yet voted, and will vote for Romney about 80-90% of the time they say they will, otherwise they probably don't vote!).

4)Most Obama supporters don't get polled, they are already Democrats, already union members on some list somewhere, so their phone numbers are excluded from polling.

5) People between 18-30 and 55-90 who work on political campaigns are not likely to be home to be polled, and those between 18-30 are unlikely to be home to take a call between 9AM and 9 PM half the time. Those people have too busy a life to answer a poll, they are more likely to be Democrat, because of their age, more likely to vote Democrat, but just not answer home phones from people they don't know, or whose caller ID comes up "unknown" when pollsters call them when they are home. They just go out and vote for Obama someday before or on Nov 6th, and don't bother with calls from pollsters, or just hang up on them if they pick up when called.


ANY poll conducted by phone shows a distict REPUBLICAN/ROMNEY bias, since more people who are able to answer a poll are home alone with nothing else to do, are wiling to express their opinions, are NOT working for Romney or Obama or any Democrat or Republican,

The simple facts: people who poll either home or 2012 cell phones with caller ID, few of the caller ID phones, (most of America) will get polled accurately, and most of them are young, active, concerned people; people who don't want to reveal their identity, or who are too busy living, most likely Democrats, not fearful Republicans.

Conclusion: polling by phone is a dead statistical method in the USA, it simply is very Republican, (translate old, unsophisticalted phone type-totally-unsophisticated) biased.

How many people answer polls with wrong answers?

I got 3 calls this week. All computer polls.

I am a lifelong democrat in the Northeast USA.

I am in a state where Republicans and Democrats matter in the state House and Senate, and I never answer polls about them dishonstely.

But 3 computers in the last week, when I work for Obama and work for local legislators who are Democrats, and where I work for Warren, when I can, in Mass.

I gave up, I answered that I was voting for ROmney, NEVER would I do that!!!

But polls are so intrusive when they are simply computers.

OKAY, confess. How many of you did what I did, in order to get out the Dem vote for Obama?

I made my stat less Obama in computer polls, did you do the same?
I hope 10,ooo people polled did the same in 4 or 5 states.

Screw polls.

F*ck up your state polls, answer all polls, make Republicans look like they are winning your state. OH, NV, IA, NH, VA

Screw up the polls, by 1-2 %.......Make the Republicans spend money elsewhere.

Wholly Crap! - Atheism vs Theism

Poster's words:

Theists claim the high ground on issues of freedom, purpose, morality, compassion, responsibility and honesty.

Why I am no longer a Creationist

Why I am no longer a Creationist


Interesting Video series from a Canadian guy who calls himself "Atheistcoffee"

About atheistcoffee

I'm no longer a creationist or a Christian... these videos are some of the reasons why.

I don't really have anyone to talk to about this stuff because my family and friends are all fundamental Christians like I was.... so I thought this may be a good way to start discussions and be able to finally get it all out there.

Worth a look.

Let's face it, Democrats in the USA and religious folks in the USA..

not exactly compatible.

A recent survey indicated most Democrats were either non-religious, or very liberal Cathoic, a few liberal Protestant, mostly not true-believers in a god.

Unitarians, Catholics, non-believer/agnostics, (most of them not weekly church-goers). These are the people who actually vote; many of them don't go to a church every week, many of them go to church less than five times a year, all self-described as "liberal" or "progressive" and mostly vote Democratic.

One has to wonder why Catholics, Episcopalians, Unitarians, and some Congregationalists make up the majority of Democrats who claim a Christian religious affiliation. And over 60% of Jewish folks. and over 80% of Muslims choose Democrats on the ballot.

By contrast, most of all of the self-described 25% of Christians do describe themselves as "conservatives" and vote Republican.

Less than 40% of Jewish folks describe themselves as "conservative" and often vote Republican.

Is there a common theme? Is there a message from religions that translates into votes?
Go to Page: 1 2 Next »