To everyone complaining about all the Terri Shiavo threads...

[tuvor]

As long as bush wants to make this an issue, I'm afraid you'll just have to put up with it.

Don't blame the DUers who want to discuss it. Blame the one who never accepts responsibility.

[sniffa]

1. who's this now?

[Solar]

26. I have an idea

Perhaps we could make a seperate forum for all of these threads.


Just an idea :shrug:

[wryter2000]

2. It's about much, much more than this case

It's about an attack on abortion rights. It's about abuse of power. It's about Congress taking over the power of the courts. It's about saving Tom DeLay's ass. It's about distracting the sheeple from Boosh's disastrous Social Security plan. And of course, it's about the reichwing's massive hypocrisy.

We're not talking Laci Peterson here. We're talking about a rightwing power grab.

[Steel City Slim]

3. Which Are The Things We Should Be Talking About

[wryter2000]

10. Welcome, Slim

:hi:

[katsy]

4. Also...

It's about pushing through monkey boy's judicial nominations in an attempt to rid the world of "activist" judges.

[Merlot]

5. Agreed on all points!

[El Fuego]

17. EXACTLY. Very well said.

They are testing the waters for a major right-wing shift in judicial appointments and christian-right-pandering legislation. This is just the beginning.

[Steel City Slim]

6. Stop Following and Accept Responsibility

Which is exactly what the repubs want. We are allowing them to set our agenda for us. Have you ever read the book "A Nation of Sheep"? Well it's time for us to stop being sheep, to stop following and start leading.

And talk about responsibility. You're saying it's not the fault of the people who keep discussing it, it's George Bush's fault. How's that? Is he somehow forcing people to discuss it? No. The issue has been beat into the ground. It's time to move on.

[mondo joe]

7. This is the agenda because this is the issue NOW.

This issue is what we face NOW.

Of course we're talking about it.

It'll be time to move on when it's resolved.

[Steel City Slim]

19. Think

It is the agenda because the repubs have made it the agenda. It is the issue because the repubs have made it an issue. We do not HAVE to dance to the repubs song. We CAN think for ourselves. This is not an isolated matter. This happens everyday, everywhere. It is happening somewhere right now. And in reality, it is a private matter for the family, it is none of our business. If one of us are ever in the position of Terri's family, it will be a decision we will have to make on our own. Let's leave that poor family alone and move on to things that affect our country and the world. Things like the judges, the environment, the war. Things the repubs are trying to distract us from by making Terri an issue.

[LSK]

25. when will we start dictating the issues?????????

[tuvor]

14. I think he IS forcing people to talk about it.

He's the one who wants to prolong her life.

He's the ten-ton elephant in the small room. How're you NOT going to talk about what he does?

[Steel City Slim]

20. What Do You Mean Forcing?

Don't you have a mind of your own? Can't you think for yourself?

[seventythree]

8. yah, Pitt's post made me angry, too

As has been voiced before, the issues/ramifications in this one are BIG -- the passion against it huge -- I think Pitt doesn't know how to put the ear on the ground, and hear hoof beats, for us, in this.
Speaking of us, I have a burning question which I have not seen anyone really discuss on any of the Schiavo threads (other than to say a hand full were in the Mid East) -- not that I have read all of them -- WHERE IN THE HELL WERE OUR DEMOCRATS????? Unanimous in the Senate -- no discussion? 100 or so not present to vote in the House --last I looked nearly a split yeah/nay vote for those who did get their rumps to Washington. I wrote 2 reps (mine and a neighbor who voted "no" to thank him)and both my senators yesterday to ask -- where was my party? Is there a party out there somewhere that I used to belong to? If there is no difference between us and them on this issue, and increasingly on the choice issue, is it time for me to officially become an independent? While I can't hack the republicans at the national level, I could at my state level.

[wryter2000]

9. I'm not sure

How many Dems were actually involved? I'm not sure it was a huge number.

I do know that my personal (these days) barometer of the "new Democrats," DiFi, was pretty eloquent yesterday about how all this was a political ploy and a sop to the anti-choice types.

[seventythree]

12. The senate vote was by voice --

unanimous -- I have no idea how many Dems were there, either, but unanimous??? Not one 'Nay'? In the House it was about 50/50 with yeah's and nays from our dems -- something like 47/53 -- with the vast majority not voting, or there, presumably. So, it would seem, out of the entire party in Congress, you had 50 some who stood up to be counted against the debacle, outrageous in my mind. God bless those 50 something. They are the leaders of the party -- the rest can go to hell unless they have a good excuse, like Pelosi being in the Mid East, imo. I read where one dem said on condition of anonymity that the dems were scared of this issue -- scared of how it would be used -- just tells you what wimps they are -- concerned more about an election than doing what is right (had the same problem with the Iraq war) and most importantly, perhaps, are soooo out of touch with their constituents, that they didn't see that their objection would be a good, political thing.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

15. There was one Dem Senator and Two Repug Senators

That's right it was a total of THREE! They were Harkin(D), Frist(R)and Santorum(R).

[seventythree]

16. Yah, what the hell happened to Harkin?

[gnofg]

13. Will Pitt

rules

[WilliamPitt]

22. *groan*

The idea that this issue can be discussed in detail and at length without 80% of the site being filled with Schiavo threads that get three posts and then drop is not meant to be offensive. I'm amazed at how many people are offended at the idea that 941 threads on one topic might be ruining the DU experience for a lot of people.

But whatever. When in Rome...

[seventythree]

28. I'm fairly new,

and it was only after your complaint that I went about trying to figure out how one could know how many threads there were on a subject. As a newcomer, and this may go to the DU experience for them, at least, I check in, scroll the items on the first page, check to see if anyone has posted a reply, check out the greatest page, check out the latest page, check my state forum and a couple others I have marked, and leave. This works for my time constraints.

I have another forum on which I discuss politics, which is not nearly as intricate in design as this one, so I have had to learn new things. There are some functions I still don't understand -- like if I respond to a thread that has been out there a while, does my reply even hit the other person's post box? I've never received a response on any of the older threads I've posted to -- which leads me to think that posting to an older Schiavo thread would be tantamount to talking to myself. See why I like new?

In a broader, more theoretical sense, it just seems gnarly to tell people that they shouldn't start any thread that they so desire because others already have, unless it some how gums up the technical mechanism of the forum, and it doesn't appear to do that. I try to read a thread's posts before I post -- and unless the thread is fairly fresh, it becomes too time consuming -- witness the Gannon threads. It took mega time to get up to wrinkle #4.

Finally, I have yet to start my own thread, here, and now you have made me think that I need to check out all the other ones on a subject -- 941 of them in the instant case -- and be sure I haven't repeated something -- topic or comment, not doubt. I know you know the concept of "chilling" free speech -- and although your words don't constitute government action, my lips are a bit blue.

[Lautremont]

11. I agree it's an important issue and should be discussed.

My complaint (a minor one, to be sure) is that everybody seems to be posting their thoughts as they occur to them, making new threads willy-nilly without making the slightest effort to see if their comment might fit comfortably into one of the 1,678 other threads on the matter. There's lots of emotional grandstanding, and the net result is like one of those dreams where you run and run but never get anywhere.

Concentrate your passion just a little bit is all I'm saying.

[LSK]

21. i disagree, i think this is a right wing distraction

Bush loves that everyone is talking about this issue and is not paying attention to issues like the economy (GM laying off 14000 workers) or Iraq. It is a distraction technique from Bush & Co and we keep falling for it.

[Steel City Slim]

23. Exactly

Thank you.

[libodem]

18. damn, someone is twisting my arm up behind my back, again

ouch, ouch, notice he's not sitting at the bedside of a wounded Iraqi child, he's not at the bedside of an American serviceman with a closed head injury, there is no real compassion...it's a promotion to keep the lines divided, the life preservers v.s. the life destroyers just keep making those liberals look evil

[birdydem]

24. this Schiavo case is a prime example

of how far the neocons are willing to go to hi-jack our country and constitution.

[OneTwentyoNine]

27. Take a stand against these Nazi's NOW or don't take any stand...n/t