I am starting to get REALLY PISSED OFF.

[Tyler Durden]

I have refrained from the "DLC/DNC" who-shot-john who is more liberal/centrist/whateverist for long enough.

I am, as I have said many times, a dedicated Socialist who believes that ANY success of the Bush Cabal helps to lead to the destruction of the Republic.

That said, I am backing the candidate who I feel represents enough of the Democratic Party ideals while remaining a candidate who can easily and handily beat the living SHIT out of Bush (as this election is much to important to risk). That man is Wesley Clark. ANY of the other candidates would make an adequate VP, although Dean and Kucinich top my short list.

That said, DO NOT trash talk Clark and expect to remain off MY shit list. Feel free to electioneer for your favorite, but anyone playing this LOSER'S GAME OF FUCK THE OTHER GUY'S CANDIDATE can expect no support and in fact, opposition from me.

I don't need this herd of cats, I NEED the Republic to stand for me and my children and this piss on the other guy serves no one.

Feel free to make me leave. I dare you.

[TennesseeWalker]

1. Actually, I agree with you about Clark.

He's the man. I've made up my mind. Been thinking about it a LOT. Clark can do it. He can get rid of Shrub...and make him go down HARD. It will take a lot of the crap republicans out of the way in the House and Senate, too.

Mark my words. Clark will have coattails.

Oh, and yep...the original poster didn't have to be so "snippy" about it. :)

[DEMActivist]

2. Plonk - you're gone now

Not because I don't like Clark, but because your attitude sucks.

Bye, bye....all gone now.

[Tyler Durden]

5. I've liked your posts in the past...

...but you're bucking for my first "ignore."

I'm not pissing on your "boy" whoever he is, I am stating that you piss on mine, don't expect me to be on your side.

REALLY. Aren't you a little fucking tired of this childish tattletail game of "who's more of a liberal/leftist/democrat?"

[Eloriel]

47. She probably is -- as am I

but I'll bet what she's even less tolerant of -- as am I -- is the kind of dukes up, belligerant, pugnacious, spoiling-for-a-fight attitude of your opening post.

And *I* rather take exception to the attitude that you don't give a damn about other candidates, it's all about YOUR candidate.

So, let me save you some time. Put me on ignore: FUCK CLARK.

YOU pushed me over THAT cliff, whereas I might not have even wandered in the vicinity were it not for your own really ugly attitude and tone. Great way to win friends and influence people, Tyler.

(You're for Clark and you call yourself a socialist? Ewwwww.)

Eloriel

[bearfartinthewoods]

80. clue1.....

lay off posting macho, profanity laden threat threads and you might find people are more inclined to hear what you are trying to say.

clue2...there are those among us who, when presented with a line in the sand and a dare to cross it....will do just that, just for the hellovit. :evil grin:

[Ohio Dem]

8. So, you LIKE the idea of bashing Democratic candidates?

That's interesting.

[Pepperbelly]

14. Whatever ...

but this baseless bashing is bullshit and whether you like to hear it or not, that is exactly what it is and I, too, am pretty fucking tired of it. If these folk cannot act their age, then Tyler is exactly right.

Ignore me too, for all I care.

[SnohoDem]

43. His attitude doesn't suck

He's shooting for consensus and victory without a circular firing squad.

[Tyler Durden]

48. THANK YOU!

Another person who "gets the message."

What's with these people anyway?

[ibegurpard]

3. Welcome to the rest of our worlds.

:hi:

[liberalhistorian]

7. LOL!

Actually, I'm thrilled to death that Clark finally announced, I think just the thought of him as a candidate makes Rove and Company shit in their pants. Besides, Clark is my mother's maiden name, so she gets a kick out of it as well (well, she does support him for more substantial reasons as well, lol!)

[Ohio Dem]

4. All the candidate bashing is bullshit.

Clark, Dean, Kucinich, whomever. I don't like bashing.

"Feel free to electioneer for your favorite, but anyone playing this LOSER'S GAME OF FUCK THE OTHER GUY'S CANDIDATE can expect no support and in fact, opposition from me."

Yep. I'm not a Clark guy (I don't think there's anything wrong with him, but I'm undecided - Clark is third or fourth right now), but I won't bash him, and I don't want to see him or any of the other candidates bashed.

Bashing helps the terrorists. Bush and Cheney.

[Tyler Durden]

9. AMEN and HOORAH.

It's about fucking time we STOPPED trying to fuck each other and started figuring out the best way to FUCK BUSH.

Just for you, I'll root for Ohio State, and I went to U of M!

[Ohio Dem]

22. LOL. Don't get carried away.

I expect Michigan fans to root for their team, and that includes hating OSU. Michigan fans are supposed to hate OSU. But if it's a nonconference game, feel free. I rooted for UM over ND the other day.

The important thing here is that bashing candidates does nothing to improve the debate. All you DU'ers remember what debate is, right? Debate does not equal bashing. Quit playing Republican games and tell me, the undecided voter, why I should support your candidate. You can't do that by bashing another candidate.

I'll support whatever Democrat gains the nomination, but I have a primary vote to cast. I'm leaning towards two of the candidates right now, but I haven't made up my mind. I will say, though, that when DU'ers bash, I lose interest very quickly in the discussion and walk away with a bad taste in my mouth. And I don't forget who put it there - the bashers. If you have a candidate's pic in your avatar and bash, I blame it on your candidate because bashing is obviously the only way you think you can score points. Isn't there anything good about your candidate? Then why don't you just say what it is? Why bash another?

Bashing is a Republican strategy. And I don't like it.

[janekat]

42. I agree - I don't like the politics of personal destruction

btw - I went to Michigan and don't hate Ohio State. I always thought we had more of a good-natured rivalry with them.

[Ohio Dem]

46. I think that's right.

A good natured rivalry. That's right. No real hate and a helluva lot of respect. I'm in the market for a Bo bobbly head doll for my collection. Why? If you understand the OSU-UM rivalry, you don't have to ask.

Also you are correct in calling what we're seeing "the politics of personal distruction." It's disgusting.

[watercolors]

82. right on!

I hate all the bashing, I won't get involved in it. AS adults we should learn all we can about each canidate and how they measure up to what we believe and quietly make our choice! In the end we hopefully will all vote the party's canidate and kick out this evil empire. I don't believe the posts who say this bashing is good and we learn from it, its childish.

[Systematic Chaos]

6. Who said anything about leaving?

I agree with you 100% that the negativity around here needs to be toned down more than a little bit.

There are several candidates whom I have a good deal of respect for, and then there are those that - IMO - would be little more than the lesser of two evils between themselves and Shrub. That said, I really think the candidate bashing should be dropped in favor of rational discussions of the issues at hand. But, what do I know? :shrug:


edited for clarity

[Tyler Durden]

13. Yeah, this "I won't vote for ____, NYAH NYAH" is bullshit.

I'm so sick of it that I've bought property in Canada.

Clark gives me just a little hope, though.

[IranianDemocrat]

10. I'm right behind you bro.

;-)

[Pastiche423]

11. Put me on your shit list

[Tyler Durden]

16. DISSENT is FINE...

But don't PISS in my corn flakes and expect me to stick around for breakfast.

I said, Don't throw stones at ME, and I won't reciprocate. But you can be ignored if that's your gig.

4 months from now is the first primary. Time to act like the Grown Ups as opposed to the children running the show now.

[KT2000]

12. Agree!

All the RNC has to do is look at this site for ammunition. Look at how much we are saving them in Opposition Research.

So much is at stake in this election, but it looks like Dems will bloody their own candidates before the Repubs get there.

Personally, I am excited anbout Clark and the sheer intelligence he brings to the election. But the more all the candidates are able to have their voices heard - the better for all the Dems.

Four more years of Bush and America as we knew it is no more.

[LastDemInIdaho]

15. Sorry dude, I don't like Clark

No self-minded dedicated socialist would support a republic. A democracy maybe, but not a republic.

[Tyler Durden]

19. So, Don't like Clark.

Just let's stop pissing on each other's boy.

And as to Socialists, even a Republic beats Anarchy. ESPECIALLY anarchy packing "usable Nukes."

[LastDemInIdaho]

23. I ain't pissed on Clark

Yet.

[Tyler Durden]

27. Soooo, DON'T.

Tout your boy/girl. Say POSITIVE things about them.

I say it's time to stop demonizing each other. We've run out of time. Bush could have USABLE NUKES BEFORE THE FUCKING ELECTION. Time to take this child's toys away.

Seriously, if Dean is the man, I'll vote for him, and I won't say ONE DAMNED THING AGAINST HIM.

[He loved Big Brother]

17. If some of the candidates had spent half as much time bashing Bush

as they have their fellow Democratic candidates, we would be in a smaller heap of trouble, I think.

[Ohio Dem]

33. That's a good point.

But they are running against each other, so I expect a little of the "I'm a better candidate than so-and-so" talk.

Just as long as none of the Dem candidates resorts to the sort of bullshit Bush pulled on McCain, then I'm happy.

But it's exactly that kind of bullshit that I'm seeing here on DU. That bothers me.

[efhmc]

18. Totally off suject. .Where are from that you use the phrase "who shot

john"?

[Tyler Durden]

21. Michigan

But we said it in the US Navy, too.

[Rex]

20. Are you crazy? I know you're not new to GD!

Telling people to stop bashing is like saying the 1st Amendment is just bunk. I agree it is not productive (well most of it), but you can't really expect people to keep their mouths shut. That's crazy talk!

[Tyler Durden]

24. Who asked anyone to shut up?

My point is to have REAL DEBATE now, because it's only 4 months to the first primary.

And if you think that's a long time, you must be under 25. Us 50 plus folks see that as an eyeblink.

[Rex]

31. Not there yet, only 32

GD is like an untamed jungle - how many times have you had a real debate in an untamed jungle? It would be refreshing to see FWIW.

[Ohio Dem]

26. I don't want people to stop talking.

I would like to read some good debates here. I don't think every fucking thread about a candidate should turn into a bashing.

Republicans run negative campaigns because they have nothing positive to say about their own candidates. We really need to stop acting like Republicans.

[liberalmuse]

25. I so agree!

I'm tired of all the candidate bashing too. It's so Rove-like. There have been some ugly, unfounded accusations tossed out here in an attempt to discredit respectable men. Shame! We're lucky we have the high caliber of candidates we do. My god, I'd love to see a Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean ticket because 'The Doctor and The General', or vice-versa would be made into a cool slogan. I will support ABB in the elections. Sometimes we need to be reminded that any one of our Dem candidates is a thousand-times better than the bush. Bashing a candidate others feel passionately about is futile, and may do your own candidate harm in the long run.

[eleny]

28. Clark's assertion that gov't should be transparent...

is one heck of a tall order for a candidate. Can you imagine being held to that standard? Talk about elevating the atmosphere! Makes me fear for his life.

Moving along - I'm a Clark supporter. The rapid fire q&a segment on Hardball this evening had my jaw dropping. Every politician will be judged by how Clark quickly answered each question. This comes on the heels of Grahamn's recent straightforward "Yes" answer to the question about if Bush lied to get us into war.

There's been a paradigm shift. No hemming and hawing or equivocating will be acceptable. Even if it's not said out loud, I can just hear the thoughts of any interviewer - ~"But Clark gave me a straight answer. Why can't you?"~

[Tyler Durden]

29. Wouldn't THAT be a GAS???

And can you think of anyone better than a soldier to dodge bullets or brickbats?

I think this guy's got LEGS.

[eleny]

37. Yes, he's got legs...

and they're not weaving and bobbing nor setting up the rope-a-dope. They're firmly planted and centered. Even when he's not ready to talk about something - he says so and promises to get back and address it. Flat out and confident.

I've gone from hopeless to bursting with confidence about the country. Did you see Katrina vanden Huevel do an about face regarding Clark tonight? (No pun intended - really.) She sounded like a different person from the one who wrote the less than positive editorial about Clark. Maybe she got sat down hard by Ms. Nagler's heart felt letter. Katrina spun around like a top and was almost purring over Clark's candidacy. It was nice!

I'm also wild about almost every other Dem candidate. Each can really hold their own. We've got a lot to be proud of these days.

[no name no slogan]

30. Well, better than being "PISSED ON" (n/t)

[Sterling]

32. Maybe you joined the cult

but don't expect me to drink the coolaid.

I think we need to scrutinize all the candidates. I want to know the good things as well as the bad things.

[Tyler Durden]

35. And I HAVE.

For more than a Year now. Time to join forces and stop giving ammo to the enemy.

[CWebster]

55. there it is right there

No way am I going to fall in line behind your general and salute just because you demand it.

This is most definitely NOT the spirit of militarism or tone of implied taboo I anticipate for the future of the Left.

[Tyler Durden]

62. NOBODY asked you to.

You are not listening. I ask for you to tell me WHY I should vote for your guy, but you just tear down. Nobody even asked you to support Clark. I asked you to stop infighting. Is this fun for you ?

[indigo32]

44. First off

nobody here is in a damn cult that I'm aware of. That's bullshit... and I don't even support Clark... though I like him.

[Terwilliger]

34. How does Clark represent "Socialist" values?

:shrug:

[Tyler Durden]

36. He DOESN'T.

IMHOP NOBODY running on our side does.

But compared to BUSH, Wesley Clark is Leon Trotsky. AND I think he can win and do SOME good.

[Brucey]

38. Tough call,

There is a fine line between bashing and discussing... I don't like the negative stuff, but even more important is upholding people's rights to say what they think. I want to know what people are thinking. It's not going to have any effect on any caucus or primary what we say here. But, you said what you think, and I appreciate that. I like candor much more than censorship. I will support any of the candidates, but will argue in favor of some rather than others. I have written some criticism of Joe, but don't feel I was bashing. Someone else may have taken it that way. But isn't it better to know what everyone thinks?

[Pepperbelly]

40. the dif is ...

when people resort to dishonesty to further their smears. That is what is unacceptable and there are several posting here who are, to be kind, teetering on the edge of totally losing their personal integrity in order to further something that is simply not worth the sacrifice.

It is demonstrating clearly whose opinions are considered and whose are the product of someone who will say anything to make an ideological point.

[Pepperbelly]

39. criticism is one thing but ...

intellectual dishonesty is another. Criticism is fine. Lies are not. Quoting someone and holding them responsible for their words is one things, pulling things out of context is another.

And that is what pisses me off is the absolute lack of integrity evidenced by some of the posts I have seen here the last two days.

All that does it make one a lying liar who tells lies.

If you're okay with being a lying liar, then go for it but do not expect lies to be treated with anything other than contempt and derision.

[deek]

41. YAWN

Where's the smilie for this?

[Tyler Durden]

52. What's with the YAWN?

" Dare to Dream. Together we can change the course of history." ?

Doesn't sound boring to me. We are on the same team; we just might like different captains.

[CWebster]

56. Interesting how the clarkies spent all day yesterday bashing

but now have adopted a new tact of projecting the accusation on others who dared to challenge them.

Your tactics are transparent.

[Tyler Durden]

63. And the "clarkies" that bash are ASSHOLES TOO.

I haven't bashed ANYONE as I consider Party infighting as Counterrevolutionary. I display no "tactics" here: I suggest honest debate, which you aren't doing.

[deek]

95. I was merely implementing a suggestion

to YAWN when DUers engaged in bashing

[tom_paine]

45. Nicely said, Tyler

As a dedicated believer in Capitalism (a smart, well-regulated capitalism, not Crony Capitalism a la Busheviks, Marcos, Pinochet and the rest), I couldn't agree more.

We have some damned good candidates in there.

We all NEED a functioning Republic. Peace and prosperity. The Good Life.

And I wonder how much this firefight is Uncle Rove's Brownshirts' doing.

I always see people like you and me...old-time DUers..speaking the voice of sanity. And yet it goes on.

[w4rma]

49. I'll second what tom_paine said. (n/t)

[ProfessorGAC]

74. Good Post Tom. I'll Go Along With That POV

The Professor

[davhill]

50. Democrats need to fight

When a party rally's behind a single predetermined candidate we end up with an abomination like Bush. Candidates need to attack each other so primary voters can diferentiate between them. After a nominee is chosen, then we can unite behind him or her. Right now we are in a selection process, and if it get ugly, it least it gets interesting. I don't see anybody being so put off by attacks on their favorite that they would vote for Bush in the general election. There may be some who take their marbles and go home by not showing up on election day, but they didn't understand the process anyway,

[CWebster]

57. you called it

final word for these juvenile crybabies who come out of nowhere swinging and then whimper when everyone doesn't just roll-over.

[Tyler Durden]

67. Name calling, misrepresentation of position.

DEBATE. Don't berate. And your name calling does nothing for your position.

[CWebster]

51. Really...

And exactly HOW MUCH DO YOU KNOW ABOUT HIM and where he stands since he decided to declare himself a Democrat last week?

goodgawdalmighty it never ceases to amaze me, the gullibility of people who so easily walk into marketing traps over and over and over again.

I have made no secret of my disdain for Kerry, but he is by far the better Democrat when compared Clark, shining knight of the hour- all spin, no substance. And how amusing that all these born-agains buying the Clark image, suddenly demand everyone not bash their idol.

Then again, never been one to get caught up in teen spirit at the latest psych-ops astroturfed, made for prime time, centrist-funded jump-on-the-bandwagon pep rally.

Get a damn clue and on guarde!

[Tyler Durden]

53. Thanks for proving my point.

The majority of what you said is largely poisoning the well (a rePuke specialty they never practice in house, but WE DO), but as to "centrist funded"? I would think your centrist conspiracy could come up with one HELL of a lot more than $1 million (about 1/10 of another candidate who shall remain nameless per my own policy) since the committees to draft started up months ago.

And I have been watching Clark since NATO and Kosovo. I think you are wrong, so why don't you tout YOUR "boy?" but don't count on me to piss on him, as if he gets nominated, you can count on me to vote for him.

[CWebster]

54. And what point is that?

It is you who call yourself a socialist only to line up behind the establishment pick, deliberately positioned to stem the rising tide of the energized base with a poll-tested packaged candidate to maintain the status quo.

Yet, you, who came out with your arms swinging, and your fists clenched, demanded that we adhere to the game by your rules and stifle dissent --or even outrage, in the spirit of standing shoulder to shoulder you're either with us or against us, hands off criticizing the man.

Give us a break, we haven't been expressing outrage since 2000 only to fall in line now for the team that done brough us here.

You need to get yourself up to speed. FAST.

[Tyler Durden]

60. That you throw brickbats with no proof...

I've been expressing outrage since 1970, and studying history since 1965. I learned debate in 1967 and you aren't practicing it.

MISREPRESENTATION

"Yet, you, who came out with your arms swinging, and your fists clenched, demanded that we adhere to the game by your rules and stifle dissent --or even outrage, in the spirit of standing shoulder to shoulder you're either with us or against us, hands off criticizing the man."

You claim I define rules, which I don't. I suggest solidarity through non-violence (vitriol) toward fellow Democratic Party candidates. You reserve the right to negative campaigning within the party.


BANDWAGONING AND LACK OF EVIDENCE

"Give us a break, we haven't been expressing outrage since 2000 only to fall in line now for the team that done brough us here."

You claim the majority wishes to express their outrage via party infighting, yet more than 50% of the posters on this thread seem to agree that this is counterproductive. I don't see your "WE".

Also, your "team that done brough (sic) us here." is without foundation I don't see where your conspiracy has been demonstrated, especially since you claim they back certain people, yet their funding is not in place ($1 million: Clark, now more than $10 million: ____).

You aren't making points: you're just venting and yelling. Show me where YOUR candidate is BETTER and stop the infighting.

[CWebster]

69. No need to list your creds as a substitute

or a means of accusation.

Of course you are defining the rules---you demand cover for your guy by suddenly demanding on a Left-leaning political activist web site that no one engage in bashing. Well, that is rather arbitrary, except what is implied is that you want no criticism of your chosen one. The fact that you claim to have been following him since the moment he was conceived is meaningless to those of us who watched him as just another retired armchair general with measured words while we were out on the streets being accused of being unpatriotic socialists. Let's get real, socialist, the guy decided what party he wanted to be in days ago.

Don't expect us to bow down and kiss his boot or fall in line and stifle legitimate criticism and debate under the festering illusion of greter civility.

[Tyler Durden]

75. Your are STILL not debating.

I define no rules: I stand up for party solidarity. I do not reserve the right, even for myself, to cause the party harm through negative campaigning.

You are continuing to name call and poison wells:
"...just another retired armchair general with measured words while we were out on the streets being accused of being unpatriotic socialists."

The candidate in question never called anyone an "unpatriotic socialist."

You continue to use irrelevancies as some sort of evidence of wrongoing:
"Let's get real, socialist, the guy decided what party he wanted to be in days ago."

I personally don't care if he is running on the "Bullmoose Party." Independents and non-party people do not get elected in this day and age, so your argument is moot.

You continue to misrepresent my argument:
" Don't expect us to bow down and kiss his boot or fall in line and stifle legitimate criticism and debate under the festering illusion of greter civility."

No one asked you to do anything but state the positives of YOUR CANDIDATE, something you have yet to do. All you're doing here is being negative and claiming your right to be so: pointless.

I repeat: DEBATE, don't BERATE.

[CWebster]

78. it's too easy Tyler

Party solidarity on your terms? What's negative? These are arbitrary, but you are assuming the final word. Sorry, no.

Now you are creating a diversion---I never stated that your candidate made that accusation, I am saying that while we took a stand and were charged with being unpatriotic, he took the safe road. I prefer the candiate to speak up and out when the times call for the voice- rather than always take the safe road. General or no.

The fact that he decided days ago what his party affiliation was IS most relevant in my estimation - and I would think with most people on this board as well, since we define ourselves by our political positions on the issues. It is not rocket science.

Tell that to Ralph Nader.

Again, it is you has leveled the charge "negative". Hey, I might happen to think your demand that we all adhere to your self-interested policy as negative.

[Tyler Durden]

83. You are STILL not debating.

What's negative? You sound like you are asking someone to define "IS." I have no final word: that is the working definition of "solidarity": we all stand together against the ENEMY; Bush.

We define ourselves by our convictions and our views. If the Democratic Party came out today and espoused the Republican Platform and vice versa, I re-register TOMORROW.

I suggest no "Policy," I REQUEST DEBATE, which you still aren't giving me.

CONVINCE ME. Tout your candidate. Show me.

[library_max]

94. Tyler, you're right

but you're never going to get anywhere in this exchange. You want to talk about things that are positive and constructive, Webster wants to trash and insult. And, it being a free country and a free board, nothing stops him from continuing to do so.

[Art_from_Ark]

71. I would like to add, what sort of "dues" has Clark paid

to the Democratic Party? By that I mean, how, besides words, has he shown his commitments to Democratic principles in tangible, meaningful ways? With the exception of Sharpton, all of the other candidates, including Lieberman, have held public, elected office and thus have had to show their commitments in a very tangible manner. Clark has never had to do that, and it was only "just yesterday" that he actually came out as a "Democrat". In 2002, he was asked to run for governor of Arkansas, as a Democrat, and yet he would not state party preference, and stayed on the sidelines as Reverend Huckabee won a second term.

I would also like to ask this-- when was the last time that a Democratic candidate came out of the blue, with no political experience or active work for the Democratic Party, and won both the nomination AND the Presidency? One would have to go back a loooong way to find someone who fits the bill. Certainly no Democratic President in the 20th century was a political neophyte-- every one had held public office before:

Woodrow Wilson-- governor of New Jersey
Franklin Roosevelt-- governor of New York
Harry Truman-- Senator from Missouri, Vice President
John Kennedy-- Senator from Massachusetts
Lyndon Johnson-- Senator from Texas, Vice President
Jimmy Carter-- governor of Georgia
Bill Clinton-- governor of Arkansas

[Walt Starr]

58. I'm not trash talking any of them any more

The General is most likely to win, IMO, and then he and whomever is chosen as veep will trounce the hell out of Whistle Ass.

Ya know, when the SCOTUS determined a Dick and a Bush should be in the White House, the American people were bound to get fucked.

[CWebster]

59. And when the DLC decides?

Walt?

[Walt Starr]

61. The DLC is irrelevant

They have no real power any longer.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

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

[Tyler Durden]

66. Infighting, Single word flaming, etc.

The tactics of inferior debate.

Make your case, or make a case for your candidate. You are coming very close to a personal attack with your latest comment.

[Terwilliger]

70. I'll make the case

Wesley Clark is the DLC candidate. The DLC has nearly destroyed the Democratic party

therefore

ie

in lieu

Wesley Clark will be the destruction of the Democratic party

have a nice day

[Tyler Durden]

76. Poisoning the well, non quid pro quo.

You don't debate either. No evidence given, and your premise has no visible support.And as to the destruction of the party, I'm more worried about the destruction of the Republic and Civilization if the Bush Cabal remains in power, especially now with "USABLE NUKES."

[Terwilliger]

92. what evidence do you need?

Freaking Hill and Billary are all over Clark like white on rice. Hill and Billary are two of the founders of the DLC...the organization that was convinced that the Democratic party should shift its core values to the center in order to start winning again...although they've lost just about everything. If Clark is not the DLC choice, who is? Dean? Graham?

If you're worried about the destruction of the Republic, then you should stop enabling the folks that allowed Dim-twit Chimpster in the White House in the first place.

[CWebster]

72. Based on Walt's past stand

he knows exactly where I was coming from.

[Tyler Durden]

77. I'm not defending Walt.

I'm continuing to document your failure to debate.

Tout your "boy." Make ME like him. Make OTHERS like him. Pissing on me or my "boy" accomplishes nothing and is not debate.

[Tyler Durden]

65. Thank you, Walt.

I haven't heard the "DLC" come out for Clark, and as far as the "DNC" is concerned, if you took all of them out of congress, we would halve the party.

The time for "trash talking" has long passed. 4 months until the primaries is an eyeblink.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

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

[einsteins stein]

73. Here's My Deal, Tyler

You seem to have your heart in the right place, unity, harmony, etc.

But you cross my bridge when you try to direct my speech.

So here's my deal - I'll go on saying whatever I feel is appropriate according to my own standards, and if I cross your bridge, you should ignore me. Don't threaten to ignore me, it just makes me get louder. And you, you go on saying whatever you feel is appropriate, by your own standards, and if I don't like it, I wont read it.

Is that fair enough for you?

This is primary season, and I'll trash and harumpf and needle all I wish. When its time to kick Bush ass, I'll be there, right nexst to you, I'm sure, on the front lines, voting for the Dem candidate.

In the mean time, I have no intention of giving up my right to talk shit about Joe Lieberman. Does that bug you? If it doesn't bug you, then you need to look at your intent....are you interested in Dems getting along, or do you want to build a shield around your own candidate?

Yeah, we're on the same team, but that doesn't mean we will always agree. Let's leave the squelching of expression to the Repukes, and stand behind the committment to free speech and passionate debate that makes the Dem party rock in the first place.

'cause it really is a beautiful world :-)

[library_max]

93. The two problems with that

are, first, we give the enemy ammunition to fire back at us (you don't think Republican operatives read these threads from time to time?) and, second, some of us paint ourselves into a corner where supporting the eventual nominee means eating too much pride and too many harsh words.

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

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

[Tyler Durden]

84. Name calling/insults: Nobody debates anymore.

I assume that NEENER NEENER NEENER is legitimate political discourse now, right?

[WilliamPitt]

87. No.

[rman]

81. is this supposed to impress anyone?

"anyone playing this (GAME) can expect no support and in fact, opposition from me."

people disagree and oppose one another all the time. big deal.

"Feel free to make me leave. I dare you."

whoooo

Besides, most people here who trash Dem candidates, are freepers/disruptors. They won't shut up anyway.

[Tyler Durden]

90. Hey, I can TRY.

I used to write articles here. Notice I haven't done that lately, and it's not because I'm submitting and being refused: it's because it is all starting to look POINTLESS.

As to the freeper/disruptors accusation, lend me a tinfoil hat but I'm starting to believe it. Caesar made it most clear: divide and conquer.

[Blue_Chill]

85. Tyler don't get so mad bro

People are just doing what they always do in elections. The only worry is if this continues after Clark wins the nomination. }(

[WilliamPitt]

86. You move to the toxic waste part of town...

and you have to put up with...this.

:)

Hey, Tyler. Welcome to Fight Club.

[Tyler Durden]

91. The bruises and scars are getting thick, Will.

Somebody once told me that politics was a game for children and egomaniacs.

My ego is shrinking fast. When did this forum become the back door of some "SLATE" sleeze pit? That's why I left those boards behind.

[buddhamama]

88. i dare you

to come up with an original thought/argument that hasn't been posted here before 100 times or more.

i do not plan on trashing any candidate but this Protection of the candidates and sentimentality is getting old and annoying.

why bother coming to DU if you are not willing to discuss the issues or your candidate like an adult!?

feel free to put me on your shit list.

[cmd]

89. Hang in there, Tyler Durden

The Republic needs you, too.

[phegger]

96. Thanks Tyler!

I agree 100%, as it happens. Kudos to you. Don't leave.


-ph :toast: