Even if Cheney annihilated Edwards ,I still would have said Edward won!

[trumad]

What the fuck is wrong with some of you good Democrats! THIS IS FUCKING WAR! We are playing to a majority of people who wouldn't know a Senator from a Congressman! Moran America! The repukes have mastered the spin game for the last several years and have killed us with it..... It is just now that we are coming into our own and fighting back.

Perception, perception, perception.... After the presidential debate the poor repukes had a very very rough go of painting a pretty face on the Bush debacle but they did try! They always try because they know it works.

Oh but us Dems.... "Oh I said Edwards sucked because I'm a Democrat and us Democrats tell the truth"...Bwwwwwaaaa Bwwwwaaaaa Bwwwwaaaaa! Tell me something? what's more importnat...thousands more dead on the battlefields of Iraq or a little spin to help your candidate win? The draft coming back under a second term Bush presidency or a little helpful spin to help your candidate win? Deficits for your children's children or a little spin to help your candidate win. Peak Oil or a little Spin to help your candidate win? World domination or a little bit of spin to help your candidate win! What's more important?

This is clearly the most important election of our lifetime but yet we still want to pretend that we can play the game like years past. Al Gore lost because we allowed the Repukes to manipulate the media!

Don't you fucking people get it! Posting threads titled Cheney won the debate Or Edwards bunted to first is not the type of spin that we should be portraying here on DU. AND please, enough of this "Oh we're Democrats so we got to be honest" shit! If you have an urge to get on DU and knock down our candidate 28 days before the election, might I suggest that you think of the consequences of doing that. WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT?

[teach1st]

1. Truth and honest opinion are more important

Pack mentality and lies are what gets us into messes.

[MikeG]

11. You can't have an honest opinion if you think Cheney won.

He was awful.

[MercutioATC]

20. So opinions aren't allowed, now?

Excuse me, they're permitted if they agree with YOUR opinion.

Does that about sum it up?

[MikeG]

24. Some are more eager than others to say negative things about Dems.

Wonder why.

[MercutioATC]

30. That's always been a major weakness here, IMHO...

...the tendency to dismiss all contrary views as freeper posts.

Believe it or not, some of us feel that discussing both the strengths AND weaknesses of our candidates is the best course of action. Some of us feel that stating an "honest opinion" means saying what we think, not acting like freepers and simply toeing the Party line.

Yes, there are freepers who visit this site, much as there are some of us who visit their site. To label all dissenting opinions as dishonest is shortsighted and insulting, however.

[Bucky]

58. The flipside, of course, is that liberal self criticism is a strength

The reason Democrats govern better and solve problems better and understand issues better is because we tend to be more critical thinkers. The reason Republicans are better at marketing their viewpoints is because they're better at the rallying cries and the follow-the-leader business. I prefer the self-critical approach because that avoids problems and tends to counteract the hubris of winners. But the pep rally, rah-rah, let's all pull together approach is valuable too.

[MercutioATC]

62. I agree with you.

Both have their place.

I'm just not sure that a Democratic discussion forum is the place to limit ourselves to the "rah-rah" stuff, and I particularly resent being told that it is by somebody who posts "Even if Cheney annihilated Edwards ,I still would have said Edward won!".

[Ripley]

67. Oh come on!!!

You know damn well trumad was being tongue in cheek with his thread title. The threads bashing Edwards were NOT.

You are purposely twisting his point into one where he demands we all march lockstep.

The attacks on Edward's were way out of proportion compared to how these same people praised Kerry's performance. Kerry would have done nothing more heroic, more angry, more aggressive than JE if he were sitting there last night.

That is the hypocrisy.

[MercutioATC]

69. You think it was tongue in cheek?????

After reading his repeated support of his subject post?

Let him tell me he was just kidding...I'll amend my assessment. I don't think he was.

[Ripley]

70. Just my opinion...

Of course I can't speak for him. But I saw the posts last night and I know what he is referring to with this thread.

It is not constructive criticism to outright say Edwards "lost." It was a lot tougher than what Kerry had to face and I also wish Edward's had pushed a little harder on Halliburton and other issues.

But how can anyone say he "bunted?" He had great answers to Cheney's lies and distortions. He brought up a lot of issues. What did he need to do to make people think he did GREAT? And why didn't they expect the same from the guy who really matters...Kerry certainly didn't hit a home run.

I hate baseball, so I'm sick of these stupid metaphors, but just following what the OP used...

[MercutioATC]

73. I didn't read last night's thread (I was at work)

I still disagree with his "broad stroke" approack, though. I've stated in a couple of posts that I think both Cheney and Edwards sounded good, but I think Cheney edged Edwards out. I've also posted that I'm thrilled that the majority of America seems to disagree with me.

Although possibly not specifically directed at me, his post criticizes my statement as well as whatever was posted last night as well as ANY other opinions that don't paint a rosy picture of last night's debate. He goes further by saying that we shouldn't post opposing views here at DU.

That's what I'm taking issue with.

[crispini]

110. Good response, Bucky. (nm)

[AP]

19. Dems have NEVER had pack mentality.

[MercutioATC]

2. And threads with titles like this aren't harmful???

Get off the McCarthy bandwagon and lighten up.

People may, at times, have a different opinion. That's supposed to be something we support.

[trumad]

4. So.... what's more important

winning this war or enabling the opposition?

[MercutioATC]

7. But your title enables the opposition, too!

If you're going to rant at people for titling threads in ways that freepers could use them to their benefit, you might want to reconsider your thread title.

Great example of hypocrisy, though....

[Bucky]

12. Just quit all this damned thinking and drink the Kool-Aid already!!

Jeebus, what's wrong with you people? Can't you just trust your leaders are always in the right?!!!

[MercutioATC]

17. Whatever you say, mein leader!

ummmm....

...no

I reserve my right to call 'em as I see 'em. Frankly, I'm surprised you don't support that right.

[Bucky]

44. I honestly don't know if my sarcasm was clear enough. When I say "stop...

For myself, whenever I say "stop thinking" I'm being sarcastic. When I say "trust your leaders" I'm being very sarcastic. If When Kerry and Edwards are in office, I won't totally trust them either. That ain't democracy. You have to eyeball the man with the guns... ALWAYS. That means being critical always. People who attack me for saying Edwards didn't do a good enough job last night and have the balls to question my loyalty to this party are McCarthyites, pure and simple. And that brings out the sarcasm in me.

I certainly do support your right, really your obligation, to be honest when you critique our guy's debate performance.

[MercutioATC]

53. Akkk! My error!

I didn't realize that you'd posted to my response to Trumad.

My sincere apologies.

[teach1st]

13. Doesn't have to be that dichotomy

We can win the election by being tireless with the truth. We can stand up to the opposition and not compromise our freedom of expression, our integrity. I've persuaded many Republicans not to vote for Bush precisely because of my honesty.

[apnu]

3. Hear hear!

This is trench war time folks, its time to get in the dirt and slug it out. All liberals still sitting on high horses: come down and give us a hand! Stop "Leiberman-ing" the GOP, they don't deserve ANY respect!

[LynnTheDem]

5. You are a DEMOCRAT ALL THE TIME...

EVEN when that's inconvenient. Or you're NOT a Democrat PERIOD.

TRUE PROGRESSIVES do not change what their ideals are, what their Party stands for, to suit an agenda.

Rightwingnuts do that.

WIN AT ANY AND ALL COSTS is BUSH/CHENEY.

DON'T YOU FUCKING GET THAT?

I went through god-damn HELL for 2 fucking YEARS with a group of rabid rightwingnuts cyber-stalking me (they still are) because I dared post my own opinion that DISSENTED with the MAJORITY on the invasion of Iraq.

I'll be DAMNED if I'm going to JUST SHUT UP for ANYONE over ANYTHING. EVER.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH and FREEDOM TO DISSENT and FREEDOM TO ONE'S OWN OPINIONS are a shining golden ideal for liberals. ALL the time.

NOT just when it's CONVENIENT.

DON'T YOU FUCKING GET IT?

[trumad]

21. Read post 18

I think I articulated my feelings a little better in that post.

[DarkPhenyx]

6. The truth is more important.

I think that would be my point in most of this.

[MikeG]

8. I agree with you 100%, trumad.

Cheney was awful. To say he won throws the motivations of those saying it into question.

There are other places to promote the Bush/Cheney ticket.

[trumad]

9. You guys keep being the idealists

and I'll win the war for you...... Thank me later!

[matcom]

10. some of us are honest, others delusional

yeah. joe sixpack reads DU :eyes:

[trumad]

15. Yeah.... millions of Americans who saw the debate

and voted overwhelmingly in favor of Edwards are delusional? OK... Sure... Uh Huh..... The wrong side of an argument Matt and you can't dig your way out.

[matcom]

23. you just admitted your lying to us

who the fuck cares what your opinion is if you tout the fact that you would lie to us if it was the other way around?

why the fuck should ANYONE listen to you now? you have your opinion (which is predictable) and i have mine. i think i'll guage public opinions around my office for a more accurate assesment instead of listening to your "opinion" when you just told me you would lie about it regardless.

nice work. way to sway the undecided sheeple out there :eyes:

[trumad]

27. You're still doing it Matt

Still searching for those around the water cooler that may agree with you that Edwards errr bunted. Keep looking Matt.... You might find a couple of Morans to make you feel warm and fuzzy......

BTW: Nice straw man....

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[trumad]

36. Matt .....

If you can't admit that your thread was a bit knee jerk last night then there's really no point in debating this with you. My take is ...is that knee jerk threads last night during and after the debate were hurt in this all important spin game. Like I said in the post above, if you think that negative posts about our candidate are constructive, than OK... I don't especially this late in the game.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[Ripley]

55. lol

frankly your being a jackass (an immature one at that)


This from someone with a smiley butt in his sig and someone who posts cat poop threads. Hello?

My objection to your thread last night is that you clearly had a different standard for Edwards than for Kerry. I'm not going to repeat what I've already posted here, but you really were being hypocritical, why?

[matcom]

61. didn't you hear?

i'm a freeper disruptor














asshole

[Ripley]

64. Are you calling me an asshole?

Kind of rude if you did considering I just asked a question.

If you're referring to yourself, I agree. :D

[trumad]

99. You know what Matt.....

You have posted several replies to me and each in each one you take great liberties with the name calling. Do you really have to call someone a name to get your point across. You imply that I am being immature? sheeesh

I didn't tell you to lie about anything Matt! I simply said let's win this spin game and try not to give ammo to the other team. You were one of the first to post a negative thread last night about Edwards performance. SO...a great majority of DUers including myself called you on it and now you're wigging out about it. And now you're threatening to put me on ignore. WOW Matt, thin skin!

[Bucky]

14. I'm sorry, Trumad. I must've skimped on the Kool-Aid this morning.

I'll remember your words and ALWAYS trust my leaders from now on. No more of that "thinking" stuff for me, buddy!!

Dumbass

[trumad]

18. Not asking you to stop thinking

all I'm asking you to do is think of the consequences.... If you think that posting thread titles stating that Cheney beat Edwards in the debate is constructive, OK.... I personally feel that it's old school and it's what gets us beat.

[MercutioATC]

22. And posting that you'd lie on polls just to get Edwards the "win" is OK?

You sure that Kool-Aid isn't spiked with something? The logic skills seem to be lacking this morning.

[trumad]

28. Guess what... The repukes doing it in a major way

so...with your squeaky clean ideology are you willing to give the higher ground to the repukes hence the possibility of another 4 years for Bush...

Do you hear yourself?

[MercutioATC]

31. Ok, now I understand...

We're supposed to act like the freepers.

Thanks for clearing that up.

:eyes:

[bigtree]

35. We're supposed to act like winners

if we want to convince anyone else to join us.

[MercutioATC]

40. So we DO all have to shut up and toe the Party line.

Look, I'm shocked you're taking this stance. This is a site for Democrats, not robots. We might occasionally disagree. That's to be expected and encouraged.


What I find particularly odd is that you won't address the issue of the wording of the subject post. Which do you feel that freepers would more gleefully cite?:

1) "I think Cheney won the debate"

2) "Even if Cheney annihilated Edwards ,I still would have said Edward won!"

YOU brought up the issue of how thread titles could be used against us. Which is more apt to be used against us by freepers?

[trumad]

47. I couldn't care less what the freepers think...

I'm getting the word out that we need to bare our fucking teeth for another 28 days but some here think we should be out watering the fucking garden.

Playing nice will get us defeated... And if you don't think that then you haven't been paying attention for the last 4 years.

[MercutioATC]

52. That's not what you said. YOUR quote:

"Don't you fucking people get it! Posting threads titled Cheney won the debate Or Edwards bunted to first is not the type of spin that we should be portraying here on DU."

You obviously care what SOMEBODY thinks. I'm not advocating "playing nice". I'm advocating freedom to voice honest opinions at DU without being accused of having an "agenda".

[trumad]

59. Did I say Freepers in that fucking post?

You're starting to sound like Cheney....

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

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

[trumad]

76. This is the quote you posted from me....

"Don't you fucking people get it! Posting threads titled Cheney won the debate Or Edwards bunted to first is not the type of spin that we should be portraying here on DU."

What do you not get about this.... It dont say freepers or repukes?

[MercutioATC]

78. And this is (part) of the rest of your post:

"What the fuck is wrong with some of you good Democrats! THIS IS FUCKING WAR! We are playing to a majority of people who wouldn't know a Senator from a Congressman! Moran America! The repukes have mastered the spin game for the last several years and have killed us with it..... It is just now that we are coming into our own and fighting back.

Perception, perception, perception.... After the presidential debate the poor repukes had a very very rough go of painting a pretty face on the Bush debacle but they did try! They always try because they know it works."


added to:

"Don't you fucking people get it! Posting threads titled Cheney won the debate Or Edwards bunted to first is not the type of spin that we should be portraying here on DU."

with a subject title of:

"Even if Cheney annihilated Edwards ,I still would have said Edward won!"

seems a little incongruous to me.

If you didn't mean that "spin" is important here and, as such, we shouldn't post threads offering opinions that don't paint a rosy portrait of every debate, please correct me.

[LynnTheDem]

71. If by "playing nice"

you mean being honest, speaking our opinions, regardless what those opinions may be, would "get us defeated", then we wouldn't deserve to win anyways.

Of course bushCartel are rightwing bastards; war criminals; SOBs; they should be sitting in jail long ago.

And I hope to God they don't get elected or manage a second election theft.

They most certainly don't deserve to be running this country, imo.

I'll willingly die for my beliefs; my uncles did for theirs...but I sure as hell won't give my beliefs up, not for 28 days, not for 28 seconds.

And if that means my honesty and integrity and belief in freedom to speak one's opinions at any and all times means we'd lose this election, so be it.

[bigtree]

54. I can ask

you've answered. Do you think our free speech here should allow your opinion to stand unchallenged just because you dissent? I agree with your right to speak your mind. I just think the public dissent of our candidates is unproductive and plays into the hands of the opposition. Look how they used the tiff some members of our party had with the Kerry response to the swiftlies. All of the right wing pukes piggybacked on the barrage of public complaints and reported them to demoralize our party members and discourage others. This is politics, not tidlywinks. What kind of strategy is it to echo the opposition, or give their complaints credence by our own elevation of Cheney's performance?

[MercutioATC]

56. Yes you can, and I'll answer.

I absolutely think that a free exchange of ideas is what should be encouraged here. Disagree with my opinion. Tell me why. We'll debate it. That's that a "discussion board" is for....discussion.

However, I resent being told to shut up because my opinion doesn't support the Party line, especially when the subject title is WAY more offensive than anything I've posted.

[bigtree]

63. John Kerry and John Edwards are going out there every day

and representing our needs and concerns with a positive message of hope. They don't parse their support with criticisms of our efforts. They deserve the same respect and representation that they have afforded us during these long months.

[LynnTheDem]

75. And they FREELY WELCOME DISSENT.

They have both PUBLICLY SAID SO.

They WALK THEIR TALK.

Too bad some of you do not.

[bigtree]

77. The hell I don't

YOU won't acknowledge the right of some of us to disagree with YOU. That makes your argument about free speech a laugh. Take the criticism and move on. You don't have a leg to stand on arguing that someone is demanding that you shut up after posting to your heart's content. YOU should be more tolerant of dissent.

[LynnTheDem]

80. You're NOT using free speech

You're demanding we JUST SHUT UP. Attempting to silence dissent is NOT FREE SPEECH.

Post all you like about how YOU feel Edwards was the best debator since Caeser, GREAT. THAT's free speech.

Telling others they should shut up IS NOT.

[bigtree]

83. Lie

Your argument has just lost credibility. I said nothing of the sort and I went out of my way to explain that I am ASKING for solidarity in our public expressions. I think you have every right to speak your mind. I just don't see any positive effect from open criticism of our candidates, especially in the absence of anything said by them that doesn't comport with our party's aims. Instead of showing that your criticism is useful you choose to attack me with false assertions about my demanding your silence. I want you to speak your mind as I want you to be subject to my criticism of your views. Can't get any freer than that.

[trumad]

37. Clean and squeaky arentcha...

I'll tell you... I'll act like the freeper for you..OK... That way you'll remain nice and clean.... But again...thank me later on JK's inauguration day.

[MercutioATC]

42. Read Post #40. That explains my objection to your "logic".

You've already read my objection to your sentiment.

[LynnTheDem]

46. Speaking of EGOS...

Yours is rather on the large side.

And you're freely admitting you DON'T BELIEVE in what we say we stand for. Or you believe...but only when it's convenient for your agenda to do so.

Thanks for showing the freepers how truly hypocritical leftwingnuts can be.

[trumad]

49. there we go again...worried about what the freeps think

ego yes... no doubt! I'm not asking for much here.... I'm simply asking that in the spin game we have to be just as dirty as the freeps.... What..you don't agree with that?

[LynnTheDem]

68. No I DON'T agree with that

If I wanted to be "as dirty as the freeps" I'd go JOIN the god-damned freeps!

I'm a Democrat because I DO NOT play dirty, I DO NOT WANT to play dirty.

I do NOT care WHAT the excuse is, DIRTY is just DIRTY; WRONG is just WRONG, and attempting to silence dissent is just attempting to silence dissent.

A damned war...a REAL WAR...as in Iraq, right now...today people are DEAD in Iraq...that's more important than even getting rid of the bushCartel. Yet I refused to be silenced when we disagreed with the invasion of Iraq. I'll be damned if I'll be silenced on ANYTHING.

YOU want to "be as dirty as the freeps", have at it.

I will stay true to my beliefs and what my Party is supposed to stand for & says it stands for, no matter what.

If we can't win HONESTLY with our stated beliefs, then we're losers, win or not. I'm truly sorry that you're unable to understand this.

[Ripley]

50. The hypocrits are the ones using different standards for

Edwards than for Kerry. Which line of Kerry's actually knocked the ball out of the park? What was his home run? If Stupidhead hadn't put on such a clownish performance, Kerry's debate was mediocre as well.

The attacks on how awful Edward's did last night have a lot more to do with people not liking where he comes from than what he said or didn't say. I repeat...when did Kerry come out and hit the homer by calling Bush a liar...outright blasting him?

No one, not one person (that I read here anyway) said Kerry bunted. Yet Edward's held his own against a far superior debate opponent and he "bunted." Horseshit.

And don't try to drag this into...your right to free speech. Go ahead and vote for Nader for all I care. But to speak as tho these threads are legit is absurd.

[trumad]

51. Amen

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

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

[LynnTheDem]

84. I KNOW you weren't referring to my opinions

I've never posted anything against Edwards' debating, and I know you were referring to other peoples' posts. As I said, HOW DARE YOU call OTHER PEOPLES' OPINIONS not legit or absurd.

THAT is EXACTLY what I object to; not the dissent. Dissent = good thing. Insults and mockery and ridicule and putting down other peoples' opinions is pure and total crap.

YOUR OPINION is that other people who disagree with you have questionable motives. How very "compassionate" and "liberal" of you to do so with no proof; and even were they all just Republicans "in disguise", are they not allowed their own opinions regardless?

How very Democratic of you to not just take their opinions at their word. You could have ASKED them first HOW they judged Edwards' performance and WHY. Perhaps they expected more from Edwards than they did from Kerry. Like we expected more from Cheney than we did from bush.

But because their opinion differed from yours, you impugn their motives and denigrate their opinions. Not at all what progressives are about.

[Longhorn]

16. You're right, Trumad.

There's a time and a place for honest opinions and discussions but on a public forum in the closing days of a critical campaign, we should be supporting our candidates as if lives depended on it, because they do!

We're not on a witness stand under oath; we're CHOOSING to participate in a forum whose entire purpose is to defeat Bush*. I honestly don't see how posting critiques of Kerry or Edwards here is helping this effort, especially when such comments are gleefully copied and pasted on conservative blogs and boards. If we can't figure out that there are times when UNITY is most important, then we deserve to be a fragmented, out-of-power party whose members sit on the sidelines sniping at one another.

[ArkDem]

25. The end justifies the means. To hell with credibility.

That "My bond is my word" stuff is very over rated. To beat the republicians we need to act just like them!

[LynnTheDem]

33. And torture is sometimes a good thing to do

If our lives depended on it. Or so bushCartel say.

Yep. Even some so-called "progressives" feel "the end justifies the means".

And every post that Trumad et al post attempting to silence dissent, mocking and ridiculing and insulting those who differ in their opinions makes a total hypocrisy out of what we say we stand for.

We support freedom of speech and dissenting opinions at ALL TIMES.

Or we do not support them at all.

[trumad]

38. Another straw man thrown into the mix.

:wtf:

[bigtree]

48. So you are so concerned with the torture that you use it as a weapon

to point up your disagreement with those calling for solidarity. Cheap, moralistic shot.

Our freedoms also extend to those who disagree with you. Throwing around your freedom of speech is sophistry. No one is demanding that you do anything. Folks are asking for your unwavering support. The fact that you can write these posts from here to midnight knocks your complaint down. Keep spouting your disagreements, but at least allow that some here will disagree with you, given their own rights to free speech.

[LynnTheDem]

82. You are totally free to disagree with me

And I'm not arguing that you SHOULDN'T disagree with me. In fact, I'm arguing that you SHOULD DISAGREE with me or anyone else ANY TIME YOU DISAGREE.

But telling people they should SHUT UP is the very OPPOSITE of that.

If I were to say Edwards sucked, YES OF COURSE I would expect you to say YOU think I'm wrong and he was SUPERB, if that's how you felt.

THAT is EXACTLY what our entire Party stands for.

But there is a difference between that and you (or anyone else) saying I (or anyone else) should just shut up, and mocking and ridiculing and insulting me and my opinion(s).

A HUGE difference.

[bigtree]

92. I hope I've never mocked you for expressing yourself. That would be wrong.

I would, however feel free to mock what you have queried, if I so desired.

[NoPasaran]

26. My feelings exactly!

Number one, Edwards won. The only difference between this debate and the last is that Darth Cheney can lie in complete sentences.

Number two, even if Edwards hadn't won, we shouldn't admit it. I don't have the exact quote, but somewhere Churchill said something to the effect of "In war, phrases like "catastrophe" and "disaster" should never be used. Especially if they are true." And this is all-out nuclear war toe-to-toe with the GOP.

We can go back to sniping at each other November 3. Until then, if you can't say something nice, don't say anything!

[LynnTheDem]

39. We can go back to being progressives and liberals

on Nov 3, you mean.

No thanks; I'm a progressive Democrat. ALL THE TIME. I support free speech, free thought, free expression of any and all opinions. ALL THE TIME.

Even when it's not convenient.

[trumad]

43. I'm not against free speech

All I'm asking is that if you ain't got a nice thing to say about our canidate 28 days out, fucking keep it to yourself until NOV 3.

At least fucking try!

[LynnTheDem]

57. "I'm not against free speech..."

only SHUT UP right now.

NO.

I support free speech. ALL THE TIME.

NOT only when it's convenient.

That's what we stand for! ALL THE TIME.

WHAT about this are you incapable of understanding???

There are rightwingnuts who truly believe in the invasion of Iraq being the right thing to do. THEY say we should JUST SHUT UP if we disagree.

HOW are YOU any different from them, telling us we should JUST SHUT UP if we disagree with you???

Who gets to decide what is REALLY the right thing to JUST SHUT UP about? You? Them?

I've been cyber-stalked and still am. I've received death threats. I've been screamed at and had my business boycotted. I've been insulted, mocked, ridiculed and threatened.

All by rightwingnuts.

All telling me to JUST SHUT UP.

I WILL NOT JUST SHUT UP...not for them, and NOT FOR YOU. Not even for our political candidates.

I happen to think Edwards won the debate; not by a landslide, but by enough. And NOWHERE at any time on this board have I posted otherwise.

But that doesn't matter to you, you still hurl insults at me.

Because I dare to disagree with you saying people should just shut up.

What other opinions do you and will you have that I may disagree with that you'd hurl your insults at me? Is this a one-time thing? We set aside all we believe in, all we say we stand for, just for this one time? I should just "temporarily" disregard something that is the very core of me, of my beliefs? And then what? Then we pick our beliefs back up and carry on?

And when Kerry's the president and does something I strongly disagree with, something the rightwingnuts may also disagree with & are trying to use against Kerry, must I JUST SHUT UP then, too?

Gee...I wonder how many Republicans never supported the invasion and mass murdering going on in Iraq...but felt they should JUST SHUT UP.

[trumad]

74. hey you can talk all you want

you can post all the negative Edwards threads you want... I'm not physically coming after you.

I'm simply expressing my opinion er free speech in that I think we as Dems should be as tough and as mean as the repukes in the spin game..... and in order to do that we should think through what a negative post about JK or Edwards would do. Like I said numerous times in this thread... If you think that posting negative shit about Edwards is OK, the O fucking K! BUT I think that it's a bad way to win the spin game 28 days out?

Do you fucking get that?

[LynnTheDem]

85. I think posting one's OWN OPINIONS

is ALWAYS OK. Whether they're NEGATIVE or POSITIVE.

IF you'd posted you think it's a bad thing to post anything negative, that we should march in lockstep, FINE. That's YOUR OPINION.

But that's not all you've done, is it. You've mocked and insulted and ridiculed and told others they should just shut up. You've posted for all to see that you'd LIE to get what you want. Well so do bushCartel lie to get what THEY want.

It's WRONG when they do it. And it's WRONG for us to do it.

And that's MY opinion.

And again, as I've said countless times, I think Edwards did well. But I also think those who hold the opinion that he did not do well have AS MUCH RIGHT to post & say so as I do to post & say he did good.

Do YOU fucking GET THAT?

[Catholic Sensation]

fuckin double posts

[Catholic Sensation]

105. ACHTUNG!

HALTEN SIE AUF STILLE WENN DU BIST KRITISIEREN EDWARDS!

MACHT SCHNELL AUCH, SEIG HEIL!

---

You're no better than the right wingers who say that we should keep our "contrarian" opinions about Bush to ourselves.

[NoPasaran]

86. I'm still a progressive Democrat too

But we're down to the last four weeks of the fight of our lives.

I was a strong Dean supporter. But when Kerry became the nominee I fell in line. Nothing is more important than winning this time. If we lose this one, we lose it all. Sorry about the inconvenience.

[bigtree]

32. These folks who gripe and moan here have a backward way of fighting

that will not be respected by opponents or serve to elevate our candidate among undecideds. I appreciate folk's honesty but I just can't appreciate yet another of their ham-handed grousing posts that is supposed to snap us into reality. The true skinny is that we have a short time to sell our candidates and there is no positive effect that grousing can produce, only cynicism and rejection at this point in the campaign. The republicans lie and spin their candidates no matter what their performance, and some here just won't accept that republican solidarity is a threat to our team. We need to present positive visions of our candidates, and anyone who can't find a boatload of positives to accentuate is not trying hard enough.

I agree with the rights of folks to dissent against our candidate's performances, I just don't get the point of such dissent. Our candidates need solid support, and that won't come from the opposition or from the undecideds. John Kerry and John Edwards are going out there every day and representing our needs and concerns with a positive message of hope. They don't parse their support with criticisms of our efforts. They deserve the same respect and representation that they have afforded us during these long months.

[LynnTheDem]

87. You aren't required to "get the point"

The rightwingnuts never "got the point" as to why I dissented against the invasion of Iraq, either.

Again, our candidates deserve the HONESTY from us that they promise to give us in return. BOTH candidates have publicly said they WELCOME DISSENT.

I KNOW this is so. So would/do you if you knew them, listened to them, or read their blog at all.

One thing I got to tell you...you wouldn't believe how many times in the past 2 years that rightwingnuts have said to me a variation of your words;

"I agree with your right to free speech/dissent, BUT you really should keep quiet if you can't show support".

It's disconcerting to hear this shit from supposed progressives.

End of this story.

You want DU to be a spinzone propaganda site, have at it.

[Ripley]

34. They don't get it because they spend too much time being

pathetically needy. Some people's craven desire for more attention than my cat asks for keeps them from understanding the problem.

The reason the repukes win is because they circle the wagons. Some liberals will shoot themselves in the foot and try to make a stand on one leg because they don't know how to play hardball. They'll rip up their own teammates and wonder why they are losing.

I don't give a rat's ass that Edwards is not anyone's first choice, or even on their list. Dean was my choice. But you won't hear me throwing ammunition over to the other side because I have a grudge or I don't like the guy's SOUTHERN accent...which is what it boils down to for a lot of these DUers. In fact I bet you that's exactly what it is about. Did you notice how these same people did not exclaim loudly that Kerry lost because he didn't pound the shit out of Dumbya? Kerry wasn't any harder than Edwards was...he actually had the easier debate...just compare the split screens from both debates. Smirky made it so easy.

But I guess Kerry could burp and slip into French and it would be considered a homerun. :eyes:

[trumad]

41. Post 32 and 34

Here Here... Bravo

[kentuck]

60. trumad, I disagree...

Saying something does not make it so. I understand where you're coming from. I saw the people that got up and lied thru their teeth after the first Bush/Kerry debate and say that Bush won. Anybody htat was watching that debate could nonestly say that Bush looked like a moron. But, that doesn't keep them from spinning it as a win.

But, I would agree with you that we should be aware of our opponents tactics and not put ourselves at a disadvantage. Sometimes I wish some posts had never been posted. :)

[w4rma]

65. Well, I don't agree with your post, trumad. But I think Edwards won anyway

And I think maybe the few anti-Edwards folks on this board probably don't like Edwards so much because of his Southern accent. However, I live in the South, and I hear the accent all the time so I do not have that problem with it.

There are a few advantages of being honest over just spinning. First you have more credibility. Second you can more easily figure out what the problems are and try to nip them in the bud. If someone here had a problem with Edwards' accent, then I'm sure that others had that problem too.

[bloom]

72. Well I was pretty shocked

after voting in the polls - with so many votes for Edwards... and coming back the the General Discussion Campaign Forum on DU and it looked like the Freeping Free Republic!!! with all of the "Cheney Won" (??? I still don't get it) threads.

And then there are all of these posters I've never heard of - so of course it looked like a bunch of Freepers and then DUer's whine about people name calling for calling them out ferchrissakes.

For the DUer's who were merely being "honest" - one has to wonder - seriously - if they were biased against Edwards or something. Of course nobodys is going to be "perfect" but Jeeeez Loooeeez - if you are a Democrat I don't see how in heaven's name you could think that Cheney came off better.

And maybe I don't want to know - because I don't think there is any excuse for the lies and all the other crap this administration has pulled.

I think Edwards did just fine in showing Cheney to be the douchebag that he is.

[Forkboy]

88. Which is why I can't take you seriously

:shrug:

[trumad]

95. Like I'll lose sleep over er Forkboy not taking me seriously

oh, and if you don't take me seriously the WHY do you continuously reply to my posts? What? you think I'm cute?

[Ripley]

96. lol

This is like high school. The clique in the lounge huddles to call you an asshole. Ooooh. They must be the "cool kids." Yep, I always take people's opinions seriously when they post things like "My Cat's Poop Itches." :eyes:

[Forkboy]

98. Cool,I didn't know I was part of a Lounge clique!!!

I feel so special now!

[Forkboy]

97. Cute like a car crash

I'm drawn to disasters.

How them Dolphins doing?

[trumad]

100. Yeah...I knew you were a rubbernecker.

why else would you follow me around.

[Forkboy]

101. Follow you?

You flatter and embarrass yourself.It's just hard to miss your constant flamebait threads insulting any and all who don't bow before your wisdom (such as it is).How many threads have you had locked now? It's hard to keep track.

How 'bout them Dolphins?

[secular_warrior]

89. For the most part, nobody cares what we post here (or anywhere)

So what if a Republican lurker sees what we post here ? We are anonymous internet posters. We do not speak for the campaign in any official capacity.

This is just a message board for people to share their opinions --whatever those opinions may be -- not the official word of the DNC or KE'04 or anyone.

Some people have an overly inflated sense of their importance. Sort of like conspiracy theorists who think the government is chasing them, or people on message boards who think Big Media is hanging on their every word. These people invent fantasies in order to make themselves feel important.

[bigtree]

90. I had one of my posts, a diatribe on Reagan, lifted and debated

on a freep board. They called it fisking. I google my name and the link comes up with the point by point rebuttal to my supposedly anonymous post here.

[secular_warrior]

93. So what ? You are still anonymous.

I don't think most of the folks who come to post here care about winning any fight with the "freep board" or any board. I'm sure most of the people who come here do so to share their opinions with other Democrats, and don't really care who may be watching. There is always a risk "enemies" may being doing "surveillance" whenever people post anything online, but it is the nature of the beast. I think most folks know if they have to discuss something really "top secret" they take it to email. Otherwise, I don't see a problem with sharing anonymous opinions, even negative ones.

[bigtree]

94. Well

I don't think it's the end of the world, but we go to great lengths to effect whatever change we can through our participation here (some of us). We post (most of us) with a healthy sense of responsibility for what we put here. I wouldn't underestimate the potential importance of what we post here, or anywhere, good or bad, potent or benign. A sense of self importance can be healthy also. I wouldn't be so quick in diminishing the aspirations of posters. Who knows what impact they can have by posting here?

[ibegurpard]

91. I wouldn't

but Cheney didn't annihilate Edwards...the most I've seen from "objective" sources is that it was a draw or slightly in Cheney's favor...in which case I have no problem piling on the spin machine to tilt it in the direction I want it to go.

[VOX]

102. I agree, trumad. "Discipline" is the watchword -- "dicipline."

It's a matter of priorities -- in this instance, what's more urgently important:
1) Doing everything humanly possible to get * and the right-wing cabal out of power, **including** holding back on some potentially self-defeating criticism;
Or
2) "To thine own self be true," and being brutally honest about our candidates, regardless of any larger negative impact it may have on them?

Republicans have been successful in the last few years because they have the discipline to stick together -- look how they rally around some of the most pathetic candidates on the planet. (i.e., McCain endorsing, and campaigning for *.) There isn't much infighting going on in their ranks. Democrats should tear this page from the GOP playbook.

All eyes on the prize. Constructive criticism can come after the election's won.

[Cha]

103. You tell the truth!

"Al Gore lost because we allowed the Repukes to manipulate the media!

[Catholic Sensation]

104. DON'T YOU PEOPLE GET IT

WE HAVE TO LIE TO AMERICANS TO GET THEIR TRUST! IF WE DON'T LIE WE'RE NOT DOING OUR PARTY ANY FAVORS! WHY DO YOU PEOPLE INSIST ON BEING HONEST AND OBJECTIVE INSTEAD OF BIASED AND DELUSIONAL? WHY DO YOU PEOPLE PERSIST ON BEING REALISTIC?

edit: the debate was a draw, nobody won.

just because I know some of you people aren't too quick, the caps part was written in sarcasm

[Forkboy]

106. heh

seems to sum up this thread rather well :)

[MADem]

107. You know what I think?

I think everyone needs a good stiff drink, or a nap. Or both!

Wow, a lot of upset people up in here!

[ArkDem]

111. I can run a 4.3 forty

[Generator]

108. I love you Trumad. You are a loyalist. No retreat/no surrender.

I know how those felt in France in the 40's, I really do.

[LoZoccolo]

109. Well, who's allowed to speak freely then?

Serious - if you're saying it's necessary that we lie because of the "morans" and all that, surely there have to be a few places where it's the rule to give a fair assesment so that we can deal with reality and strategize and whatever - where there is a certain "ruling elite" which are allowed to speak freely and tell the truth to each other. Who would you nominate as people permitted to do that, and in which context can they do that?

I would think under your plan that a message board of Democrats would be a safe place, but obviously I'm missing something about the grand strategy of morans or something.

This is a serious question and I'd like you to answer it.