Showing Respect for Democratic Candidates Is Easy.

[MineralMan]

It's a no-brainer, really. Criticism is fine. Discussing things that are areas of disagreement is fine. Using vile insults against any Democratic candidate for President or any other office is decidedly not fine. In primary campaigns, such disgusting behavior may well be directed at the person who becomes the official nominee of the Democratic Party. It is simply not OK under any circumstances.

That's my opinion. I feel strongly about that opinion. Others might disagree with it. The floor is open.

[safeinOhio]

1. One exception

Lyndon LaRouche has ran 7 times as a Democrat. Not sure about this time, don't know if he is in jail or not.

[safeinOhio]

2. Other than that

I'm 100% with you.

[HassleCat]

3. I assume he's running

I think he's about 95 years old now, but he can't stop himself, I guess. I think he ran from jail a couple times.

[MineralMan]

4. Frankly, I would simply never mention that person.

He's ridiculous and not a serious candidate at all. There would be no point in discussing his candidacy in any way, really. Even so, I would not use vile adjectives or descriptors in connection of his name. I would simple dismiss him as a candidate, for obvious reasons. I am speaking only of the kinds of words that are easily recognized as vile and unsupportable. We all know which words. They're all extreme insults to an entire involuntary group of people. For example, calling someone a racist isn't vile on its face, since being a racist is a choice. You get the idea, I'm sure.

[JDPriestly]

9. So. are you saying that showing respect for Democratic candidates is easy unless it the

candidate is ridiculous and not serious (fill in the blanks). May I suggest that words like "ridiculous" and a phrase like "not serious" are expressions of opinion. I may or may not agree with your opinion. But those words do not express facts. They express opinions, and we may disagree in our opinions freely. There are no rules.

What is more.

Either we treat all candidates who proclaim themselves to be Democrats with utmost respect and honor, or we treat all candidates as we feel appropriate.

I am reminded of Jimmy Carter's admission which I will paraphrase as that he sometimes lusted in his heart. "Respect" is in the respecter. You can't fake it. You can't choose to have it. You can pretend to respect someone when you don't. But in politics false expressions of respect do not help us find the best qualified candidates. True when we talk about choosing a candidate within the Democratic field as well as when we talk about choosing between candidates of various parties.

Candidates for public office are public figures. They are discussed, slandered, libeled, torn to shreds, referred to with swear words, depicted as nasty criminals, questioned, shrunk, resized, and they knowingly submit themselves to that process when they submit their names and their reputations and their sacred honor on the alter of the election ordeal. It's part of the reality.

Frankly, I don't want to see anyone elected to public office who is sensitive and easily hurt when called the inevitable dirty, vulgar names or downright lied about. I want politicians who can laugh at themselves and, like Obama, just brush the absurd insults off their shoulders. Because in a democracy, speech including the use of nasty language, is free. And in addition, our politicians have to deal with too many really difficult and divisive issues and will make a mess of things if they put their easily bruised egos before serving the people.

You can't squelch free expression in a free society and still have a free society. Not even on a political discussion site. On a political discussion board, you can impose certain reasonable limits required to maintain a civil discussion.

But when a herd of people convince themselves that one among them used a word that person never used and used that word which the person never used to refer to a person whom that person never mentioned, we have reached an extreme of confused holier-than-thouism that is beneath Democrats in the first place.

Let's get back to discussing the issues, reinstate NYC_SKP because he never used the "C" word and he never mentioned Hillary in the post for which he was banned and get back to helping ourselves pick the best candidate for 2016.

[Demeter]

5. I don't respect politicians that don't respect me

and it doesn't matter which party they claim, or claims them.

If DU has a problem dealing with facts, then we all have a problem. DU becomes an organ of propaganda, not truth, change and democracy.

[MoonRiver]

6. Wow, ban worthy, imho. n/t

[RufusTFirefly]

11. Wow. Just wow!

My apologies if your response was sarcastic, but I fear it wasn't.

[Dawgs]

12. LOL!! n/t

[MineralMan]

10. Nor do I. But, I will not use vile language to point that out.

For example, take Lincoln Chafee. He switched to the Democratic Party in 2013. Before that, he voted with the Republican Caucus on many issues that I find objectionable. Because of that, I will not even consider voting for him in the 2016 primaries. I do not believe he is a Democrat, but a poser. I can say that without using any vile language at all, and I have already done so in another thread.

This is not about disagreeing with any candidate. This is about using language that also insults others who may be members of some involuntary group. Many right-wingers, for example, have used racist terms to refer to our current President. In doing so, they not only insult him for the fact of his birth, but imply that all people who share that characteristic are also bad people.

So, see, you can call a Democratic candidate a crook, if you like, since being a crook is a voluntary choice. I think it's a bad idea, unless you have concrete evidence of that, but the characterization is not a vile one. I think we all know to what I am referring.

[dbackjon]

16. And do you think that if some one disagrees with your position, they don't respect you?

[Demeter]

20. People like this?

[stage left]

7. I'm in favor of saving the vile insults

for the Republican candidates.

[MineralMan]

8. Not me. Insults that also insult members of

involuntary groups are wrong all the time. Racist insults, sexist insults, ableist insults, and the rest. We should not be using them to insult anyone. The English language has more than enough insulting words that insult only the person being insulted. We can use those on Republicans. I'd prefer we didn't use any personal insults, though, on potential Democratic presidential candidates.

We don't need to be vile to discuss politics. Truly we don't.

[JDPriestly]

17. Good to make these rules for yourself. But don't expect other people to follow your rules unless

they want to. People are free to say and feel and think what they want.

On a message board, the rules should be pretty basic and easy to follow. They should be clear and precise. Otherwise, we should be liberal in accepting the variances in expression and opinion that keep the message board interesting and alive.

It is good to say we should bar racist, sexist, ableist (disability-related?) insults, but we have to carefully define just what words are inappropriate.

If you are referring to NYC_SKP's post, I submit that he did not use the "c" word as so many have claimed and he did not use the Hillary word as people have also claimed. I think that he was having fun with the person who posted before him as well as fanatical supporters of a certain candidate who is very frustrating to support because that person is actually refusing at the moment to deal with the press and because of that making herself an easy target for ridicule, but hey, you are as entitled to your opinion as I am to mine.

Thanks for your many excellent posts. And thanks for raising this topic and giving us the opportunity to discuss just what the limits are of free expression. Personally, there are a lot of words I do not use to express my feelings. But then I don't need to use those four-letter words because I have a big vocabulary and so far a lot of self-control. I say remove offensive posts and ban obvious trolls. But don't ban a long-standing, contributing DUer because of language he did not use or for his political opinion.

As for respecting Democratic politicians, respect has to be earned. Goes for all of us. Politicians, even Democratic ones or self-proclaimed Democratic ones like Chaffee and Dianne Feinstein have to earn our respect.

[MineralMan]

21. I don't make rules for anyone but myself.

I don't have any authority to do so, nor do I want any such authority. We're on a website, though, where there are people who do make rules for using the website. It's easy for me to follow those rules, which is what this thread is about. It's natural for me to do so, but easy enough for anyone.

I didn't ban anyone. I understand, though, why people have been banned here. Not my decision. I served a term on MIRT, though. During that term, people were PPRed by MIRT. None, though, with more than 100 posts while I was there. The reasons for those bannings were quite obvious. They were disruptors who came here to disrupt. Only the admins can ban longtime DUers, and they do that very rarely, indeed. In ever case I'm aware of, such bans were based on a history, not just a post.

Frankly, the admins of this site are much more cautious in that than I would be, but I don't own a discussion forum, and never will.

[stage left]

19. Hmm.

I think I may have given you the wrong impression. I won't insult the Republican Candidates for being gay, lesbian, bi, or transgendered; being black or white or Asian or Indigenous; for being disabled, physically or mentally; for being male or female; Young or old; ugly or beautiful. I will only castigate them for the venal, self serving, cruel, and uncaring creatures they are; for the wrong headed policies they promote, and the harm they've done and continue to do to the people of this country, to the earth, to the world.

Okay, I have said that just looking at a picture of Ted Cruz makes me sick, but I think it's just that omnipresent smirk of his.

[Dawgs]

13. Okay Mom

?1

[MineralMan]

14. I'm not anyone's Mom.

That would be impossible. I'm just one guy with opinions on many things. DU is great. It lets me express those opinions. BTW, I have a Mom. She'll be 91 years old next month. She taught me that there's never anything wrong with expressing one's opinion, but always something wrong with personal attacks on others.

Hi, Mom!

[Dawgs]

15. Ditto, except my mom is 72. n/t

[Exilednight]

22. anything you believe about a person, good or bad, is an opinion.

[Hekate]

18. There ya go again, keeping a cool head and talking common sense