Pete Stark is not a collaborator with bushco

[cali]

And it's absurd to say that he is. Honestly, what's going on with that kind of rhetoric is akin to trying to form a virtual wolf pack, to tear Stark's virtual flesh from his virtual bones.
I really hate seeing that kind of attack. I don't think it's true and I don't think it accomplishes jackshit.

This is from an OP that's now on the Greatest Page:

"... They torture and kill. They rewrite and disregard the laws you pass. And you are a collaborator, Pete. Fox News blames the fires in your state on "al Qaeda," the National Guard is occupied committing war crimes, and it's YOU who apologizes."

"...If you refuse to join the 22 congress members who support impeachment, and if you apologize for letting a few words of truth escape your lips, then you are part of the movement toward fascism. You are one of only 435 people who could DO something, and you have apologized for merely SAYING something. That puts you a number of steps away from where you need to be."

"This is not just about words, Pete. Your words have consequences. They can embolden and disempower. You have chosen in the end to embolden those launching illegal wars for profit and power while stripping away our rights, our safety, and our environment."

[LoZoccolo]

1. This is the sort of thing people do when they don't have much real power.

If all someone is willing to do is sit on the computer and type on the Internet, then the only way they have of ramping up pressure on someone is to say more and more outrageous things.

[BootinUp]

2. I think you have put your finger on something there. n/t

[babylonsister]

4. David Swanson does a hell of a lot more than that. He's beyond

frustrated after all his efforts. Here's the link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3645257&mesg_id=3645257

[Freddie Stubbs]

5. That thread was locked for a reason

[babylonsister]

6. Oops! I didn't notice it was locked. Thanks. nt

[Milo_Bloom]

3. No he's not... BUT

He current represents exactly what is wrong in the democratic party.

They stand up strong one day and say the things that need to be said and take the position that needs to be taken.

They appear to stand behind their statements/positions.

Once the GOP attacks, they back down and retract what they said/stand for and give the GOP exactly what they want.

It isn't collaberation, but it is the weakness that currently frustrates all of us.

[incapsulated]

7. I agree

I was just as angry at him for backing down.

But turning him into the anti-christ is stupid.

[cali]

8. yep. that's a lot closer to the truth

it is frustrating as hell to watch them take a position and then back down, over and over again.