Cover My Back, Boys - I'm Goin' In ...

[NanceGreggs]

What a way to start the New Year – posting something that is bound to make me incredibly unpopular. But sometimes you just have to speak up – and for me, this is one of those times.

Believe me, I do not go gently into this good night, nor do I venture into this blackened landscape unadvisedly – thanks to Santa, I have a brand-new asbestos suit, and I'm wearing it tonight.

It is apparent from the posts here of late that we have truly impassioned supporters of our various Democratic presidential candidates. They are, for the most part, true Democratic patriots who see in their candidate someone who is reflective of their ideal choice for the next president of the United States.

They state the case for their chosen candidate with enthusiasm; they cite the accomplishments of their candidate in the past, and point to the facts that tend to show their candidate’s ability to lead in the future.

However, there are others.

“(My candidate) is the ONLY choice!” No, last time I checked, your candidate was not the only choice, but one of many. That’s the way the system works (or should work). It’s called democracy in action – ever heard of it?

“I can’t understand how anyone could support (candidate’s name here).” I’m sure you can’t – in the same way others can’t understand how you can support your candidate. See how that works?

“Your mind is closed – that’s why you won’t listen to what (my candidate) has to say.” You’ve been pitching your candidate since day one – when was the last time you listened to what another candidate had to say? Why do you think that your choice is not open to discussion or a change-of-heart, while everyone else’s choice is?

“If you’re not behind (my candidate), you obviously don’t get it!” Ah, my mistake. I completely forgot that your candidate is the only viable choice – based on your opinion, which we should all defer to, rather than basing our individual opinions on what we happen to think.

“(Your candidate) doesn’t understand the importance of (your issue here).” Imagine the audacity of individual voters who put their priorities in a different order than yours, and feel that an issue that is third or fourth on your list to be dealt with might be at the top of the list for them? They’ve got some nerve.

“It may surprise you to know that (your candidate) once voted for/supported such-and-such.” Uh, this is DU you’re talking to. I doubt that many people here don’t know about whatever bombshell it is you think you’ve just dropped. Let’s just say that one man’s LBN is another man’s archival material. There are no surprises here – other than your surprise that others may be just as cognizant of the past as you suddenly discovered you are.

“If you understand what’s at stake here, you will vote for (my candidate).” I hear ya – apparently I am too damned stupid to understand what’s at stake, which is why I am supporting someone else. That’s why people like me (who disagree with you) are obviously idiots who shouldn’t be allowed to vote in the first place.

“(My candidate) (a) knocked on thousands of doors, (b) sent out thousands of emails, (c) raised more money than (your candidate).” Thanks for the invaluable information. I mistakenly believed that we should be choosing our next president on the basis of dumb shit like an ability to lead, a viable agenda for undoing the damage done by BushCo, etc. Had I known that the election of the next POTUS should be based on who knocked on more doors, I may have seen things differently.

“(Your candidate) has made mistakes in the past.” Oh.My.God. Flawed human beings who make mistakes are actually running for the presidency? Who knew? I want someone who’s perfect in every way – you know, someone who has never admitted to being wrong in their judgment, or making a mistake – like G.W. Bush, for example.

What set me off on this little rant was a post here tonight – and in keeping with DU rules as well as political etiquette, I will not name names – a discussion thread implying that two current Democratic candidates will jam the caucus phone lines of a Democratic competitor.

When we start accusing fellow Democrats of utilizing illegal and immoral Republican tricks, I think certain people here have crossed the line. In fact, I have no hesitation in stating that such baseless accusations are truly reprehensible.

I applaud all of the unwavering support that many of my fellow DUers have demonstrated for their candidate-of-choice. In most instances, such enthusiasm is born of a true belief that their candidate has shown himself/herself to be more than worthy of consideration for the most important position in the country, and at a time when the right choice may determine the fate of our nation in a very uncertain future.

Many of the posts here over the past few months have been informative about our prospective choices and have shed light on how all of our present candidates bring something of value – be it idealism or practicality, experience or new and innovative ideas – to the political table, and are worthy of real consideration.

As for those who consistently insist that their candidate is the only candidate worth looking at, I can only ask: “At what point did you decide that everyone else’s opinion was less valid than yours?”

Just wonderin’ ...

[babylonsister]

1. Thanks, and enthusiastically applauding you, Nance!

:applause:

[ChiciB1]

2. I'll Read This Later.... I'm Sure It's Great & I Was JUST Thinking About You

30 minutes ago! Gotta spend time with hubby right now, but I'll be back and can't wait to read what you wrote!!

[NanceGreggs]

9. If your hubby is anything like my hubby ...

... I can totally understand your priorities!

[ChiciB1]

34. Yep... I Think One Of My Doctors Said To Me Once... Keep The Pappy

HAPPY! I'm back for a minute... wanted to read this and then back to bed for some "sleep!"

[Sancho]

3. Excellent!

:dem:

[NC_Nurse]

4. Thank you! K&R

I ignore most of that type of BS, but I'm glad someone is calling bullshit. :thumbsup:

[Laurab]

5. A big K & R ! Happy New Year! n/t

[Adsos Letter]

6. Excellent post once again, Nance Greggs

way more heat than light going on at this point, and flavored with unhealthy doses of misinformation and disinformation.

[H2O Man]

7. Thank you

for being a voice of reason.

[maximusveritas]

8. This made you more popular in my book

if that's possible.

[JohnnyLib2]

10. K & R, with hopes

that some will actually think about it!

[Beetwasher]

11. They're ALL GOOD!

We've got a great field and I'd be happy voting for any of them.

[candymarl]

12. Thanks

I haven't even made up my mind yet. Any one of the Democratic candidates is a better choice than those of the opposition party. This is about restoring the Constitution and not going back to the "good old days". To quote my grandma, "there were no good old days".:P

[NastyRiffraff]

13. BRAVO!!!

Thank you, Nance, for putting my own thoughts into such eloquent words.

I have studiously avoided the candidate wars here on DU. I would love to have a serious discussion some supporters of a rival candidate, but sadly it seems that's not likely to happen here. Even if one is started, it's promptly invaded by those who feel "MY candidate, or you're stupid/crazy/misinformed, etc. Then there's always someone who declares he/she will move out of the country/not vote/write in their preferred candidate if X-candidate wins the nomination. Democracy in action! :sarcasm:

For the record, I think we have an unusually good field to choose from. I like some better than others, but I'll proudly cast my vote for the nominee.

Oh, and K&R!

[NanceGreggs]

14. "I like some better than others ...

... but I'll proudly cast my vote for the nominee."

I am with you one thousand percent on that, my friend!

[bahrbearian]

15. Happy New Year

:yourock:

[JeffR]

16. Fantastic!!! But

I do want to remind you that my candidate's RED HOT and your candidate's DOODLY SQUAT. But I mean that in a nice way...;)

[Kurovski]

74. I understand that your candidate lives in a hollow tree.

But, like, whatever.

[astonamous]

17. My Grandmother (Rest her soul) use to always say...

"Try it, you'll like it".

This, of course, in reference to some odd food item that she thought was the best thing in the world and we should all eat it and love it as much as she did. Many a meal-time argument was started this way and many times ended in someone leaving the table crying or gagging.

Great post Nance!

Diversity makes the world go around. I'm voting for who I think will support my agenda the closest and when November rolls around I will support the Democratic nominee...unless something very strange happens.

[Beartracks]

48. Yep, voting responsibility extends beyond the primaries!

>I'm voting for who I think will support my agenda the closest and when November rolls around I will support the Democratic nominee...

Yes, ALL voters should do this at every step of the election PROCESS -- and it IS a process that doesn't stop with the primaries. During your primary, vote for the candidate whom you think will support your agenda the closest. Then, at the general election, DO THE EXACT SAME THING. You might not be voting for the same person you voted for previously, but it should once again be the candidate whom you think will support your agenda the closest. And just to state the obvious, that's "closest", not "exactly." For some, it may be like voting for "the lesser of two evils" but it's still gotta be done.

All too often I get the impression that some voters would rather abstain from the general election if their preferred candidate doesn't make it past the primaries. That's abhorrent.

P.S. "The candidate whom you think will support your agenda the closest" -- that is what it's really about, isn't it? Doesn't matter if the person cheated on their spouse, "inhaled" once, had a relative who got arrested for something, or <gasp> changed their mind about something... Compared to the other candidates, the one who is closest to the bullseye of your wants/needs/dreams is the one that gets your vote.

:patriot:

[astonamous]

89. I swore I would never vote for anyone...

... that supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Any one that voted to give this administration the power to go to war and anyone who voted to continue to fund it over the years.

That doesn't leave me with a lot of choices so I have had to really look at all the issues and really stay on top of the candidates past records and current statements.

[tavalon]

18. I was worried that you were finally going to piss me off

Instead, once again, you were spot on. Yeah, I've got your back, Nance.

As an aside, I would love to say that I'm more enlightened and that's why I haven't been engaging in the mudslinging, but actually it's because of two things. First, my candidate never got into the race (damn it all to heck!) and second, the primary will be decided before I get a chance to have a say, so I really don't have a horse in the race. I've also got an autistic son who hurtled into puberty at the same time he began stressing about about the giant gift-giving guy from the North Pole. This all began for him in about October. That combined with newly developed narcolepsy on his part, oh, and our move closer to the city in September. Well, until just recently, I've just had no time to get into the fracas.

And thank goodness for that!

[Silent3]

19. Thanks

What seems surprising to me about all the rancor here lately is that I think we've got a really good slate of candidates to choose from. I'd be happy to see any of our Democrats in the White House, especially after eight years of Bush for comparison.

I'm also amazed at all of the worry about who's electable and who isn't, which I think fuels a lot of the squabbling. We certainly can't be complacent about the coming election -- we've always got to fight hard like we're desperately coming up from behind -- but come on, guys! The Republican party is in a shambles. The enthusiasm of Republican voters is very low. My God, look at the difference in campaign contributions. Have Democrats ever been this well funded compared to Republicans?

And what a sorry bunch of choices in the Republican party. Not one of their candidates appeals very well across their splintering coalition of Christian conservatives, economic conservatives, and libertarians. If "none of the above" were on the Republican primary ballot, he/she/it would sweep the Republican primaries by a landslide.

[tavalon]

20. Yes, I have my favorites and my less favorites,

but overall, we'll do ok. Thank goodness, most of us will remember that after this rancorous time, as we did after the primary wars of 2004. Of course, many left but many more came. It's is the nature of this strange beast.

[juajen]

21. K & R

Right on, Nance!

[ninkasi]

22. I think most of us have your back, Nancy

Another great post.

[WheelWalker]

25. Coverage. Back. One (1) Unit. GSA Contract # 7243352907-A

[bklyncowgirl]

23. Put it this way, we're going to end up voting for one of these people.

It may very well not be the candidate I support, in fact, unless lightning strikes, it's pretty likely not going to be "my guy" (Richardson supporter here).

I can't see any sense at all in trashing the other candidates because a few months from now I could very well be going door to door asking my neighbors to vote for the person I had publicly (hiding behind my screen name of course) accused of everything short of butchering kittens to make fur mittens.

Thank you Nance, for trying to breathe a little sense into this silliest of seasons.

[Sparkly]

24. Oh, excellent!!!

Rec #28 (of many to come, I'm sure)!

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[FloridaJudy]

26. That's for injecting a note of civility

And sanity into the conversations. There are some Democratic candidates I like more than others, but there are none so loathsome I wouldn't vote for him or her over the best the Republicans have to offer. The kind of feces-slinging that the debate too often devolves into is hurting us all.

Sometimes I feel like I need a wire brush and a bottle of industrial strength disinfectant.

[frogmarch]

27. Well done! K&R n/t

[Diamonique]

28. Another great post from Nance! n/t

k&r

[Imagevision]

29. Nance, the genius's at CNN should replace Beck with you, excellant piece...

[blondeatlast]

77. That's such a wonderful, impossible idea it makes me sad, actually.

Nance is no longer much of a secret--I'm spreading her words at every opportunity!

[mzmolly]

30. I'm thinking a new avatar might be nice. Anyone but the Republican?

I'm so glad I'm not as passionate about any of the candidates as I am just getting back to 'reason'.

Thanks again. :hi:

[Raster]

31. We got your back, Nance!

"...one man’s LBN is another man’s archival material.":rofl:

[rasputin1952]

32. Got your back Nance...

Been saying the same thing for ages...:hug:

[proud patriot]

33. We'll keep watch

:patriot:

[intheflow]

35. Thanks, nance.

You do DU proud. :patriot:

[madamesilverspurs]

36. Could not agree more!

In fact, I was thinking along the same lines this morning as I was reading one of the newspapers from northern Colorado. One of their local readers had posted this comment to their online edition:

"We can thank the Clintons for our lack of morals and ethics. They did more harm to our Great Country than anyone in recient (sic) memory. Drug use and under age sex went out of control while Bill was playing President. Do we want to go through all that again? We need leaders that set a good example, not lie, cheat and steal."


So, with that kind of ignorance heading into the nearest voting booth, why in the hell are we using each other for target practice when we could be educating our neighbors?!

Cover your back? You betcha!

[SeattleGirl]

37. Thank you, Nance!

For me, you've hit the nail on the head.

[mac2]

38. There is diversity in the choice of candidates

-I for one want a candidate for President who believes in democracy and the Constitution.

-I want an end to the illegal wars and lies.

-I want someone who will protect our borders. I want to be a nation not an Empire using trade agreements to negate our laws and borders.

-I want a representative of the people not an arrogant elitist who meets behind closed doors with world leaders doing who knows what in my name.

-I want my country back.

If this is the candidate you choose than all the better.

[Seabiscuit]

39. Just the latest example in a long series of examples of why DU needs NanceGreggs!

Thank you, and Happy New Year!

[saltpoint]

40. My candidate's perfect, yours sucks, and anyone not supporting my candidate

sucks, too, and that's all there is to it.

Thank you and God Bless America.

_______

I hope folks' ears are attuned to good sense, Ms. Greggs, as you consistently provide it.

[bklyncowgirl]

51. Moreover that poll which had your candidate up this week is hopelessly biased

Of course it was the most historically accurate poll last week when it had my candidate up on top.

...and that's the truth!

[saltpoint]

58. That's right. Good polls show my candidate doing well. If they show

someone else's candidate doing well, they're rightwing outliers!

[ribrepin]

41. Thank you--I am supporting my candidate enthusiasticly

but I am sick of the nasty bickering. That's why I stay mostly on the Joe Biden board.

[ZombieHorde]

42. Thank you! nt

[LeftCoast]

43. Nance, if you're ever in SF I want to buy you a drink!

Wonderful post as always!

:toast:

[FlyingSquirrel]

44. Oh, and who are YOU supporting Nance? Ha! Just kiddin'

LOVE your stuff, keep it up!

:loveya:

FS

[Eurobabe]

45. Well said Nance

Once again, right on the money. :hi:

:kick: & Rec'd

[intaglio]

46. Thanks for this

and it would also be proper to remember that all the candidates are politicians ... and we all trust politicians, don't we?

[Historic NY]

47. Another brilliant observation......gotcha covered.....

Who will be supporting when the dust and smoke settles? I often wonder if we could hold a conversation or look at each other. Our system is uniquely ours, we spend months beating up on each other even before we beat up the opposition. :crazy: I often think people forget the reason for the primaries. I half expect to hear when one or another candidate breaks wind. How many months of this crap must we endure and why, if we won't consider the other guy.

[Mythsaje]

49. I think most people know who I've chosen at this point.

And my reasons why.

I thought the phone-jamming thing was over-the-top, personally. I have no patience for baseless accusations or personal attacks on the candidates. Frankly, I'm a little tired of people calling my candidate a "phony."

I like his stance on the issues and that's why I'm supporting him. If one of the other candidates had his stances, I'd be supporting him or her instead. For me, it's all about the issues, and the best plan for dealing with the aftermath of this disastrous administration.

And if I post something about the other candidates, it's based upon how I perceive their relationship to the issues I hold to be most important.

Some people act as though this is some sort of sporting event, like their self-worth is tied up in their candidate's chances in the primary. There's a reason I dislike sports--that sort of fanaticism is goofy as hell, and promotes NONE of our better qualities as human beings. IMO. And the last thing I want to see is people bringing that kind of mentality to something as important as what's in front of us now.

I think any one of our candidates is a better choice than any Republican. There's not even a doubt in my mind, which is why I'll cast a vote for whoever wins the primary. But I can't help feeling that we'll grow to regret certain choices somewhere down the line.

[Cary]

50. My choice is the Democrat's nominee. . .

Some things do trouble me about some candidates but I'm not nearly as troubled by any Democrat as I am troubled about every Republican. That includes Ron Paul, who is saying some good things but would still take a meat axe to the New Deal if he was given a chance.

We cannot afford 4 more years, and as far as I can tell 4 more years is exactly what the Republicans are offering up.

We have a lot to do to fix the damage of the last 7 years. It is too much to expect any of our candidates to fix it all. The question is what gets fixed first?

[ColesCountyDem]

52. Encore! Author! Author!

Brilliantly said, ma'am! While my choice may not be your choice, I can promse you that I'll support your candidate, should he/she get the nod, and I hope those folks you refer to in your post will do the same. There is far, FAR too much at stake this November to NOT support our nominee.

:)

[Highway61]

53. Here Here

well said....k&r!

[Pacifist Patriot]

54. If you need an asbestos suit for that, I'm in the wrong place.

Sheesh, my mind is so open right now I STILL haven't made up my mind and I've only got twenty-something more days to do so.

Thank you!

[LostinVA]

56. I think you should vote for Huckabee, Rev

:hide:

[Pacifist Patriot]

69. Oh that was just mean.

:)

[LostinVA]

75. kissy kiss

[Pacifist Patriot]

90. Oh okay, cause your just so darned cute.

[LostinVA]

102. I know

[LostinVA]

55. k&r!

[Myrina]

57. NANCE GREGGS FOR PRESIDENT!

:applause: :patriot: :applause: :patriot!

[SteppingRazor]

59. You're just making up these excuses to justify your support of a terrible candidate.

:popcorn:



Kidding aside, of the many great manifestos you've knocked out here at DU, this is one of the best, Nance. :thumbsup:

[JohnnyRingo]

60. No heat here

I always find your posts thought provoking and well written.
Though I seldom mention it, I retain your considerations on my short list of things to read.

I hope that once a candidate is chosen the site will band together for the common cause.

Well put, and thanx for posting.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

61. Yay! WooHoo! I'm cheering and clapping and

whistling (the whistle with two fingers in the mouth, which I am only able to do online!!)

:bounce: :applause: :woohoo:

The most discouraging part is how a positive, informative post on one of our candidates is often immediately followed by a bashing post, from one of said candidate's primary opponent's supporters. Not to mention how RW sources are dredged for dirt to slime our candidates here on DU, again by many of the "my candidate is the only choice" posters.

Thank you for your smart, sassy and piercingly spot on post, Nance. It got my day off to a good start!

:kick: :kick: :kick:

MKJ




edit, grammer and stuff

[Maestro]

62. There definitely has been much gnashing of teeth lately.

And as you point out, it is quite ridiculous. Thanks for the rant. :hi:

[ElsewheresDaughter]

63. Thank you Ms Nancy!

:loveya: :loveya: :loveya:

[yardwork]

64. Seriesly.

There are a few posters here who are determined to cast asparagus on Democratic candidates, in some cases comparing them to Karl Rove. Do those posters realize that they sound just like freeps? Do they care?

[natrat]

65. please-assuming a canidate is beyond dirty tricks because he/she has a D next to there name is absur

Look at this last congress --no offense-but these people are whores for the most part

[NanceGreggs]

98. No one should be ...

... assuming anything. That was my point.

If there is evidence that anyone is using 'dirty tricks', regardless of party, they should be outed for doing so and suffer the consequences.

However, stating that any candidate is 'probably' going to do something illegal, based on nothing more than one poster's surmise, is despicable.

[lisainmilo]

66. Thank You!

K&R
You are awesome......such great perpective

[mlevans]

67. I would dearly love to see your essays, rants, or whatever you call them

printed in the op-ed pages of our local newspaper. You ought to be nationally syndicated.

[comradebillyboy]

68. Nice job Nance, DU was beginning to sound like

Free republic

[DemExpat]

70. Whew! What an excellent, lovely post to read here!

A breath of fresh air......

:applause: :toast: :applause:

:loveya:

DemEx

[pleah]

71. Thanks for putting some sanity back in the mix.

[fascisthunter]

72. Very Good (nt)

[Kurovski]

73. K&R.

That's all fine and well, but if a person doesn't vote for Wetzelbill/Kurovski '08, there is something seriously wrong with them mentally/emotionally/spiritually/ethically/morally.

Sometimes facts only LOOK like opinions.

Happy New Year, Nance! :hug: :D

[1monster]

76. I have a neighbor who is registered Republican. It is a lifelong family tradition.

During the nonelection years, we talk about everything, including politics (something that was impossible eight years ago, but she has come much much closer to my way of thinking over the years).

She loathes Bush/Cheney and has for years, Her feelings regarding candidates in off year elections are very similar to mine.

But a funny thing happens when Presidential election season comes around. As stated above, she loathes and despises Bush and his whole admin, but she voted for them anyway because she suspeneded her disbelief, despite all evidence to the contrary and bought all the negative things said by SBFT and the media about Kerry and used those as her excuse for not voting for him.

The suspension of disbelieve, despite all evidence, including voting records and monetary contributions by corporate entities, lives high and well on this board.

Because one allows oneself to be seduced by the admirable message one's chosen candidate reiterates in campaign literature, media, and stump, the whole of one's mind, body, and soul, apparently becomes blind to any information that even suggests that the chosen candidte might not be the savior of democracy and mankind, but might just have feet of clay that is in bed with corporte bankers, insurance companies, drug manufacturers, military industrial complex corps, etc.

I've seen it over and over and over again on this board to the point that I quite often get offline and turn to my ZUMA game to help drown the sense of despair.

DUers are offering arrogant and insufferable insults to each other to what purpose?

When one supports a candidate, one must suspend his/her suspension of disbelief and look candidly at the candidate and his/her record. If the record doesn't match the message, if the message is mixed, then one must objectively assess the chances that the message is the candidate's real mission.

Let's face it, folks. The candidates are ALL spending BIG BUCKS to political consultants, PR companies, and advertising experts to devise a campaign that will pull in the voters.

Thier aim is to get the nomination, and then the Presidency (or whatever office they are running for).

Don't get pulled in by what the candidate or his/her campaign says. Look at the whole candidate and add their record in to the reckoning.

And stop stop stop gratuitously insulting those who don't share you passion for your chosen candidate.

[Kurovski]

86. Unfortunately negativity works. I suspect anyone who consistently,

and regularly campaigns for a candidate with insults and innuendo. It helps to shape "positive" opinion in a negative way. It gets results. That's why it's a standard feature in psychological operations.

And campaign ads.

[Marrah_G]

78. I think I love you!

:loveya:

[frogcycle]

79. excellent post - for all those other people

I sure am glad it doesn't apply to me, since I'm right and they're all wrong.

:rofl:

[Kajsa]

80. " Unpopular"? Nance, this thread just

elevated you another twenty points above
the high ranking you already had!

Happy New Year to you, dear lady.

I'm glad Santa got you a new asbestos suit.
;-)


:applause: :yourock:

[calico1]

81. Excellent post!

The fights over Democratic candidates on this board is the main reason I hardly ever visit here anymore. Seems pointless at times.:-(

[hisownpetard]

82. Great post, Nance. I've said exactly the same conciliatory things as you said in several posts,

but my posts were somewhat more distilled, to wit:

"Who said, Moran?"
"Bulls**it, Bozo!."
and the even more persuasive but less original argument of,
"Can't we all just get along?

However, I must admit - you said it better.
You always do!

Kudos, with wishes for a peaceful and fulfilling 2008!:party: :toast: :party:

[GoneOffShore]

83. Excellent post - as always Ms Greggs!

One hopes that those who need to read this, do, but the thought lingers that they won't. As someone further down said, many tie their support of a particular candidate to the same sort of passion that they would use to back a sports team.

The "voice of reason" to true believers often sounds like the voice of the "other side".

[pacalo]

84. Thank you.

Each of these examples pales in comparison to a post I read today about a Huckleberry quote to prospective Iowan caucusers: "Hijack your church's bus, whatever you've got to do to get people to the caucus who are going to vote for me." That's the type of deranged statement that deserves our attention.

[solara]

85. You got it Nance, and thank you once again

I don't participate in political 'discussions' here, in fact I am not yet completely certain which Democratic Candidate I support. But one thing is sure, no matter who emerges as our nominee, he or she will have every bit of my loyalty and patronage.

All I have to do is remember who has been in office for the last 8 years.

The extended nightmare of the Bush regime will not be magically over in January 2009, but having a Democratic White House is a REAL beginning.

We the People have an enormous amount of work to do, so as soon as possible we need to focus, unite and join hands as we stand up TOGETHER to do whatever it takes to get our beloved Country back.

Happy New Year!! :hi:

INVESTIGATE IMPEACH INDICT IMPRECATE INCARCERATE :patriot:

[Javaman]

87. Nancy, I really enjoy your articles...

but holding the Democratic candidates to such a lofty position and of them being beyond the ability to do phone jamming is; laughable.

I certainly don't condone such tactics but to say that using such "republican tricks" is beyond the Dem candidates is amusing.

In the new demented political landscape that we now find ourselves in, because of the repubs, I get the impression that politics "as usual" is a thing of the past.

Everything is gamed. This is certainly not our parents elections anymore, way to much money and influence is at stake.

vote rigging, call jamming and all sorts of other historically well known tactics have been employed by both the Dems and repubs for years. And there is certainly enough evidence to support that charge, however, as always, after the election all of that is quietly swept under the rug.

So for someone to say it is beyond the reproach of Dems to stoop so low to try such things is quite frankly, just plain funny.

I have been a life long dem, but the candidates, with the exception of the bottom few, seem so unlike the Democrats that have grown up with that it's really hard at times to tell them from the republicans.

We have gravitated so far from our core beliefs that when a conservative Dem runs for something against a ultra right wing repub, the Dem looks down right liberal. But like anything, it has to be taken in context of the prevailing atmosphere.

Given the current playing field, I'm still at a loss as to whom I will support, but I do know this, I know whom I won't support.

And to me that is a terrible terrible choice to be left with.

[annabanana]

88. Nance, honey, you just crack me up!

We have an embarrassment of riches here on the Democratic side.. but your candidate will lay waste all hope for mankind, whilst mine is doubtless the clarion call to a golden age!

Love ya.

[AntiFascist]

91. Yes, but there are also threads like this one...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3928195

based on respected writings, that seem to indicate that one candidate may be working deals with the most "illegal and immoral" of Republicans. One must have some pretty intense rose colored glasses to think that there is no overlap.

[NanceGreggs]

95. Thanks for making my point for me ...

"... writings that seem to indicate", "... one must have some pretty intense rose colored glasses to think that there is no overlap."

In other words, anyone whose perception of Hillary's positions and motives is different than yours, or Mr. Parry's, just doesn't get it.

Thanks for clearing that up for everyone.

[AntiFascist]

97. My perceptions are open to change...

but evidence speaks for itself. Anyone is free to interpret the evidence as they see fit, or sweep it under the rug if it suits their purposes.

[habitual]

108. Congrats! you really proved Nance's points very well. TWICE n/t

on edit: this post is in response to evidence that speaks for itself. Anyone who wishes to just sweep it under the rug is free to do so.

[AntiFascist]

111. Spin...

Hillary supporters are so good at it.

[SIMPLYB1980]

92. K&R

[Politicub]

93. Wonderful post!

Isn't one of the hallmarks of being liberal (or progressive) having an open mind and a willingness to at least listen to new ideas? It's conservatives who want to "conserve" the past that never was, based on the holy writ of their forefathers.

Each time I see a NanceGreggs post on the DU homepage I'm always eager to click and read it. I just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to write such amazing pieces.

[Mz Pip]

94. Wise words

:thumbsup: again! :applause:

Mz Pip
:dem:

[frogmarch]

96. Another kick n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

99. SmooooOOOOOCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh ...... K&R, too! :hi:

[IsItJustMe]

100. I Luv the good vibes, yet there are two dems I won't vote for (Bush Lite), although I don't rip on

those candidates here at DU and I honestly don't think my opinion is anymore valid than anyone elses here.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

101. Thanks Nance!! K&R

:yourock:

[avrdream]

103. For about the 100th time (for me), thanks for your wisdom, Nance.

It's been tough hangin' out here lately.

[DFW]

104. A very much "Needed to be Said"

And from someone many people here listen to. Here's hoping they
are still listening. I just got back from Renaissance Weekend
in South Carolina, and the vibes were just all so NON-confrontational,
it was really encouraging. Hillary supporters, Obama supporters,
Edwards supporters, Biden supporters honestly laying out their cases
without slashing and cutting at the others--maybe it's easier to be
civil when you have articulate people sitting next to you that support
someone different. The bad news was that I still remain undecided, but
I was reassured that the tone can be one more civil than has been
reported in the media or seen here on the boards.

Totally off-subject: a guy from the right whose views are 180° the opposite
from mine laid one on me that I just gaped at. Now this guy is a friend, and
I have had a friendship with him that is about as likely as Bill O'Reilly
and Keith Olbermann being pals, but that's the way the world works. He
Thinks I'm totally nuts with my political views, and I think the same of his.
His name is Richard Viguerie, and if there's ever another civil war, he and
I will be the first to take pot shots at each other, even if we are both
born Virginians. But he left me gaping when he said that Chris Matthews
and Tim Russert were liberal Democrats. Talk about alternate perceptions!!!

But think about it--if I can be friends with a guy like that, then Nancy's
not-too-subtle, but oh-so-needed call for a return to that rare combination
of sanity and civility is one to be heeded rather than ignored.

Therefore, I add my voice to the "Thanks for that!" chorus.

[MzNov]

105. We all just need to remember to stay focused,

try to keep the big picture, and use the Ignore button whenever it gets too much. I see more people claiming that they like several candidates, but pick their candidate because ________. Only a minority here on DU really get into acting like R-CONS.

Considering the stakes of this election, I think we're all doing very well to keep our tempers in check. There will always be exceptions.

EDWARDS IS THE ONLY ONE FOR '08 !!!

:-)

[Joanne98]

106. GO JOHN EDWARDS!!!!!!!!!!!

[girl gone mad]

107. welcome to primary season on DU.

All in all, I think this year has been a lot friendlier than 2003/2004.

[Beaverhausen]

109. Thank you, thank you, thank you

:yourock:

[robbedvoter]

110. Any Dem beats any GOP-er. Any dem is better than any of GOP-er. The rest is

details.Just hoping they don't steal it again.

[Martin Eden]

112. Objective facts relating to progressive values must be considered

What do I mean by the title of my post?

I'm reminded of a quote by Paul Krugman (and I paraphrase): If Bush declared the world was flat, the headlines the next day would read "Shape of Earth -- views differ."

My point is that all candidates are not equal in how well they have/will represent progressive values in office. Not all opinions on candidates are equally valid in the context of who would be the best president.

Nance, I hear you loud and clear and I essentially agree with your criticism of posts in this forum that declare THEIR candidate to be the ONLY reasonable choice, and how other Democratic candidates are VILIFIED to an extent far beyond their actual shortcomings.

Nevertheless, there are real differences between the candidates and they should be evaluated by a combination of factual record and rational analysis. There will always be subjectivity in weighing electability vs policy positions vs ability to govern. Civil debate on these factors is what we should be doing here and how we should make informed decisions.

Too often we do not do civil debate very well here, and your post should serve as a well-deserved kick in the pants to shake some sense into us.

But let's also remember it is incalculably important that the best candidate wins the Democratic primary, and the answer is NOT all of the above.

[NanceGreggs]

113. Couldn't agree more.

I have no problem with "here are some facts you might consider". What I do have a problem with is "here is my take on the facts, and if you refuse to see things as I see them, you're obviously wrong."

I think we're on the same page here.

[NBachers]

114. Thank God!

The one that got me was the posting a few days ago referring to Clinton supporters as "hillbots." I will vote for Hillary Clinton if she's the nominee. I guess that puts me down into the demeaning category of "hillbot." I don't know why some poster who knows nothing about me wants to insult me personally.

There's more anti-Democratic vitriol being spewed forth here than on any comparable repube blogsite.

Thanks for speaking out for political and emotional maturity. There are days when I drive-by past DU because I just can't handle the shrill vituperation dealt out so freely against candidates I respect.