There are times when I take great pride in being a part of DU...

[rasputin1952]

and then, there are other moments I'd prefer not to recall that often.

Are we so set in out ways, so entrenched we can no longer move? We have two standing candidates, both have their finer points, both have their faults; just as with all of us, none of us are perfect, and we should not/can not demand perfection from them. What we have are two people that are fighting a battle that one will win.

Here is where I stand on this battle; I have no favorite, I can go either way, and until I see some substance from either or both candidates, neither will receive my support.

Race, gender, religion mean nothing to me in this confrontation. I want someone who will lead this nation back to where it belongs. I want someone who will roll-back the Patriot Act, I want someone who understands that a "free" market is little more than legalized looting of the Treasury. I want Peace, I want the chance for prosperity for every American, and I want our nation to reach out to poorer nations and help them feed themselves and get an education. I want people to sit down and talk, I want the screaming, yelling and clashing of swords to end.

Then, we can talk about issues that affect the vast majority of Americans and our fellow human beings on the planet.

None of this will happen if we consistently and with abandon attack our candidates without mercy. Tell my why Obama is a good choice, tell me why HRC is a good choice...don't tell me why they suck...for when you post such things, the world reads them, ...and when the world reads them, we look like 4 year olds in a cheap squabble in the schoolyard.

People...we are so much better than what we look like now, we are the party of the educated, the knowledgeable...and we look like we're in a pie fight.

[TheDoorbellRang]

1. Some are trying.

They're just getting sunk by the mudpie throwers.

kick for sanity.

[rasputin1952]

3. And for those, I have the greatest respect and admiration...

there are others who's posts just should not be answered...:)

[malletgirl02]

8. contructive posts

In order to do my part I will kick and recommend the constructive posts.

[rasputin1952]

11. And there is the begining of something we can all be proud of....

:)

[bridgit]

2. Sorry, DU has become whack-a-mole...

[rasputin1952]

5. Only when we allow it to be...

like any other game, whack-a-mole can be walked away from; one is never forced to play...:)

[bridgit]

7. hahahaha, I appreciate your sentiment...

;)

[rasputin1952]

9. As odd as this sounds...leaving a post is as easy as adding to

it. The flames proceed because people jump in, not because they walk around. Most nasty threads wold die if they were just left to sink into the abyss.

Discussion is always good, arguments just hold any presitge.

[Maddy McCall]

15. So you think the "Let it sink" thing and the boycott are beneficial to a forum...

that exists to discuss politics?

Understand please...you are a moderator and in a position to decide the fates of any of us who might disagree with you in this thread. So it's difficult to really discuss this topic fully, knowing that.

However, since you've posted what you have, I'd like to respond without feeling that somehow my doing so will jeopardize my membership here.

I think the "let it sink" crusade is the most idiotic one to grace this forum in a long time. It's groupthink run amok, and it's really stupid to reply to a thread that is in anyway critical of your candidate with "let it sink." It kills discussion in a discussion forum.

I also disagree with the boycott, another form of "walking away." Why even be a member here if you're not going to discuss issues.

One of the most heated discussions I was ever involved in at DU was the Terri Schiavo thing. Heated discussion, lots of insults and hurt feelings. Though it didn't look like it, I was listening. And when all was said and done, I changed my position on the topic. Why? Because sometimes it takes heated debate to change people's hearts and minds.

I'll disagree with anyone who tries to quash discussion at DU that doesn't break the rules. If it breaks the rules, lock it. If it doesn't--if it's a thread that mods deem worthy to be left open at DU (thus doesn't break the rules) then what exactly would be the rationale to "let it sink" or ignore it?

[bridgit]

18. Maddy McCall...

:hi:

[Maddy McCall]

20. Looks like you and I are on the same wavelength here.

:hi:

[rasputin1952]

23. Not at all, the"groupthink" exists simply because people

refuse to discuss politics are pursue inane "arguments" that do nothing but bash another's candidate(s).

Discussion and compromise are the very foundations of politics...finding a common ground where even if the best cannot be had, at least there is work toward the betterment.

My point is, we have come to a place where people are actively seeking out the most negative aspects of the two standing candidates, and others are taking the bait. It is one thing to discuss the similarities and differences each candidate presents, but the largest flaps are over the gaffes and foibles, some from years ago, that have become the stock-in-trade.


As an aside, when I post as a member, I post strictly as a member. I expect people to disagree w/me, (as well as agree), but I would never even consider action under mod status for something I've posted, (unless it is a serious rule infraction). I just want to make that clear to one and all.

edited: not enough caffeine to catch some small errors...;)

[Maddy McCall]

26. So, like I said, you seem to support the "let it sink" thing.

To me, that shuts down discussion. If you'll look around the forum today, you'll see where even mild criticism of Obama is being met with screams to "LET IT SINK!"

[rasputin1952]

28. Criticism based on fact is one thing...bashing for the sake of

bashing is entirely different animal.

The old canard, "my candidate is great, your's sucks", is the type of stuff I'm, talking about.

It is one thing to discuss say HRC's vote to go into Iraq, that is a legitimate issue...but it is not only issue. On several occasions she has pointed out it was a vote made in the heat of the moment, and based on false pretenses by a the administration. In any case, it merits discussion.

As for Obama and the recent flack over the Rev Wright, I feel this merits discussion as well.

However, I would not use either of these items to "judge" where a candidate stands now. The point is...since issues aren't being discussed, issues that affect each and every American, regardless of where they are on the political spectrum, what we are left with is a lot of speculation and innuendo.

In time, we'll come through this intact, we've been through the Primary Wars before, and a candidate will emerge that I hope we can all get behind and send into the WH w/the hope things will change somewhat quickly. A larger issue though, in all reality, is that both Houses of Congress must become more strongly D than they currently are. The work we do in our districts and out states will determine what really gets changed, far more than any president.

[Arkansas Granny]

27. Thanks for staying Maddy. You've pretty much outlined my feelings on this situation.

I've also had my mind changed on some issues due to a serious discussion that I've read on this forum and the reasoned debates that have been forth by thoughtful, intelligent posters. I've NOT changed my mind on issues because of the poo flinging, name calling or bullying threads that I've seen here lately.

I found DU after the 2004 election and felt that I had found some kindred souls. I have really enjoyed being here, but this primary season has really been trying. I was not prepared for the level of vitriol that I see posted here daily. There are proportionately few threads lately that don't devolve into flaming.

I understand that people have different positions and support different candidates. Many of us are now supporting our second or even third choices. It seems to me that the best thing for all of us is to elect a Democratic President in November and I have been really disappointed by those who claim to be Democrats, but that they will either not vote or will vote for McCain this fall.

BTW, glad to see you here this morning. :hi:

[bridgit]

17. You've been very kind & understanding to me previously...

when I was in need of such matters; as you may recall, so I have no quarrel with you...discussion is good, sure and why not? Who is able to argue against such a concept? Whom indeed? Perhaps but one poster. Perhaps their spouse. Perhaps many more. I disagree with this 'let it sink' mentality. It is a harbinger unto a chastened, formless, shapeless form of mindless acquiescence in fact. In fact it suppresses freedom...and does not exult it. There was not one day in which I 'got it'; stumbled round some room somewhere stoned and not un-knowing of what could be. Mine has not been so willy-nilly a life as to pretend to such a loft as that.

Ignorance!! It's what's for dinner!! :thumbsup:

[rasputin1952]

29. I love discusssion, it is a part of my very soul...

and you, dear friend, are both intelligent and articulate...as always, it is a pleasure to see you on the boards.


As for ignorance....if ignorance were truly bliss, there would be millions dancing in the streets. And I might well be among them, although I'd rather watch from a balcony...:)

[OzarkDem]

10. That's why many of us are walking away

Boycott begins at midnight.

[grantcart]

12. eastern or pacific?

[bridgit]

21. mountain

[rasputin1952]

13. A boycott does little more than give they opposition a win...

just ignore the nasty posts, let then die.

[Maddy McCall]

19. If it's nasty enough to break the rules, why don't you lock it?

If it's not nasty enough to break the rules, then why would you suggest that people ignore other DUers?

[rasputin1952]

24. All I'm suggesting is that people don't HAVE to post to

threads that exist only to undermine candidates w/o any real basis in fact.

FWIW...I do not, not does any other Mod, arbitrarily lock a thread.

[Maddy McCall]

25. I've never said that you do arbitrarily lock threads.

But if the problem is that stuff is getting posted that shouldn't merit response, then maybe mods should look at what the problem post is, and whether it breaks the rules.

You know, like calling out other DUers and stuff.

[rasputin1952]

30. We do Maddy...that is why we have "alert"....

we count on the members to help us out. Sometimes though, what appears to be a slam, might not be in the context of the thread.


Over the years, I have come to respect the vast majority of DU'ers, you being one of them. I have read brilliant pieces & I have read tripe, and everything in between. I try to be as objective as I can be, but I fall into subjection as well. When I see "creative bashing" I call it as I see it...when I see legitimate discussion, I am inspired. Lately, many threads have fallen into the "creative bashing" folder...and this is where the problem lies.

I respect both standing candidates, both are intelligent, articulate and have vision. I think either of them would make a good president, perhaps even a fine president; (I doubt either would go down as 'great', but who knows, bush has set the bar pretty low).

In any case...we are having a discussion now, and I find that exhilarating...this is what DU is all about, a meeting of the minds that can help to create a better future for all of us...:)

[Maddy McCall]

31. Well, after what has just happened to my thread...

while other truly vile threads are left open, I've lost all faith in the alert system.

[2rth2pwr]

4. Which candidate is going to roll back the Patriot Act?

Which one will give Peace?

[rasputin1952]

6. I don't know...answers are very short when the only thing that is

going on is absurd posturing. I have yet to hear anything of substance from either standing candidate. It is the "I got you game" at this point...but I can tell you, they one that speaks d Peace and rolling back the PA will be the first one to make a leap into a realistic fray. All McCain has is 100 years of wr, if we can't beat taht, we're in sad shape.

[Bonobo]

14. Obama supporters make a concerted effort to let flamebait drop because it isn't

being deleted and then we get called out for our efforts to clean this place up.

Then we try to post threads that are Anti-McCain to try to move into the General Election and spare us the further divisivensess here, and the Hillary supporters whine that it's not over yet! Waaaaaaah!

So what are we supposed to do?

I feel myself getting more and more angry as the Hillary supporters continue with their SELF AVOWED STRATEGY OF TEARING DOWN OBAMA! IT IS THEIR ONLY HOPE LEFT!

So I am getting pissed off, because this is going to be our nominee and the bandwidth that I have supported for years with donations (not this year, sorry I am broke) is being used to fill with HINTS FOR FREEPERS TO USE!

[Yes We Did]

16. I did my part today.

Positive threads and just ignored... actually ignored not put on ignore, threads I didn't like.

It's that simple.

[dailykoff]

22. Okay, why Obama is a good choice, take 25:

"Barack Obama's Stirring 2002 Speech Against the Iraq War"

Senator Barack Obama (D-Il), then an Illinois state senator, delivered these remarks in October 2002 at the Federal Plaza in Chicago:



"I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.

I Don't Oppose All Wars

"I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil.

"I don't oppose all wars. After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.

Opposed to Dumb, Rash Wars

"I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

"That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics."

from full speech at link: http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/Obama2002War.htm?rd=1

............

Hillary:
- NO on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.
- YES on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.
- YES on Kyle/Lieberman bill that sets the stage for the US to take military action against Iran.
- YES on the Iraq War Resolution.
- Hillary refused to sign the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge.

OBAMA:
- YES on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.
- NO on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.
- In response to the Kyle/Lieberman bill that sets the stage for the US to take military action against Iran Obama drafted legislation stating that Congress did not grant President Bush the authority to attack Iran, either through the Kyl-Lieberman amendment or any resolution previously adopted.
- Not then in the Senate but took a public stand against the Iraq War Resolution
- OBAMA signed the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge.


McCain:
- NO on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.
- YES on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.
- YES on Kyle/Lieberman bill that sets the stage for the US to take military action against Iran.
- YES on the Iraq War Resolution.
- McCain refused to sign the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge.

original post by grassfed: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4990975&mesg_id=4990975

............................