You may have a problem.

[last1standing]

If you think that Faux News is truly "fair and balanced", you may have a problem.

If you think that Gov. Richardson is a traitor for supporting a candidate, you may have a problem.

If you think that Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame are partisan hacks for supporting a candidate, you may have a problem.

If you think that a Democratic presidential candidate honestly said that all babies are punishments, you may have a problem.

If you purposely post right wing propaganda in an attempt to tear down your candidate's opponent's reputation, you may have a problem.

If you read smear columns from right wing sites and believe them, you may have a problem.

If you purposely smear a Democratic candidate with half-truths and distortions thinking it will help your candidate, you may have a problem.

If you believe that the Democratic candidate you support can do no wrong, you may have a problem.

If you think the Democratic candidate you don't support is leading a cult, you may have a problem.

If you now hate Keith Olbermann, Dan Abrams, and every other pundit and journalist who doesn't blatantly support your candidate, you may have a problem.

If you now hate Helen Thomas, Paul Krugman, and every other pundit and journalist who doesn't blatantly support your candidate, you may have a problem.



Your problem may be absolutism. You cannot understand that those who do not agree with you can still be good people. You do not understand that ALL politicians make mistakes and say stupid things when placed under a spotlight. You do not understand that the policies of our two remaining candidates are so similar that they cannot focus on them because the other candidate is proposing the same agenda.

I know there are some people posting here lately who want nothing more than to tear down this forum and create hatred between us. For the rest of us, though, isn't it time to take an honest look at who we are and what we support? The propaganda that has been posted here lately nearly drove me away, but I'd like to see if there are enough posters left at DU who understand that the vast majority of us support the same values regardless of who we think has the best chance of implementing them.

This primary isn't about good and evil, folks. It's about who is best able to carry our flag. Both candidates will do their best and it's time to remember that.

[damonm]

1. Proud to be the first LOUD K&R for this!

[Autumn]

2. Happy to be the fourth rec

:kick:

[whatchamacallit]

3. Word

[Guava Jelly]

4. 8th K&R

:)

[jgraz]

5. If you slag on this OP, you may have a problem

K&R :thumbsup:

[GoneOffShore]

6. Good job.

Another positive thread.

[DarienComp]

7. Agreed.

I would never disrespect Joe and Valerie Wilson or Paul Krugman for supporting Hillary, or for any other reason.

I can't promise that for Dan Abrams... not because he seems to support Hillary, but because I've never really liked him anyway. Before this campaign season, he had a penchant for Natalie Holloway-Lacie Peterson-Runaway Bride-type stories.

*edited for clarity

[last1standing]

12. I'm not sure he had a choice whether to report on those stories or not.

Those things happened before he got his own show and he probably had to report on what they gave him. I could be wrong, but I think that's generally how it goes - you put in your time until you gain the reputation to have a say. Really, I think most jobs are like that. :)

[DarienComp]

13. That's fair, I guess...

I dunno, maybe I just can't stand his manner, or something... does that make me awful?

O8)

[last1standing]

14. Yes it does.

But then I never watch his show, myself, so I'm probably just as bad. :)

I was just pointing out that most of these reporters who get their own shows probably had to jump through a lot of hoops and crawl through a lot of slime to get where they are - much like our politicians. :evilgrin:

[DarienComp]

16. Well, maybe I'll give Dan a break.

But Norah O'Donnell will never gain my favor. Never.
:+

[last1standing]

19. Poor Norah....

She had to...um....well she was...

Nope, I can't defend Norah, she's a mediawhore, through and through. :evilgrin:

[SunsetDreams]

8. happy to K&R

well said :)

[Prophet 451]

9. When and who did Wilson & Plame endorse?

I don't have any sort of problem with them endorsing the candidate of their choice but I must have missed that one.

[last1standing]

10. They've endorsed Clinton.

And since then, a few of the more vocal Obama supporters have been trashing them just like a few Clinton supporters have been trashing Richardson. Its sad, really.

[Prophet 451]

11. It is

It's always a shame when it comes to that kind of thing. Surprised I didn't hear about it when it happened. Thanks for the info.

[Usrename]

33. Wilson called Obama a coward in one of his hack hit pieces.

I think he owes Obama an apology.

[maximusveritas]

62. Yep, I think people would be fine with him just supporting Hillary

but when he repeatedly attacks Obama in such a disgusting manner, he crosses the line and deserves every bit of blowback he's gotten.

[Usrename]

63. Calling him a coward was way over the line.

Even KKKarl Rove won't go there. It was a distgusting piece of work.

[pnwmom]

65. Do you have a link to that? n/t

[Usrename]

67. The last paragraph of this hit piece he wrote last year.

We know that she has won and lost but always fought for her beliefs, which are widely shared within the Democratic Party. The battles she had been in have been fierce--and the battles in the future will be no less intense--and she has proven her steadfastness and is still standing. She does not have a cowardly record of voting "present" when confronted with difficult issues. She does not claim "intuition" as the basis of the most dangerous and serious decision-making. What she has is deep and vital experience, more important than ever in restoring our country's place in the world.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-wilson/the-real-hillary-i-know-_b_77878.html

[pnwmom]

75. Thanks. Do you happen to know if Obama's ever explained

why he had so many "present" votes?

I wouldn't have called that "cowardly" myself. Perhaps it was somewhat calculating, however -- something HRC is often accused of being.

[maximusveritas]

77. He did in the debates

Though that format didn't give him the chance to explain every single vote:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801230009

I think this piece provides the clearest explanation though:
http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2007/12/disparagement-o.html

[pnwmom]

79. Thanks for the good information. n/t

[Usrename]

78. It's part of the Illinois State Constitution.

'Present' Perfect
by Abner J. Mikva
The New York Times
February 16, 2008

>

Unlike Congress and the legislatures of most other states, each chamber of the Illinois Legislature requires a ''constitutional majority'' to pass a bill. The state Senate has 59 members, so it takes 30 affirmative votes. This makes a ''present'' vote the same as a no. If a bill receives 29 votes, but the rest of the senators vote ''present,'' it fails.

>

I recall voting ''present'' on many bills when I was in the Illinois Legislature. In the 1960s, for instance, I voted ''present'' on the annual highway appropriations bill. Like many of my fellow senators, I thought some of the money being allocated should have gone to public transportation. Still, I didn't want to vote no, because I did not want to stand against the basic principle of maintaining our public roads. So I voted ''present.''

It never occurred to me or to any of my critics that I was ducking responsibility for a making a decision. Mr. Obama was an outspoken member of the Illinois Senate, and not someone known for dodging questions, whether they were on ethics, police responsibility, women's choice or any other hot-button issue.


http://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/mikva-021608/index.html

Examining Obama's 'Present' Votes in Illinois
by David Schaper

>

To register a vote in the Illinois General Assembly, lawmakers have a choice of three buttons on their desk. The "yes" button is green. The "no" button is red, and the "present" button is yellow, says Rich Miller, who writes and publishes The Capitol Fax, a daily newsletter and blog on Illinois politics.

"There's a saying in Springfield that there's a reason why the present button is yellow," Miller says.

But Miller says that not all "present" votes are cowardly, including those cast by then-state Sen. Obama.

"After having put some thought into it, I don't think that Barack Obama was necessarily a coward for voting present on those bills. In fact, I think he believed that he was doing the right thing, because something, in his mind, might have been unconstitutional," Miller says.

Miller points out that, at times, Obama was the only lawmaker voting "present" on bills winning near unanimous support, even on issues he supported and on one he sponsored.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18348437

[pnwmom]

80. Thank you. Both posts in response to mine have helped clarify that

a "present" vote isn't equivalent to "abstain," which is what I (and probably a number of others) had thought.

[Usrename]

81. Nope, you need to understand the State Constitution.

In Illinois, a present vote is counted as a nay!

Unlike Congress and the legislatures of most other states, each chamber of the Illinois Legislature requires a ''constitutional majority'' to pass a bill. The state Senate has 59 members, so it takes 30 affirmative votes. This makes a ''present'' vote the same as a no. If a bill receives 29 votes, but the rest of the senators vote ''present,'' it fails.

[pnwmom]

82. I wonder how many other states have a similar system. I've never heard

of that before.

[Usrename]

83. I had never heard of it either. I have no idea if any other state is the same.

Hillary should have known about this though, she grew up there. She made a big deal about it in the debates. Go figure.

[last1standing]

84. Thanks to both of you for keeping this thread kicked.

:hi:

[pnwmom]

87. And here you go, again! n/t

[pnwmom]

86. Well, I grew up in Illinois, too, and I didn't know about that.

She was 17 when she left home and went to Wellesley. I can easily believe that she didn't understand every detail of Illinois politics.

Edwards clearly hadn't heard about this, either. He was practically interrogating Obama about it in the debate.

[SeattleGirl]

15. There ARE people on this board who have those problems.

Drives me nuts when I read those kinds of things.

Thanks for this post!

[Tribetime]

17. Thank you

[last1standing]

18. You know 18 recs this quickly tells me that there must be quite a few DUers sick of polarization.

It seems so much here has come down to the two sides trying to prove that the other side is evil, not just wrong but actually evil. When I found DU just after the 2000 election I thought that this site was the best thing to happen in a long time. Everyone here bonded together to make a small stand against the tyranny and injustice of the bush* administration. It really did feel like a family then as we all supported the same thing - getting back congress and the white house. When the 2004 election cycle came around things did get harsh but there were always voices of reason who were able to keep things calm. Kephra was a big help back then. Unfortunately, voices like his are gone and no one has come forward to take their place. Maybe that's what's missing here now, I'm not sure, but I think we need someone who can help bring us back together for the upcoming election.

Regardless, I'm glad that so many here have shown they don't fall for the propaganda and lies a few posters insist on spreading. Thanks to everyone who kicks or recommends this thread. :hi:

[Catherine Vincent]

44. "18 recs this quickly tells me that there must be quite a few DUers sick of polarization."

Ah, no. Obama supporters recommend anything that slams (or a hint at slamming) Clinton or her supporters. You know that.

[tavalon]

59. The reason it didn't have 36 recs in that amount of time, is that

half of us have GDP turned off for Latest and Greatest and only occasionally wander in here because of something on the Front Page. I didn't realize I was hitting a GDP piece until I clicked it and I decided to give it a read. I did and you got another rec, though half of us will never see it on the greatest page but then we aren't doing this polarization thing anymore - that's why we filter this place.

[ExPatLeftist]

68. Does irony mean nothing to you?

Look who is crapping where...

[last1standing]

71. I've seen this before, it's the Blinders Syndrome.

You can only see the things that will make you angry and not the things that you support. Therefore, when I mention Olbermann you work yourself into a fit but when I mention Krugman your mind can't process the information so your eyes disregard it.

Either that or you just like to hate. :shrug:

[last1standing]

20. Blatant self-promoting kick.

I think it's better to see this on the first page than "Obama/Clinton sucks blood from babies!"

:kick:

[Berry Cool]

21. Well said!

K&R

[DemVet]

22. If you think Obama can win this thing before the convention, you may have a problem.

[last1standing]

24. I'm afraid you may have a problem.

n/t

[cali]

28. We already know you have a problem, you really didn't need

to confirm it for us.

:hi:

[DemVet]

39. Yeah, a little puppy named "cali" following me around....Now HEEL!!!

Can't you put me on ignore or something?

[Danger Mouse]

42. post idiotic statement in positive thread = look like idiot = get called out on it.

Suck it up.

[ExPatLeftist]

69. Hear Hear. n/t

[Danger Mouse]

40. and the brain trust weighs in.

[DemVet]

47. Quit using your daddy's computer. He'll be home soon and will spank...

...your ass for using it to post ridiculous stuff on a grown-ups website. Alright little boy?

[Forkboy]

52. Sounds like you might be having a flashback.

[Danger Mouse]

53. why don't you look in a mirror while you say that, idiot?

[prolesunited]

85. Wow, glad to see the poster's point

didn't go over your head.

[readmoreoften]

23. I don't think Obama is leading a cult.

I think some Obama supporters think he is.

[last1standing]

25. If you're unable to see that both candidates' have a few over the top supporters,

You may have a problem.

[myrna minx]

26. K&R. n/t

[Lucky 13]

27. I agree. Kick.

[redqueen]

29. Nice one.

:thumbsup:

[knixphan]

30. you rock, last1

Perfect.

[last1standing]

31. Thanks.

I think a lot of us are sick of the juvenile threads that attempt to tear down our party leaders. It's time some of us said something about it. :)

[last1standing]

32. One last kick for a new crowd.

:kick:

[JayFredMuggs]

34. You cannot understand that those who do not agree with you can still be good people.

Great line!

I love this thread ! Thanks for posting it!

[last1standing]

37. I did like that line. :)

I'm serious about it, too. I don't agree with a lot of people on this board, never have, but I respect their opinions even when I'm knocking them. ;)

[NYDem Observer]

35. Seriously, if anybody finds fault with this thread

they may have a problem. :thumbsup:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

36. OMG, a ray of sanity!

:hi: Well done!

[Patriot Abroad]

38. Still proud to be a Democrat - Thanks!

[TBF]

41. Does this mean the cult is not meeting next Tues?

Great post, K&R!

[Danger Mouse]

43. Excellent post, K + R.

[dchill]

45. Go ahead and plagiarize Jeff Foxworthy...

I'll still K&R U.
:)

[yellerpup]

46. You've made Karl Rove very unhappy with this post.

He LOVES polarization. Thanks for breaking the evil spell! K&R! :kick:

[Kajsa]

48. Wonderful job, last1standing!

I'm proud and happy to K&R this great post.

Thank you so much.

:)

[Vattel]

49. awesome post

I support Hillary but I'd gladly vote for Obama (and probably will since it looks like he'll get the nomination).

[acmavm]

50. Are you possibly referring to people here referring to other posters as

scum?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5332910#5333087

Seriously anyone here who thinks they're damn candidate can carry it away all on their lonesome is an idiot. And people have looooonnnnngggg memories. And whoever takes it will NEED the other side. And you may not have it just because of what a few have posted.

[Kermitt Gribble]

51. K&R!!

Bring back the sanity!!!

[ekwhite]

54. K&R

[Willo]

55. Dang, I have a problems

...luckily none were on that list *whew* :crazy:

[kid a]

56. great post! (but what about James Carville - he has a problem and I have a problem with that

[pnwmom]

66. Carville is an idiot blowhard who's not running for anything and never will.

Just put him on ignore.

[Andrea]

57. Thanks for elevating

the conversation. It's sorely needed. Wish I could give this some kind of superduper gold star rec instead of just the usual.

[L0oniX]

58. Fire in the hole...........Kick!

[McCamy Taylor]

60. Is there a 12 Step Program for this?

[tavalon]

61. Yes

And the first step is to admit you are powerless over the insanity of GDP and will therefore TURN IT OFF! (says she who accidentally wandered in from the Front Page portal).

[pnwmom]

64. Great post! Love your list! Here's one more:

If you think you can best support your candidate by demonizing the other Democrat, you may have a problem.

[susankh4]

70. What if....

you are having the time of your life and think this is the best primary season ever?

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

Is that a problem?

:patriot:

[last1standing]

72. If you're saying that you enjoy the cruelty and anger here lately, then I feel sorry for you.

All I can say is good luck.

[susankh4]

73. Nope.

I ignore that sh**.

[loyalsister]

74. Excellent post!

Thanks for this. Belief in belief is rampant and something we to be wary of when we consider our posts.

[knixphan]

76. bravo again.

[pnwmom]

88. I'd recommend this over and over if I could. n/t