If I've sounded "negative" it's because I don't want our party to lose.

[Ken Burch]

Somebody called me "one of the most negative posters" on this board the other day.

It's like this.

I want us to win.

To win, we need unity and we need to begin the process of healing.

This means we need a bashing-free zone between our remaining candidates.

All of what I've said is about creating such a zone, such a climate of reconstructing the sense of purpose and hope we all had a few months ago. That hope that has been crushed by the ugly tone this race has taken on, the politics of destruction and false division.

I believe that we HAVE to beat John McCain.

I believe this requires making sure none of the new voters that have been brought into this campaign are driven away and made to feel that they have no right to have a say.

I believe that we can't win if one of our candidates keeps trying to win by destroying the other one, while offering nothing positive to replace what's being destroyed.

It's not asking too much to have both candidates be strictly positive towards each other.

It's not asking too much to have our nomination contest be strictly positive and progressive from here on it.

That's all I've been trying to say.

That isn't negative.

Negative would be to give up and say nothing.

Negative would be to let ugliness win.

Negative would be to stand by will the idealists and the new voters are crushed for no reason.

I want us to win.

That's the reason I've said all I've said.

Is that such a negative thing?

[Window]

1. For the record Ken, I don't think you're negative at all. Nice post. K/R.

:kick:

[livingmadness]

36. BEWARE PEEPS

I'm noticing a real trend on this board and others (Kos etc), of posts that all have the same theme, the EXACT SAME THEME - one of defeat, despair however cleverly rationalized by the poster as genuine concern. Now I don't know the OP here, and you may be totally genuine. If you are then you'll understand why it is still important to notify posters of the pervasiveness of this tactic, and won't take offense.

REMEMBER - Obama's biggest and strongest support comes from places like this. His internet campaign has been second to none. Would not surprise me at all if the effort was on to undermine that. And if you don't imagine republicans have the patience to join up, act as innocuous supporters over time, the odd post here and there, then you underestimate them.

So regardless of whether the OP is genuine or not - PAY NO ATTENTION!! The polls were bound to take a wee dip following the attention re: Wright, look for them to improve markedly from now 'til next Tuesday. I firmly believe that even more high profile supers in the coming days, and some strong wins in NC, Indiana will bring this to an end. HOLD ON OBAMA-ITES, THE END IS IN SIGHT!!!

[FrenchieCat]

2. Maybe its that you are buying into the Psyche Op operation being ran around here....

The only folks truly "concerned" about some crazy pastor, are the same one that voted for the guy with the last minute revealed DUI, and the Guy who's mistress came out with recordings of his voice right in the middle of the campaign trail.

[populistdriven]

3. how the hell could we lose to this blathering old fool

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=125742&mesg_id=125742

[Ken Burch]

4. If anybody could, it's our party.

And HRC would think nothing of making sure we lost, just as her DLC cohorts made sure Dukakis lost in 1988 to set up the unjustified purge of Democratic progressives, and just as Carville arranged the surrender in Ohio in 2004(since a Kerry victory would've ended HRC's chances and been the end of the DLC.)

[democracy1st]

5. Exactly why its Obama08

[cornermouse]

8. So I guess we drive away the voters who don't

agree with Obama? You had my interest till you posted this.

[Ken Burch]

16. Obama and his campaign never attacked any of HRC's constituencies.

And the claim that he somehow was an enemy of older women was always a despicable lie.

[laugle]

26. Go have a beer

with Obama.....I want a real president!

[Ken Burch]

28. Cindy Sheehan would never support the more hawkish candidate.

She probably doesn't back Obama either, but you aren't really honoring her values by backing the candidate you support.

[laugle]

29. What are you smoking.......just because I have a quote I liked from her?

You need to take a break, your reply to me is bizarre.........

I'm from the Vietnam generation, so if your talking war, I know plenty about it, don't even go there.......

[Ken Burch]

30. The quote was pertinent, in my view, because of the contradiction

between her progressive, humanist, antiwar values and the status quo "vaporize Iran" values embodied by your candidate.

You may be from the Vietnam generation, but so was our last Democratic president. He ended up abandoning most of that generation's values on foreign policy.

[laugle]

32. Because you are a long time

member here, and a friend of one of my favorite guys Swamp Rat, I'll reply just once more.

Cindy's quote is about Unity. Without it we are doomed. As far as the war in Iraq goes, Cindy was not against it until her son was killed.

People evolve, change, and yes, sometimes contradict themselves; ever heard the phrase "walking mass of contradictions?"

You will never find a candidate that shares all your values, but I think you can assume that all or most of the people who are members here are against the war.

I think you forget how this nation felt on 9-11 when we were attacked. People were angry, scared, and wanted revenge. And this happened in Hillary's state of N.Y. I won't make excuses for her vote or many others, but the mood was much different then, and based on the intelligence at that time many voted for the IWR. Also, Kerry voted for it, did you vote for him? I really think they would have recalled her if she didn't vote for it! I still believe she would be the better president and would win.

I read some of your posts and found them demeaning to Hillary and undeserved.....

[laugle]

34. BTW, she said

obliterate! Ahhhh you know she was just talking tough.........LOL

Hell, Ahmedinajad said he would wipe Israel off the map, I didn't believe that either..............

"Speak tough--and carry a small stick" LOL

[shaniqua6392]

14. You had my sympathy until.....

You blamed her for wanting us to lose. You blamed her for the Dukakis loss in 1988. You blamed her for purging Dem progressives. You blamed her for Kerry's loss in 2004. Oh well. I guess you will have to accept that you are negative. I would like to add that it is supposed to rain today and it is all Hillary Clinton's fault. How dare she? For the record, I would also like to add that I am not a Clinton supporter. I am a Democrat and will proudly vote for either candidate. However, when I see that she is blamed for everything bad that happens in the world I think it is extremely unfair....and negative. Don't forget about half of the Democratic Party that has voted for her. Obama will need them and if all they see is Clinton being unjustly accused of such falsities, they may run to McCain. If the proverbial negative shoe fits.....wear it.

[Ken Burch]

17. You didn't read my post for clarity.

I didn't say she was exclusively to blame for any of those things. I said Bill was to blame for some of them, the DLC for some.

And I don't blame her for everything bad that happens in the world.

You would have to agree, however, that the continuation of her campaign, and the tactics that campaign has used, have had purely negative effects.

If she had run a positive campaign as a progressive who welcomed grassroots activism, we'd all be in a much better situation right now.

[Hope And Change]

6. K & R!

:kick:

[usrbs]

7. You do realize that your posts are detrimental to your sudden desire for unity, don't you?

You've been on my list of, let's call them unfair, Obama supporters for weeks, now. I almost never bother opening your posts. And now you want unity. Why didn't you think of that earlier?

[hokies4ever]

9. pot calling the kettle black?

didn't you just create a post wishing Obama a successful 'post-campaign' career? Hush idiot.

[usrbs]

12. Actually I didn't. There is a search function here. Use it.

[hokies4ever]

13. Why bother?

you're just another divisive Hillary supporter. The original poster was trying to make amends for his negativity and you decided to not accept his apology. If you're going to be a prick, go to johnmccain.com and invest in some military hardware stock.

[usrbs]

15. I'm sure there will be many other such posts if Obama gets the nomination

as seems likely.

And many of them will be from the very worst and most offensive posters. I'm pointing out that the earlier you stop behaving like an asshole the more believable your apology and call to unity will be.

You've proved that truth doesn't matter to you, nor does decency. But don't worry, I accept your future apology now.

[hokies4ever]

19. Go look up what a pledged delegate is

then tell Hillary and ask her kindly to either accept the definition or get out of our party. You can go along with her too. Plenty of real estate will be cheaply available in Iran after she nukes it.

Hillary doesn't have the balls to do the job of President. She didn't have the balls to stand up to Bill Clinton's cheating ways, she won't have the balls to stand up to other powerful men.

[2rth2pwr]

25. Pledged delegates are not legally bound to vote for the candidate they represent.

Democratic candidates campaign for the nomination in a series of primary elections and caucus events. The results from these primaries and caucuses determine the number of pledged delegates committed to vote for each candidate at the Democratic National Convention. Pledged delegates are allocated to each of the fifty US states following two main criteria: (1) the proportion of votes each state gave to the Democratic candidate in the last three presidential elections, and (2) the percentage of votes each state has in the United States Electoral College. In addition, fixed numbers of delegates are allocated to the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Democrats Abroad under the party's Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention.<6> Pledged delegates reflect the preferences of voters but are not actually legally bound to vote for the candidate they represent. However, since candidates may remove delegates who they feel may be disloyal, the delegates generally vote as pledged.<7> In 2008, a total of 3,253 pledged delegate votes will be awarded through the primaries and caucuses.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2008#Pledged_delegates
link is breaking paste this in your browswer- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2008#Pledged_delegates

pdf of the party rules- http://s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/3e5b3bfa1c1718d07f_6rm6bhyc4.pdf

[Ken Burch]

31. You can't deny, however,

That if there was a massive defection of pledged Obama delegates to your candidate, the fully justified sense of betrayal and rage on the part of Obama voters would destroy any chance we would have to win.

Your candidate can't just shove the progressive majority aside and then DEMAND that they accept her on "party unity" grounds.

There's no way that kind of arrogance could be tolerable.

[2rth2pwr]

33. If there was good reason, I don't see it as an issue. The pledged delegates can

stay, it will go over easier if it was the super delegates that did it as a firewall.

They were created to use their own judgment.

[Ken Burch]

18. My posts have all been in the service of not having the more progressive, more positive candidate

brought down by a more conservative, more negative campaign...a campaign that isn't worthy of the better values of many HRC supporters.

There simply hasn't been a case for HRC staying in and running a campaign based mainly on tearing the leading candidate down and creating division. Even you would have to agree, if you were looking at it from an objective perspective, that HRC's decision to stay in no matter what has done us all much more harm than good.

If she had run a positive, inclusive, progressive grassroots campaign she'd have the nomination and victory in the fall all sewn up.
It's the campaign she ran instead of that that ended up being unfair and negative...and, in the end, unfair even to herself, since it has lowered her in the eyes of millions when lowering herself was never necessary.

[laugle]

35. Really, talk about a

contradiction! He's been lecturing me about it...............

[mmonk]

10. I haven't had a problem with your posts.

[quantass]

11. Humph, i was expecting an incoherent rant ... You make total sense to me! Good post!

[Ken Burch]

20. Thanks...I think....

I hope I haven't led to to expect incoherent rants as a matter of course...

[BenDavid]

21. Ken, I do not know to whom you support but if it is HRC, you could

post in here HELLO and MOST obama folks would brand you a bigot and a racist and call you more vile names. So, if you wish to post what you hinestly know is your thoughts and concerns then post away my friend. We HRC supporters believe in someones right to express their opinion, whether it be good bad, mad, happy.

[Ken Burch]

24. I don't support HRC. If she had run as a progressive, inclusive positive candidate

A candidate who validated the role of activists and sought to bring us together, it might have been different.

She'd have it won if she'd run on her 70's values.

[CK_John]

22. Why do you assume McCain will be their candidate. The GOP and Cheney are not going to

bet the ranch on this sick old nutter. That is your big mistake and yes you are very negative.

[Ken Burch]

23. Well, they don't have a history of turfing out somebody who's gone over the top in delegates.

And if they did dump McCain, that would make our task harder.

I don't see why you think that the possibility they'd nominate someone else somehow rebuts my concern about our nomination race not being over.

The only thing I'm negative about is the possibility of all the possibility of change and a progressive realignment being derailed by the last minute switch from a popular, engaging candidate to an unpopular one who drives people away.

And about the unpopular candidate hurting the party by staying in for no reason.

[CK_John]

27. Don't worry it will be decided when the olympics end and the convention begins. n/t