Like it or not......

There are those of us who feel "Clinton Fatigue" is real ( http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=3505905 ), but, we are told by HRC's supporters that not only is that not so, but we support "RW Talking Points" when we voice that concern ( http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3506830&mesg_id=3506830 )


There are those of us who absolutely DO NOT want another Corporatist in the WH -- Republican OR Democratic. HRC is not only a Corporatist, she is one of the leaders of the Corporate Wing of the Democratic Party -- the DLC ( http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=137 ) To this concern, we have heard everything from "She is not!", all the way to "Well, at least there's a (D) after her name on the ballot! ) None of those are any comfort, but, I will say, the defenses are myriad and varied as the people who make them. I feel if a Corporatist wants a vote, they need to look to the Corporations that fund them, and their "Corporate Personhood" for the votes, because I am done voting for them. Period.


There are those of us who do not want a War-monger anywhere near the Oval Office ever again. And, we feel HRC has been a cheerleader for every war during the Bush years, on into the future... not only because she hasn't bothered to deny it ot renounce any of her votes for war, although I do concede she's been really careful how she's voted since tossing her hat into the ring. (I just don't see it as a trend in her thinking, just a ploy to get elected. Ditto for all the others, except for Kucinich and Gravel, btw... )


There are those of us who want Impeachment NOW. Bush, Cheney, Bush AND Cheney, Alberto Gonzales. We want criminal proceedings (not just endless hearings) against Bush, Cheney, Rove, Gonzalez, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, and anyone else involved in getting us into the Iraqi Occupation and the resulting atrocities by LYING to us. They have blood on their hands. And, while none of the candidates (except Kucinich and Gravel) has called for these impeachments and endictments loudly and publicly, HRC has been steadfast in her refusal to take a War with Iran off the table.


There are those of us who want our troops out of Iraq IMMEDIATELY. Not tomorrow, not a year from now, certainly NOT 10 years from now. As far as I know, only Kucinich, Gravel, and Richardson have called for immediate withdrawal.


There are those of us who say "enough is enough" to HRC for one or all of these reasons and are told we can (more or less) go f*ck ourselves ( http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3505824&mesg_id=3505824 ) -- that she'll be nominated and then elected with or without us. We are told that if we don't vote in the GE (for the Democratic Nominee which, as any Clinton supporter will insist to your face, will be HRC, even before one vote is cast), we are naive, worthless, closet Republicans (?), closet Naderites (?), stupid, evil, or a host of other insulting things. (Just a note to candidate supporters: Insulting people is not the smart way to get them to vote for your candidate. If you figure your pile of insults will wear those like me down, instead of putting us completely and irrevocably off, you will be mistaken. I have never made decisions based on what other people think I should do, and I promise I won't start now. Those of us who are like that will tell you, this will backfire -- or be a waste of time and energy.)


Here's where I stop speaking for others, and only speak for myself:


Maybe I'm just being too cynical. That's a word that's been tossed my way a lot. Or, maybe I'm too idealistic. Another word that is flung in my direction, (interestingly and, I think, oddly) often with a bigger sneer than the "cynical" epithet. Anyway, maybe it's just my problem, and I am at this point, willing to concede it is, but..... I grew up thinking the Democratic Party was something special. I was proud to be a Democrat. I felt it was something I was willing to fight for (as I did for many times, over many years). And, by saying that I refuse to vote AGAINST the Republicans this time, and vote for the Democrat "just because" they are the nominee, I am (as I see it) once again fighting for my Party. I will no longer ENABLE the WRONG WING of the Democratic Party to go on waging war, not calling for accountability, representing Corporations over the will of the people in my name. No way, No how. I WILL NOT. ANd, there is no name you can call me, no challenge you can throw at my feet, no argument you can make that will change my mind. I AM DONE VOTING AGAINST THE INTERESTS OF ALL AMERICANS just to see someone with a (D) after their name elected.


I will not be moved. I will not be swayed. And, I see this as my duty as a Democrat. And, even though I can't speak for them, I don't think those of us who feel as I do will be, either.


With great respect to ALL Democrats, even those who disagree,


TC

thanks you for giving the country President Right Wing Republican, hiw anti stem cell vetoes and his eventual neanderthal Supreme Court appointments.

Oh sorry. I'm not supposed to try and engage you in dialogue, how arrogant of me. I'm just supposed to watch while you drag the country down the drain on the cross of anguished martyrdom.

I'm voting for Edwards in the primary, and I hope he wins the nomination. But if Hillary gets is, not only will I vote for her, but I will donate money and time to the effort.

It's just too damn important.

so I see you unnecessarily combative comment (especially in the face of my conciliatory tone) to be inappropriate and unnecessary. Every day, I sit here and deteriorate a little more, thank you. But, I see that as a reason to leave my kids and grandkids with a Democratic Party that will benefit them, and ALL Americans, and not just the corporations and the War Machine.

If you feel my vote is so important, perhaps it is you who are being irresponsible by not helping me nominate a candidate ALL DEMOCRATS can vote for happily and without reservation.

Otherwise, I stay home, and for the first time in a long life, NOT VOTE AT ALL.

Thank you for your reply, and PEACE.


TC

but I just don't see how the "my way or the highway" crowd can condemn their fellow Democrats to a possible four or eighth years more of unending hell.

It's so completely irrational. She is not the demon you make her out to be - she's just not. Look at her voting record, look at her life, for pete's sake.

This country, my friend, needs you now more than ever to step up to the plate. And that does not mean staying at home. It means understanding that we do not live in a perfect world and if the Democrat can nudge us even ONE foot closer to our goalpost, then that's worth the walk to the polls. That's the gift you give to your kids and grandkids, the wisdom to know that we live in a compromised, imperfect society and the love that impels you to overlook disappointment and march bravely into the future.

the "my-way-or-the-highway" one?

You are saying you expect me to give up all my ideals and values and convictions to vote for anyone with a (D) after his or her name, when all I ask you to do is help me elect a (D) we can both vote for.

Consider that, please.

TC

I"m not voting for her in the primary either. I would, frankly, rather see John Edwards as our standard bearer. I think he's more capable of attracting swing voters, I think he's articulate and passionate and believable, and I think he made a pretty amazing choice in spouses. :)

But, should he fail in his bid, and should Hillary succeed, I will not be disheartened and will take up the good fight and vote for her in the general. I don't agree with her on everything, but she is so far better than anything the Republicans could possibly offer up that it's a no brainer.

Put it this way, I probably am as wary of Obama as you are of Hillary. I don't trust him, I find him phony and I don't think he's quite ready for primetime. Should he win the nomination, however, you will see an "Obama" bumpersticker on my car. Because I know that a "Democratic President' means a Democratic administration - hundreds of thousands of Democratic appointed Cabinet staffers, all of whom making small decisions everyday that are the MIRROR OPPOSITE of what a Republican would do. A Democratic president means Democratically appointed federal judges, not just the SC, all of whom have major impact on our daily lives. A Democratic president means a chief exec who can issue a progressive executive order and change lives.

I will vote for the Democrat, because it's in the country's best interest to do so. Even if I"m not wild about the PARTICULAR Democrat.

How is that possibly "my way or the highway"? I tend to think it's just the opposite.

"Can't Possibly Vote for Hillary" threads, and consider that almost all of us in that category have the most sincere convictions and ideals involved in that statement. I, for one, have never missed an election... not even at the municipal level. For me to stay home and refuse to vote is a real statement... the only one I feel I have left, in fact.

:hi: have a great Sunday!

TC

...and nobody came?

Already, nearly half of Americans do not vote. Ever wonder why?

With the elections being stolen right out from under us, when our votes are not being counted, and all we are being offered are false choices as candidates, presented always with a "lesser of two evils" choice in the presidential races, is it any wonder people are staying home on election day?

Choosing note to vote out of protest is only effective if people rally in large numbers and make a public ballyhoo about WHY they are not voting. Staying home and staying silent will not make a difference.

It would take one hell of an organized effort and demonstrations across the country. But at this point, it may be necessary if we are to send the message that we're fed up with business as usual and that we DEMAND free and fair elections again.

At least, that's what they do in Latin America and other countries when election results are disputed. They organize, protest, and throw the bastards out on their ears! They'll start a revolution over an election!

Here in America, we just lie there and take it. We walk into the voting booth, hold our noses, and reluctantly force ourselves to push the little button that says either (D) or (R), despite our consciences.

Well, it's a lot easier than having to think about the mess our country is in and how we got here. Then, we'd have to admit that we share the responsibility and actually DO something about it. That seems an awful lot to ask of a society which is more concerned with what Paris Hilton, Britney Speaks are Michael Vick are doing than curing the cancer that is eating us up from within.

Time to wake up and smell the coffee, America. It just may be the last pot brewing!

the only group that will react from your statement is the republicans they make careful note as to how to keep democrats home... and you have answered one way... they will be sure to continue to create issues of future nominees and make others take the same stand you are...

our system gives the win to the highest vote getter and the one who wins the most states... you think that this "NO Vote" display is going to make some difference... sure it could... if enough people stay home who might have otherwise voted dem. then the republican wins...

if your convictions are worth the change of the Supreme Court to move all the way to the right and women will use coat hangers to get abortions or doctors will be jailed for assisting women illegally... Big Brother will continue to take over our privacy rights... corporations will be given the green light to everything they do... and the RW will change the future of all of us for the next 30 years until the new members of Supreme Court retired or die... how do you feel about Bill's picks? Hillary will give similar... a woman for sure...

At 48 myself.... that could mean the remainder of my life... 2 justices are going to be stepping down in the next four years... they are waiting for the election and hoping a dem. gets in....

I will be out on election day and knocking on doors to get as many people out to vote as possible... that is democracy... staying home to "make a statement is worthless!"

The SCOTUS is irrevocably RW for at least a generation now. If you believe we will ever see anyone truly "Liberal" appointed there in any of our lifetimes, you are extremely naive. The best we can hope for is a "moderate", because that's the best we can do with the polarized confirmation process we have today.

A "moderate" cannot be counted on to come down on the side of the litle guy. (S)he may or may not, but no one who is guaranteed to hold the line against the extreme Right will ever be confirmed again anyway.

So the best we can hope for is a kinder and gentler limbo to live in where the SCOTUS is concerned.

TC

than those the rw Reps would appoint.


thank you for your impassioned stance and willingness to hear the other side, as well, TC.

This has turned into an exptraordinary thread. I really wanted to have my say and then a conversation about all points of view without starting a flame-war, and all the great posters who came here, and had their say were the ones who made this thread so phenomenal.

Thanks you for your post, and your opinion... and thanks really to everyone who posted here, without almost any snark at all. If all discussions about such thigs could be had this way, this board would be all the better for it, I think.

Thanks again, tigereye!

TC

one persons idea of the perfect candidate does not fit the perfect candidate for another... and so we vote and give the job to the winner... your type is one of the most dangerous to the party... the President and the party that wins... carries with it many important positions... should Hillary win... she appoints a cabinet... Secretary of State... Attorney General... Supreme Court Justices... all of whom will make a huge difference... some may be moderate or more progressive or more liberal...

if a liberal liberal says either we nominate a true liberal or I will not vote... then you get a republican in office... if you nominate a liberal liberal... the independent voters vote republican... yah don't want to believe it but it is true... so you get a republican in office...

instead of bitching that a candidate isn't perfect or to your liking... campaign for your choice and if that person doesn't get in... push for cabinet appointments that will make you happy...

progressive thinking means moving forward.. not standing still...

if you take the stand of "all or nothing"... you get nothing!!!!

Sometimes when you demand all or nothing, you get "all"... as long as I'm prepared for "nothing" (and I am), I don't see the problem. And, I can't see how voting for the "same-old-same-old" will be moving ahead... it's just maintaing the status quo. I won't do that anymore.

Elect Hillary without me. For goodness' sake, you would think my one little vote was going to end the world as we know it! (It won't. I promise. If my vote were that powerful, there wouldn't have been a Republican POTUS since Eisenhower.)

So, chill out and work for your candidate. If you work hard enough you won't even notice I'm not with you.

TC

understood. Don't stay home now so that you don't have to WISH you could stay home on election day.

How do we even know that a DLC candidate would not nominate another rw or rrrw candidate for judge, if elected. I have no faith in them.

rw - right wing
rrrw - really religious right wing

if elected. I have no faith in them."

We don't, so that's a very good point. See the articles about just that discussed way down-thread. The DLC cannot be trusted, and HRC is an officer of that group. Ergo... I can't trust her, either. Not with the Supreme Court, or anything major. See antigop's posts at #85, #90, and #92. Very eye-opening.

TC

You're out there beating the drum for HRC continuously..

After all of the pro-HRC threads you've jumped in on, why am I have trouble believing this claim?

I've been an Edwards backer for months. I jump on the anti Hillary posts, because they piss me off. Matter of fact, the sheer idiocy of the venom directed at her has caused her to rise in my esteem.

it comes to the deciding point. Maybe someone here knows what the DLC position is on that, presently, will give us a clue of what she will deliver.

DLC DINO Republican-lite - it's time to let them know now that there are plenty who will not help them. And who knows what will happen if they have their way AGAIN.

I am as anti-DLC as I am anti-Republican given the way both have shown us how great they believe imperialistic killing is. I'm serious. That's what they represent because that is who they are connected to.

If the little people of this world ever get this turned around and get the peace they deserve, the DLC will be left behind.

DLC will be left behind."

I love that sentence! Beautiful. Wouldn't it be great if they'd just go away on their own, though? LOL!

Thanks for posting that!

TC

BUT...Do you have congressional or senate seats on the ballot next November? If so, I suggest voting for those even if you don't vote for president. Same for local ballot initiatives where your vote could make a real difference.

If we get a veto-proof majority (with new progressive candidates elected) in the house and senate next year, it will make an enormous difference in this country's future...no matter who is president.

As for me, I will vote for (and even support) the dem who wins the primary which, since I am a Kucinich supporter, will probably not be my ideal choice. Why, you ask? Because we are the democratic base and can help pull our party back left of center where it belongs. Example -- look at Schwarzenager in CA. He's the most moderate republican you will see these days...he had to shift to the left in order to hang on to the governorship.

And, I mean it.

If it'll make you feel better, I won't vote for ANY of the current candidates who are DLC, and a couple who aren't but are hawks, nonetheless.


TC

What you should do is damn well get down on your knees and apologise to a woman whose boots you don't sound fit to lick.

I think you should have made a plain, straightforward apology to Totally Committed and your response was lamentable, but perhaps not as lamentable as my unduly viteruperative outburst; for which I apologise.

If stem cell research is so great why are'nt the
big pharma investing in it and make a killing?

It is the tax payer funding for the research is what
is not in the law books.

that's insulting, antagonistic BS.




Again, ignoring the issues and concerns of millions of voters does NOT serve Democrats and may AGAIN serve up a "President Right Wing Republican."

I have MS, don't you dare speak for me.

everyone except for Mojorabbit.

to vote for?"

Honestly, we have the Republicans (corporation-lovers central) vs. Vechy Dems (corporation-likers central).

That's a choice?

I am no fan, but I can tell you, she is not obese. And, since she has the best healthcare guaranteed her -- carte blanche -- my guess is she's pretty darned healthy.

I think she looks awesome for a woman our age!

TC

RKF Jr. and Kucinich in 2008, 2112, then RFK Jr in 2116, 2020 and just maybe we can clean up the reagan, Bush Clinton, Bush destruction of our country.

Where are all the Democrats who will help us?

I wonder.


TC

to FIX THIS MESS we're in. My thoughts exactly, Hemingway.

Jesse Hemingway wrote:
<<<RKF Jr. and Kucinich in 2008, 2112, then RFK Jr in 2116, 2020 and just maybe we can clean up the reagan, Bush Clinton, Bush destruction of our country.>>>

Absolutely. But we can't just sit here and wish it so. We must act.

Bobby Kennedy Jr. needs to hear from you right now if you want him to get in this race. Please, please, please SIGN THE PETITION to draft him and let your voices be heard!

Do it here: http://RFKin2008.com

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3504714&mesg_id=3504714

We need a POTUS for ALL Americans!


TC

because you are not alone. The more you hold to your principles and Ideals and not lower them to meet other people's low expectations the more you can sleep. I am done with holding my nose for the least offensive in voting or the compromised.

I fully applaud and let the moralizers of their own truths cast about, but to Thine own Self Be true!

I appreciate that!

TC

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3505277


TC

...the attack?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3497982&mesg_id=3497982

TC

NO and if the Dems run a candidate that supports a war in Iran, and the Greens or Libertarians run an anti war candidate, I will be forced to vote against the war.

for me is no choice at all. When it comes time to vote, I will do so, for the least threatening candidate. Elections being what they are...even that might not be a choice...but I'll play...because like winning the lottery...I think there is alway a chance. It's a shame that the habitual actions...the legislation that this nations representatives enact, consistently support corporations at the detriment of society...but public discourse is limited to the narrowly defined, one line emotional hot-button issues, that make adversaries out of us all. The choice of who I vote for, is based on fear, with little correlation to my present day reality.

Awww..... :hug:

Thanks for posting.


TC

I don't want someone like her as a good coporatist she is suddenly pardoning these bums as the first act of her taking office, and then proceeding to use those powers given to her by Bush in the same way that Bushco has been using them. Then the rest of the Democratic Party will learn how STUPID they are in not paying attention to detail that this is more a corporatist dynasty that doesn't want to lose power than a Republican Party that doesn't want to lose power.

We need someone elected that is committed to taking OUT the corporate power that has been infecting our government for so long in increasing ways!

That means:

1) Highest priority of getting true public campaign financing in place.

2) Nominating supreme court justices that will recognize that decisions like that providing "corporate personhood" were even more "judicial activist" (make that "court clerk activist", since it was a court clerk that made that decision and not the justices in the landmark decision's headnote), and overturn this ruling as well as others like "corporate free speech", etc. that are tearing up our democracy.

3) On just about every other major issue coming before them (global warming, election integrity reform, bankruptcy rules, outsourcing, tax laws, the Iraq war, handling of Katrina and other disasters, privatizing the military, health insurance, etc.) that they represent the people collectively first and foremost and have NO vested interest in "representing" corporate money interests.

Totally. Completely. And, without a moment's hesitation.

Really good post!

TC

Republican OR Democratic" . . .

absolutely correct, TC . . . and well stated . . . many of us have been saying for years that the real political struggle in this country is the corporatists vs. the populists . . . and the big unanswered question is . . .

"Can we restore citizen authority over corporations before they completely destroy us and the planet we inhabit?" . . .

Otherwise, this Party, this country, and all working Americans are SCREWED.

TC

looks like the next generation doesn't want Capitalists in power either:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1764019


Check it out!



TC

Sorry, I'm not falling for your POV...

She will make a good President, as will ALL the Democratic Candidates...

ALL of the repukes are worse than the next...

I'm glad you like Hillary. I sincerely envy you your lack of doubt.

Cheers!

TC

The gamble that those millions will be forced to vote for the "Lesser of Evils" is dangerous. In a string of stolen elections, having a narrow margin can mean YOU LOSE.

:think:

This will be my 10th Presidential election.
In all that time nothing has really changed in Washington.
If anything, it just gets worse.

Corporations have person-hood while citizens have been reduced
to "consumer units" and "workers" to be used or discarded if
cheaper workers can be found off-shore.

We try to shame Republicans who put Party over Country.
Voting for someone you don't believe in just because they have a (D)
after their name is, in effect, putting Party over Country.

No more. Period

so i know what you mean. I feel all the work I did in that time for this Party was for nothing.

And, like you, I say: "No more. Period"


Keep your chin up, my friend.


TC

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1764012&mesg_id=1764012

Recommended reading if you want to know what's on the minds of young people.


TC

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1767879


TC

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1764948&mesg_id=1764948


TC

(I'm really surprised at the lack of responses to this excellent question. ALl the HRC supporters must post in this forum, exclusively... or they have no good answer, maybe. Dunno.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1767420

TC

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1767468

Very thought-provoking.

TC

kick for the afternoon crowd.


TC

"...I will no longer ENABLE the WRONG WING of the Democratic Party to go on waging war, not calling for accountability, representing Corporations over the will of the people in my name. No way, No how. I WILL NOT. ANd, there is no name you can call me, no challenge you can throw at my feet, no argument you can make that will change my mind. I AM DONE VOTING AGAINST THE INTERESTS OF ALL AMERICANS just to see someone with a (D) after their name elected..."


:toast:

:toast: to you, too!

TC

why my elected reps were not doing more to educate the people and protect the interests of the working class. I guess sometimes just voting for any 'D' may not be in our best interests.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2982390&mesg_id=2984448

what you say. Like many others, I'd like to see us have a gal in the oval office - just NOT this one! The guy in the best shape to draw in undecided votes and those who finally realize the GOP ain't their party - PLUS having solid support and finances has his photo displayed within this post.
There's lots of "perfect candidate" candidates we might champion, but let's face facts. If they're not running now, who's gonna fall in behind them at this point??? Idealisim certainly has it's place, but it's gestation period is usually quite long.
We're (the wife 'n me) part of the eroding middle class. JE's song is like a piper's tune to our ears. That's the parade we've joined. IF..... he's not tapped to run, we'll, of course, support anyone with a (D) after their name. I'm not SO idealistic that I'd waste my vote on an (I) candidate. Good tea serves no one when it's tossed in the harbor! :shrug:

Biden and Dodd may have been in the senate and washington too long but, they will not throw our party under the bus, sell us out or try to squash the progressives.
Nor will they just go around bombing countries and starting unilateral wars like HRC>

kick

TC

IMO, your alter ego should be Top Cat: :hi:

:rofl:

Thanks. I think.

:hi: to you, too!


TC

He knew everything and GOT THINGS DONE. :-) :hi:

I appreciate that! You are Too Cute! LOL! That really is so sweet.

TC

a corporatist. Otherwise they stay home. Democrats need those votes.

It's really sad that the issues you raise and these concerns are shouted down instead of "discussed" honestly by so many "loyal" Democrats. (What are they afraid of?)

The NaderHaters shut down discussions on these issues before and continue to aim their venom at the wrong target. If they get burned by the same assumptions and the same DENIAL in 2008, they will only be left with more bitterness and misplaced anger.

Better to be called "idealistic" or even "cynical" by the NaNaNaICan'tHearYouICan'tHearYou set.

:hi:

My granddaughter will be voting for the first time next year, and she and her friends like what Kucinich has to say best (in this current field), but think Al Gore is a "rock Star" because they all saw "An Inconvenient Truth", and I think would vote for him en masse if he got in. They reject HRC because of just what you said -- the corporatism.

A couple also really like Obama.

TC

:hi:

TC

I ignore the name calling and intimidation tactics. they are only emmulating their candidate. threats will get you your way and all.
yeah yeah. I do not intimidate so easily.
And I don't think just because there is a D by someone's name they are cool. many a southern republicans use to have a D by their name.
And I concider the DLC and their members to be little more than shadow republicans with an agenda to overthrow the DNC and the destroy the progressive movement.
I was raised a democrat. I have always been proud to be one. unfortunately, my first vote came in the Mondale run.
then came Dukakis, ect.
I have read alot about FDR, the era, Truman, the great democrats that I wanted my party to be like again.
I have stuck with them thru thick and thin hoping for them to finally turn on the light and realize why they were always losing elections. But, I do think Kerry lost not just because of swiftboaters but, was betrayed by his own.
And the same people will destroy Howard Dean. the first real democrat to come along in a generation and revitialize the party. it will be back to be shadow republicans with the Clintons and their DLC henchmen and Murdoch visiting the Lincoln Bedroom. no.
I cannot call myself a democrat if my party keeps doing the same stupid stuff, is blind to the trecherous Hillary and her gang. I will not be associated with them and if the hounds of hell have their way, she is elected, she will NOT be my president.

TC

Since Clark isn't running, I like Kucinich. Richardson kind of lost me on the gay forum debate, but he is against this God-forsaken war and would at least bring some international diplomacy skills to the table. I'm so fed up with the DLC making it easy for these horrible neo-cons to run the country into the ground.

I don't trust Clinton. I think she's more or less signed on with the neocon policy positions with regard to many of the foreign and domestic agendas. Her major bitch with the Iraq war seems to be that they did it all wrong, not that it happened in the first place. Not that Congress and the American people were lied to, and the fact that American soldiers and Iraqi citizens have died for nothing but Bush's ambitions. I don't like the fact that she's buddy-buddy with insurance lobbyists, and pharma lobbyists, and pretty much all of the same lobbyists who've practically been living in the White House for the last several years.

She's a status quo, don't-need-to-change-anything-important kind of candidate. Given a Democratic congress, she wouldn't block progressive legislation, but she'd do very little to bring it to fruition on her own. She couldn't afford to take those kinds of risks. She's thrown her lot in with the wolves. (No insult to wolves intended).

On the other hand, she'd run a competent government, appoint decent, intelligent folks to cabinet positions, and nominate someone to the Supreme Court that wouldn't be a RW wacko.

It's imperative we break the power of the real neocons. Even if it's Hillary we end up sending to the White House.

I do not understand the vitriol with HRC. Yes she has warts, however the alternative is unacceptable. I live in NY so my primary vote is a protest, and I hope enough voters at least show her what they want her to do. I know they are sick of my e-mails at her site. and McCarthys too, for all the good it does. I can't see any way I can vote R, so if she is the candidate I'll vote her way. I don't oppose any one's arguments against her or any other candidate, but let's not just shoot our own.

I appreciate it very much. Can we agree to disagree?

:)

TC

I could be wrong, but that's what I'm seeing based upon her words and actions heading into the primaries. She's feeding on people's fear of change when it's precisely change we need the most.

I'm hoping she'd end up stepping away from their positions if she wins, but it's a slim hope at this point.

With all due respect...

The Clinton fatigue thing IS a right wing talking point. Because some on the left have adopted it does not make it less so. The fact is there is no empirical evidence of such a phenomenon...and in fact there is considerable evidence to the contrary...

You may have Clinton fatigue, but such a feeling is not widespread...except among those who have been defeated by the Clinton's time and time again...

I am disappointed to see you repeat the corporatism mantra without anything really new to back it up...of the currently viable Presidential candidates (casting my net wide, excluding only Kucinich and gravel), which do you think does not deserve that label as you have defined it? Apparently a corporatist is someone who does not display an acceptable amount of hatred for everything having to do with corporate America. Exactly what policies and positions has Hillary taken that you would consider corporatist? And how are they different from the other canddiates...

Calling Hillary Clinton a warmonger is simply not factual

Impeachment is one of those latte liberal issues (see Matt Taibbi), that has absolutely no serious resonance in the country, and it seems to matter little to those espousing it what the consequences of its inevitable failure would mean...

Lastly, though I respect your opinions, you are seriously out of touch with what mainstream Democrats believe and seem to want. And it is the type of rigidity you display that keeps the left in this country from ever approaching anything close to a working majority. Dismissing the views of others as illegitimate because they do not fit into your world view is not a way to build coalitions. This is precisely why populist campaigns never succeed...because populism needs an enemy to thrive. But it is exactly the division this engenders that dooms populist movements to ultimate failure. The fact is, Hillary Clinton's views are much closer to those of most Americans than yours are, and indeed are much closer to those of most Democrats than yours are.

I appreciate the thought and respect you manage to put into your replies.

We simply disagree, but I respect your view, of course.

TC

But then again you are one of my favorite DUers so no surprise there.

:hi:

Julie

I appreciate that very much. You are a sweetie!

:hi:

TC

:hi:

I appreciate your support more than you know!

:hi:

TC

I will join you in saying,

"...by saying that I refuse to vote AGAINST the Republicans this time, and vote for the Democrat "just because" they are the nominee, I am (as I see it) once again fighting for my Party. I will no longer ENABLE the WRONG WING of the Democratic Party to go on waging war, not calling for accountability, representing Corporations over the will of the people in my name. No way, No how. I WILL NOT. ANd, there is no name you can call me, no challenge you can throw at my feet, no argument you can make that will change my mind. I AM DONE VOTING AGAINST THE INTERESTS OF ALL AMERICANS just to see someone with a (D) after their name elected.


I will not be moved. I will not be swayed. And, I see this as my duty as a Democrat. And, even though I can't speak for them, I don't think those of us who feel as I do will be, either.

:kick:

and recommended.

Thanks, my friend. I always appreciate your support!

TC

but there may be far more people in the general population who are getting very tired of the same old...same old,and just may either bolt the party,or sit the election out.

I think that many of us have our pet issues that we want adressed.Mine is getting the (un)Patriot(ic) Act repealed as well as the Real ID Act and the new passport rules...wire tapping..and getting a candidate who actually believes in the Bill Of Rights and the Constitution.No candidate who supports the Patriot Act will get my vote.

After all is said and done,a person has to stand for principles.Without a full restoration of our rights,we'll have won nothing of any real value.

You are not alone TC...not by a long shot.

Most days it feels like I'm alone! LOL!

I appreciate your post very much.

TC

all the words spoken by war loving Democratic candidates.

He was not a Liberal, but he did hate war and the Military/Industrial COmplex he saw developing!

TC

the same as do the RW memes, but worse, the HRC persona is uplifted as unassailable--but goddamn you if you dare to breathe otherwise. I say worse, because this is a Democratic Candidate, and we should all remember the adulation of Reagan and Bush minions as hollow and revisionist. I need substantive change in the political atmosphere to breathe free and clean again. These Bush years have been a veritable clogged filter, a choking, gagging reflex of worries about what could/will happen next.

Here's to change TC: may happier times greet us soon.

NoFederales

I agree with you about the "fatigue" problem, but really appreciate the hopeful anding to your post! Goodness knows we all deserve it!!!!

TC

knock me over with a feather! There goes the argument for electing the Queen of the DLC because she'll get to make the next appointments to the SCOTUS.... :eyes:

It'll just be more of the same, I fear. Status quo.

TC

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_28/b4042040.htm

>>
With controversial rulings on abortion and campaign finance, the current U.S. Supreme Court has waded into some of the most explosive issues in American politics. Under the leadership of new Chief Justice John G. Roberts, the high court appears to be on the verge of rewriting vast tracts of settled Constitutional law. But there's another important emerging feature of the Roberts Court that has not drawn nearly as much attention: its sympathy to business.
>>

Putting a DLC POTUS in charge of choosing the next SCOTUS appointees is like putting the perverbial fox in charge of the henhouse.

TC

You're a sweetie!

TC

It amazes me that people can't/won't/don't see what the multinational corps are doing to this country.

If they would stop voting against their own interests for the DLC candidates, they would have a better shot at the American dream than ever, but people can't see that long-term.

The Multi-nationals are killing this country, out Party, our political system, so many things. And, the little guy is about (I hope) to get tired of looking in from the outside at it.

Thanks for your post and your support, my friend!

TC

"With great respect to ALL Democrats, even those who disagree."

But, I'm glad you liked the rest of the post!

Thank you.

TC

apologising for being passionate and uncompromising about your beliefs, even though you had explained their rationale, you were responding to another poster who felt no such inhibitions, and the issues themselves are ones of "great pith and moment", upon which the lives and many, many potentially slow and miserable deaths will depend.

Apart from that, though, you wrote a very, very intriguing and extraordinary post. As I see it, it is a much more rational "counsel of despair" than Nader's before 2002, because what has taken place in the intervening years has been and remains so utterly surreal, even by the customarily regressive political standards of the US, historically. The one advanced country in the West without a free national health service, and the richest. Well, just California would rank as one of the richest, wouldn't it?

Bizarre as it seems, you haven't hit rock bottom yet and maybe need to, you are saying, if your only choice is a DLCer. It's a hard precept for those already under the cosh to accept, but since you yourself, have a degenerative disease, few would be able to do so with such adamantine authority.

I suspect it won't come to that at all, and Edwards or Kucinich will sweep the board.

I would love to see Kucinich "sweep the board"! (Not so sure about Edwards, though. Lots to consider there.)

I appreciate your taking the time to explain that and your support in this thread!

TC

Getting more and moreso bt the day, it seems... LOL!

I appreciate that!

TC

But, I do realize that now, and am trying my best to do what I can.

It's so frustrating to be at this stage of life, and come to the realization that being a loyal Democrat for 45+ years has done nothing but enabled to current situation. If I knew then what I know now, how different some of the things I did would have been. *sigh*

Oh, well.... There is a Yiddish proverb that defines "success" as getting up one more time than you have fallen. It's all I can hope for at this point I think! LOL!

TC

"Clinton Fatigue": most commonly referred to as Bush, Clinton,Clinton,Bush, Bush ..... or, forcing Hillary to take the blame of negative effects of three men. As in SCAPEGOAT: to make somebody take blame: to force somebody to take the blame for others.


"Corporatist": a supporter of corporatism - -running of state by large organizations: a system of running a state using the power of organizations such as businesses and labor unions that act, or claim to act, for large numbers of people.


"Warmonger": somebody who is eager for war or tries to start a war. Calling Hillary a cheerleader for every war during the Bush years is not only not based on facts. Insinuating she is a warmonger is an outright lie. Her floor statements alone can totally contradict your false insinuations that she has altered her views since "tossing her hat". Saying "although I do concede she's been really careful how she's voted since tossing her hat into the ring" is also a false innuendo.


"Impeachment NOW": an oxymoron. Even if you want impeachment based on a single issue it will take a lot of time to go through committees, votes on the floors. Many of us believe an Impeachment that these thugs deserve would detail each and every high crime and misdemeanor performed by this "most corrupt administration in the history of the USA", the detail of which could be astounding and overwhelming. And they truly deserve this.

"Criminal proceedings" don't you mean "War Crimes Tribunals"? "Criminal proceedings" happen whenever a person is charged with a crime, even if it is a misdemeanor. Lying this nation into war, the resulting death and destruction are war crimes. And regarding Iran, Hillary has said loud and clear she wants to involve in the political process. Your "steadfast in her refusal" is a terribly subjective statement.

"Troops out of Iraq immediately" is yet another oxymoron. Even the most sudden strategical redeployment of this magnitude in military history has taken more than "immediately". Adding "not tomorrow, not a year from now ..." is merely raw emotion not based on sound logic. "Immediate withdrawal" of troops out of Iraq would take many months.

TC

We need a non-corporate populist President, that would be John Edwards. I never thought I, too, could be a contra, but here I am campaigning for a Democrat by campaigning against a Democrat (provided you accept HRC is a Democrat)

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/fwordpreview.htm#chapter%203

Get active/Get political

I think we DO have to get "contra" as well as getting active and political, at this point, don't you?

Otherwise, it's just more of the same, really.

TC

There's very little difference between a Democratic and Republican vote for war and corporate welfare.

Dems need to be Dems. I am through, especially with my DINO representative in Congress, voting for Republican-lite. We need a CLEAR choice on the most important issues of the day...not a "I was for the war before I was against it, before I SAID we should cut off funding, before I voted to write the blank check" DINO.

in their views and ideals. There has to be a clear choice between one or the other. Right now, there isn't that glaring difference for us to rally 'round, and this Party is all the weaker for it.

I wan't a Democrat to vote for, not just a moderate Republican with a (D) after his/her name. Is that too much to expect?

I don't think it is.

Thanks for the support!

TC

Agree completely. The reason the republican party got as bad as it has is because voters were told to vote for ANYONE with an "R" by their name... never to talk badly about them, etc. etc. etc. Party before country.

Now it seems we're on that same path.

Which means we have learned NOTHING except how to be better Republicans. And, that's a lesson this Party could do without, and may die for. If there is little or no difference between two choices, why bother to make a choice at all?

Thanks for the post!

TC

If I wanted my vote to go to a Neo-con, I wouldn't be so dead set against the DLC and their candidates.

TC

I really do understand where you're coming from. However, with respect, I think you would be doing both your party and your country a disservice if you did not vote and I'll tell you why:

Everything you say about HRC might well be true. I'm not her greatest fan either and she wouldn't be my chosen candidate (mine would be Kucinich or Gore ). The fact is though, that on welfare, social security, Medicare/aid, food safety regs, dozens of little programs that don't make good headlines but do make a real difference to people, any Dem is likely to be better than any of the Repub candidates. If that sounds like "anyone with a (D)", I apologise but there it is. It's a question of degrees, HRC might be a corporatist but I doubt she's likely to be as unashamedly fascist about it as most of the R's are likely to be. I'm a Brit, we're good at lesser-evilism (you would be too if you were given the choice of Blair or Major). Also, since the Dems aren't as bashful about attacking their own as the Rs, she'd be far more likely to compromise with Congress. If you feel that you absolutely could not, in good conscience, vote for HRC, fine. I respect that.

Consider also that the Repubs, via Diebold and all the sneaky vote manipulation tricks Greg Palast laid out in his two books, are going into this with a big advantage. What does that have to do with it? Because the only hope of getting some kind of reform on that is to get a Dem into the Oval Office (again, apologies for the "any D" arguement) and that means that right now, in the coming election, the Dems need every single vote they can get.

Like I said, if you're sure about this, then I can respect you standing on your principles but think very hard about it (as I imagine you already have but hell, extra thought is never a bad thing). I don't get to vote in your elections but were it me and Hillary got the nod, I'd hold my noise and vote for her (and then spend the next eight years bugging the piss out of her to do the right thing).

I wasn't raised not to participate in elections. I've never missed one. So, you have to know how much this means to me. I am absolutely sincere in my horror at this slate of candidates, and HRC, in particular. We don't stand a chance if either side wins. Makes me sick. Keeps me awake nights. I feel hopeless and frustrated.

Trust me on this: Whatever I do on election day will be the most painful thing I have ever done, politically. But, I will be staying true to my ideals.

Thanks for your support, and the words of wisdom.

TC

It doesn't make sense. Kucinich is a populist, Gore, to the right of the spectrum. Could you imagine Kucinich siding with the neonuts on the Elio Gonzales issue? Or joining in the criticism of Clinton over his private life? Or choosing Lieberman as his VP?

Maybe you should ponder the question more deeply, but it should be obvious.

I don't think I need to justify my love of Kooch.

As for Gore, he's the next best of the candidates I know something about and on global warming, he's the best. Given that I think global warming is going to become the single biggest issue over the life of teh next presidency, it makes sense to support the guy who's good with it.

Plus, and I'll admit this is idealism on my part, it's fair. He's already won once but didn't get to serve.

more left-leaning now.

The Al Gore you are referring to may no longer exist. I was stunned by his transformation to a real left-winger, and the passion he now feels for things he would never have supported back "in the day". This is simply a different Al Gore. Truly. THIS Al Gore is VERY close to Kucinich in so many areas, it's scary. (Good scary.)

You should read the book. I think you'd like it a lot!

TC

library. And thanks. I was worried that you were making nice again, as matter of habitual decency!

Incidentally, your reference to the Yiddish saying reminded me of Nelson Mandela's words on sanctity: “I am not a saint, unless you think of a saint as a sinner who keeps on trying.”

He is one of my all-time heros. I adore the man. Thanks you so much for those words that are SO like him to say. They need to be embroidered on a pillow or something!

TC

:)

TC

Obama has also called for an immediate withdrawal.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3510139

The more calling for total pullout, the better!

Thanks for letting me know.

TC

... a delightful caveat.

Now the Dems just need to make it happen. Enough is enough.

Cheers.
AK

a group of democrats that feeds on its own...

Paul Wellstone was one of the most courageous Democrats that this Party has ever had the honor to have elected. He is a personal hero of mine. I don't think, if he were still with us today, he'd be advocating the advancement of the DLC wing of this Party, far to its detrement. And, he certainly wouldn't be as abusive as you were to me upthread about my personal decision, either.

So, keep sniping through this thread all you want. It isn't going to change my mind.

Peace out, my friend...

TC

he was a man of action.... not a man of inaction... your "Stay Home" mentality is making the republicans drool.... it makes it more difficult for the rest of us who run around trying to get as many people out to vote as possible....

where you have the right to do as you will... you attempt to create a movement... to suppress the vote... (sounds like a republican) which means if you are successful others will follow and stay home... this is so negative...

I call you a Donner party because "you eat your own kind" .... Hillary may not be the perfect "democrat" to you but she is a democrat.... your negative bullshit hurts the party... your defeatist attitude hurts the party... your "stay home" attitude hurts the party....

Even Paul Wellstone understood that sometimes you have to do things to get things done despite the fact it goes against your personal beliefs....

I will share with you a story:

I am divorced... while we were separated, my ex invited me to a function where Paul Wellstone was the key-note speaker... I was there!!!! selfish of me.... fine but Paul was there....


Ok, so I meet him and there is a camera man taking pictures... I sooooooo want a photo with me and Paul.....please please please.... Paul asks me not to have a photo with him..... why??????? he tells me that should the press get the photo it would be political suicide.... why? you may ask? because I am 6'1" and at the time 40 pounds heavier (mother of 4)... I was a big woman and Paul was a small man.... just imagine the photo... was I hurt? a little... I would love to have a picture of myself with Paul, even if it where when I was fat.... but reality was... I loved Paul more and wanted him to stay as my senator.....


and so I say... you are too idealistic and politicians sometimes have to do what they must to stay in the race... it sucks!!!! but it is what it is... Hillary may have to compromise at times to get what she wants but the alternative is the republican gets what they want...

until the general election... you can campaign all you want for your choice but please don't trash your own party or you are "eating your own kind" it may hurt to hear the truth but it is what it is....

Sounds like you would have really valued it as a treasure. (I know I would have)

As I said upthread, mine is only one vote. And, if my vote had the power to elect or unelect Democrats, the last Republican POTUS in the U.S. would have been Eisenhower. By all means, elect HRC without me. (If she is the nominee.) If she isn't, well, depending on who it is, I'll think about voting. But, no more votes AGAINST the Republican, only one FOR the Democrat. If that cannot happen, I don't vote.

Peace to you.


TC

my point is that you and others come onto these sites and argue that should your candidate not get the nomination that you and others should stay home... you do more than suggest it to be just your "ONE" vote.. you encourage others to do the same... and this is how we end up with republicans... liberals are so full of idealistic points of view that they can't bend even if it will provide the slightest bit of gain... and so the republicans win despite the fact they do not hold the majority opinion of anything... this "stay home" or anyone but "HRC" talk feeds the republican agenda... it frustrates many and ends up keeping people home... I myself try my damnedest to get people out to vote on election day... so I see your posts as feeding the GOP attempt to suppress it... your ideals are different but the outcome is the same...

I have Wellstone in my heart and hear his messages every day... What Would Wellstone Do (WWWD)? is more than a bumper sticker... He gave a great speech... he spoke of the ignorance he had when first running and in office... he apologized for errors in Veteran Affairs... he said he learned things and was always learning and growing... we are all human and have our weaknesses... and sometimes do things we dislike for the greater good... would Wellstone stay home?

YES HRC has her short comings... but in the end the President comes with many other people... that person opens the door for multiple people to make a difference... maybe someone you really do have a passion for... and so your vote for the top ticket... is a vote for countless people... not just the ONE... should HRC get the nom.. and if HRC is so unappealing to you then write her and her staff and ask that she appoint people you do like to work in her administration... or write the people that you like and ask them to ask for an appointment... perhaps you can plug your nose with the understanding that you are voting for a cabinet post... I hate the republicans myself but I know that we have to work with them and sometimes give something up to get something... this is one thing wrong with W...



Senator Bobby Kennedy: "What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness, but is love and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country…"



http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/rfk.htm

back when Gore was running there were some editorials written to the MN Daily U of MN paper... arguing that Gore was not an environmentalist and people should not vote for Gore and vote for Nadar... many people just could not stomach Gore... same as how they talk about HRC...

Nadar said there was no difference between Gore and Bush... a vote for one or the other was the same...

so people voted their conscience and voted Green... and the rest is history...