Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Handy Guide Supporting How The "Present" Vote Works in Illinois

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 10:50 AM
Original message
Handy Guide Supporting How The "Present" Vote Works in Illinois
Since the evidence that both John Edwards and Hillary Clinton don't seem to either understand basic senatorial legislation processes in Illinois and other states that use the "present" vote or are using it as a political tact hoping people are too stupid to figure it out, here is some handy information for those that wish to find out the truth about how and why one might vote "present" when in various stages of passing legislation.

Let it be known that Barack Obama voted "present" 136 times out of approximately 4,000 votes. That comes to around 3.25% of the time that he voted "present".

More information on this issue:
Fact Check: Present Votes are an Accepted Legislative Strategy in the Illinois Senate

Obama Was Praised for Showing Leadership on Tough Issues
Representing a Safe Democratic District, He Used His Position To Help More Vulnerable Senators Do The Right Thing. Zorn wrote, "Obama, however, was in a safe district and never faced a serious challenge for his legislative seat. He had no need to shy from hard-line stands on gun control and abortion rights. He actually took such stands frequently and is now highly praised by advocates for both causes."

Planned Parenthood President: Anyone Who Thinks A Present Vote Is A "Duck" Doesn't Understand How the Process Works. "There is a presumption, if one is not familiar with the mechanics of the General Assembly, that a present vote is a 'duck.' Pam Sutherland, the CEO and President of Illinois Planned Parenthood said of Hull argument: "I think it's not well-based...I think it's somebody who doesn't understand how the legislative process works."

Handgun Violence Opponents: Criticizing Present Votes Indicates "You Don't Have A Great Understanding Of The Process."
'Criticizing Obama on the basis of 'present' votes indicates you don't have a great understanding of the process,' said Thom Mannard, director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence."

Voting Present in the State Legislature is Used as A Signal to the Other Party, Not As a Way to Duck the Issue. "An aspect of Obama's State Senate voting record that is drawing attention is his "present" votes. A present vote is a third option to an up or down "yes" or "no" that is used with great frequency in the Illinois General Assembly. It has many varied and nuanced meanings that, in the context of the actual bills, border on boring. It's most important use is as a signal -- to the other party, to the governor, to the sponsor -- to show a willingness to compromise on the issue if not the exact bill, to show disapproval for one aspect of the bill, to question the constitutionality of the bill, to strengthen the bill.

Obama Said He Would Vote 'Present' On Unconstitutional Bills, Saying He Tried To Resist Bad Votes Even If They Made Good Politics.
The Sun Times wrote, "Obama says his 'present' votes often come on bills that he believes are unconstitutional. 'I have tried to not succumb to the temptation of voting on bad laws just because it makes for good politics,' Obama said."

Senators Would Vote Present If They Had 'Unresolved Worries.'
The State Journal-Register reported, "Sen. George Shadid, the Edwards Democrat who is pushing the legislation, promised Senate Education Committee members that he wouldn't move ahead with Senate Bill 368 'unless I can get a good consensus.'…Four committee members cited unresolved worries when they voted 'present' on the measure, which passed 7-0."

Specific Bills Raised By The New York Times

SB 759 - OBAMA SAID HE WAS VOTING PRESENT ON THE FLOOR; OBAMA SAID THAT THE PROVISIONS WERE NEGOTIATED OUT OF THE ORIGINAL JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM BILL AND THAT THE SENATE WAS GOING BACK ON ITS WORD

Obama Voted Present On Bill To Charge Minor As Adult For Gun Crime Near A School Because There Was No Proof That The Measure Would Reduce Juvenile Crime.
Obama voted present on a bill to allow a minor to be tried as an adult if he/she is charged with aggravated battery with a firearm at or near a school. Obama said, "I did just want to point out that last year we worked on a almost complete overhaul of the Juvenile Justice Code, and this provision was debated at length during negotiations with the various State's attorney's office. Part of the reason that we negotiated it out of that original bill was at least the sense of some of us that there is really no proof or indication that automatic transfers and increased penalties and adult penalties for juvenile offenses have, in fact, proven to be more effective in reducing juvenile crime or cutting back on recidivism. I know there's disagreements with other folks, but I did just want to point out that last year when we worked -- guided so ably by Senator Hawkinson -- on this bill, the sense was that we had more or less completed an overhaul of the code and that we were going to pause for a moment, see how that worked before we moved on. And I guess I'd just like to point out that here we are, a year later, doing the exact same thing that we had been doing prior to the changes that we initiated last year and that is to increase penalties further for juveniles and try them further as adults and expand the number of offenses. So for that reason, I'm going to be voting present." <91st GA, SB 0759, 3/25/99, 3R P; 52-1-5 (BO: P); Session Transcript, 3/25/99, p.209>

HB 854 -- OBAMA VOTED PRESENT BECAUSE A BILL WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Obama Voted Present On The Floor And In Committee On A Bill That Would Seal Sexual Assault Victims' Court Records; Illinois Press Association And Obama Argued That The Bill Was Unconstitutional.
Obama voted present on a bill to amend the Criminal Identification Act by allowing certain assault victims to petition to have their court records sealed, only to be opened for public inspection if good cause is shown. Under the bill the trials involving sex crimes would remain open, but upon a conviction, a victim of a sex crime could ask a state's attorney to petition a judge to seal the records of the case. If the judge agreed, the public could not open those records unless someone petitioned the court and showed good cause. The State Journal-Register reported, "But the Illinois Press Association argued that the measure violates the First Amendment. The U.S. Constitution does not allow judges to seal the records of trials that have been held in open court, said association attorney Don Craven. Besides, Craven argued, the legislation does not allow defendants the same opportunity if they're found not guilty. And there's no indication what would happen to the case files if the verdict were appealed. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Chicago, agreed that the bill probably wouldn't pass constitutional muster, although he said it's not unusual for his colleagues to pass such measures to show political resolve." <91st GA, HB 0854, 5/11/99, 3R P; 58-0-1; State Journal-Register, 4/28/99>

3 Of The 4 Democrats On The Judiciary Committee Voted Present On This Bill. In committee, Senators Shadid and Silverstein joined Obama in voting Present on HB 854. <91st GA, HB 854, Jud Committee, 7-0-3, 4/28/99>

When Similar Measures Were Passed In Other States Following A Scandal, The Press Raised Similar Constitutional Objections. The AP reported, "News executives in both states said the legislation was unnecessary and would hinder freedom of the press. 'It's another case where in order to achieve some possible good, legislatures are often willing to run right over basic constitutional rights,' said J. Randolph Murray, editor of The Anchorage Times in Alaska. 'We are against the thing because of the blanket restrictions it would impose,' said Doug Crews, executive director of the Missouri Press Association. 'Once a restriction such as this is made, where is the line drawn and where does it stop in the area of law enforcement records?'"

HB 1511 -- OBAMA VOTED PRESENT ON A BILL WHOSE SUPPORTERS ADMITTED IT WAS UNFINISHED

Obama Voted Present On A Bill That Would Require Aggravating Allegation To Be Included To The Trier Of Fact As An Element Of The Offense; The Bill Was Not Deemed Ready At The Time Of The Vote With Promises From Its Supporters To Revisit It In The Spring, Which They Did Not Do. Obama voted present on a bill to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure to provide that, in all cases in which the death penalty is not a possibility, if an alleged fact -- other than the fact of a prior conviction -- is not an element of an offense but is sought to be used to increase the range of penalties for the offense beyond the statutory maximum that could otherwise be imposed for the offense, the alleged fact shall be included in the charging instrument or provided to the defendant through a written notice before trial, submitted to the trier of fact as an element of the offense, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt. <91st GA, HB 1511, 3R P 54-2-2, 11/30/00; PA 91-0953, 2/23/01>

Illinois State Bar Association: "Bill Needs More Time, It Needs More Discussion, It Needs More Input By The Legislators And I Don't Think That Has Happened To This Point."
Chicago Daily Law Bulletin reported, "But Daniel L. Houlihan, legislative counsel to the Illinois State Bar Association, said the bill appeared to be so flawed that lawmakers shouldn't rush to pass it. 'This bill needs more time, it needs more discussion, it needs more input by the legislators and I don't think that has happened to this point,' he said."

HB 3793 -- BILL WAS "MEANINGLESS," "MEDDLESOME," AND AN EXAMPLE OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY "WASTING ITS TIME"

Obama Voted Present On Teacher Curriculum Requirements.
Obama voted present on a bill to amend the School Code by requiring public school teachers to teach pupils discipline and respect for others. <90th GA, HB 3793, 5/13/98, 3R P; 44-10-1; P.A. 90-0620, 7/10/98>

Bloomington Pantagraph: Bill Would Create A Mandate With No Objective Standards, General Assembly Was 'Wasting Its Time.'
The Bloomington Pantagraph wrote in an editorial, "Illinois schools have enough problems without the General Assembly wasting its time on measures that are at best symbolic, mostly meaningless and at worst meddlesome…the Legislature sent a bill to the governor that would require public school teachers to teach pupils discipline and respect for others. The school code already requires honesty, kindness and justice to be taught to students...All this bill will do is...clutter the school code and widen the rift between teachers and lawmakers who try to micromanage their classrooms."

SB 609 -- OBAMA SPOKE ON THE FLOOR THAT THE SENATE SHOULD NOT OVERRIDE HOME RULE

Obama Voted Present On Adult Business Location Restrictions Because Of Home Rule; The Bill Failed.
Obama voted present on a bill creating the Adult Uses Location Restriction Act, providing restrictions on the proximity of adult entertainment establishments to schools, parks, places of worship, pre-schools, day care facilities, mobile home parks, and/or other residential areas, (Senate Amendment No. 1) constituting minimum restriction on the location of adult uses for all governmental units, including home rule units and allows governmental units to enact more stringent restrictions. When discussing the bill, Obama said, "ost of us would prefer not to have an adult bookstore or -- movie theater or something next to our -- next to our residence, but that's exactly why we have local zoning ordinances...And it seems to me that if there's ever been a function that has historically been relegated to local control and is appropriately there, it's these kinds of zoning matters." <92nd GA, SB 0609, 3/29/01, 3R L; 33-15-5 (BO: P); 92nd General Assembly, Session Transcript, 3/29/01, p.160>


Anyone who watched the debate in South Carolina saw Hillary Clinton and John Edwards take out the usual distorted (and perhaps ignorant) view that voting "present" meant that you were not committed to the legislation involved. Hillary was doing it because she would rather distort her opponents' records to shine the light off of her very warlike and careless voting patterns and John Edwards' campaign is now in the final throes of fading away, hence he needs to throw the Hail Mary pass as much as possible. Here is how they distort the "present" vote politically and without much truth:

Even Though Present Votes Attack Was Raised And Rebutted In 2003, Clinton Campaign Recycles Old Opposition Research

The "Dirt" On Attacks on Obama's Present Votes Is "All Over The Hands of Those Pointing The Finger."
"This column has the dirt on the issue of state Sen. Barack Obama's "present" votes on tough issues in the Illinois Legislature--votes that at least two of his opponents in the March 16 Democratic U.S. Senate primary say mark him as a coward... There's dirt here all right. It's all over the hands of those pointing the finger."

Emily's List Head Ellen Malcolm Held A Press Conference To Discuss Obama's Present Votes. First Read reported, "Describing it as a press conference gone awry would be putting it mildly. Before the start of the NPR debate yesterday afternoon, the Clinton campaign arranged for Ellen Malcolm, the head of Emily's List, to hold a press conference with reporters. Malcolm took the podium and argued that Clinton was the only candidate in this race who had stood up when it was tough, especially on women's issues...Malcolm hadn't mentioned Obama by name, but she said that those who vote "present" at tough times don't show a true commitment to leadership - referring to Obama's "present" votes on some anti-abortion measures while serving in the Illinois state Senate. But reporters asked Malcolm why the head of the Illinois Planned Parenthood had said in the Los Angeles Times that Obama was getting in trouble for a "present"-vote strategy that the pro-choice group had devised."

Hillary: Obama "Voted Present" On Choice And Gun Issues As A Member Of The Illinois Senate.
Hillary Clinton said, "Well, in the Illinois state senate, on issue after issue, my opponent voted present instead of yes or no. Seven of those votes were on a women's right to choose, two of those votes were on measures to protect families from gun violence, one of which was a measure about firing guns on or near school grounds."

Blair Hull Criticized Obama For Voting Present.
The Chicago Tribune reported, "Obama's commitment to abortion rights has also been questioned in campaign mailings from rival Blair Hull, who has criticized the state senator for several "present" votes he cast on bills relating to abortion. 'It's inexcusable,' Hull said while campaigning Downstate Tuesday. 'If you are absolutely pro-choice, you don't vote present.' But abortion-rights advocates have been quick to defend Obama, arguing that his "present" votes were strategic legislative maneuvers that many other lawmakers who support their cause also participated in."

Hull Sent Out Mail That Said That Obama "Ducked" Present Votes; Maria Pappas Criticized Obama At A Debate.
The Daily Herald reported, "Recent campaign mailers sent by Democrat Senate hopeful Blair Hull accuse Barack Obama of ducking key abortion rights votes in Springfield by voting 'present.' But the head of Illinois Planned Parenthood said Obama's critics are misguided. 'I think it's not well-based,' Pam Sutherland, chief executive and president of the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council, said of Hull's criticism. 'I think it's somebody who doesn't understand how the legislative process works.' The campaign pieces accuse Obama of failing to stand up for a woman's right to choose because he voted 'present' on legislation that dealt with parental notification of abortions...The mailings, sent to voters in recent days, show a rubber duck above the headline 'He Ducked!'... Hull is not the only candidate to criticize Obama's voting record. Cook County Treasurer Maria Pappas has offered similar criticism at recent debates."


Link:
http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/12/20/fact_check_present_votes_are_a.php






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Tarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
1. Kinda proves Hillary's point, and she (and Edwards) nailed him on it last night
There's always some explanation, some reason or excuse, for the "present" votes. And when he was called on it by both candidates last night, that's what we got again; spin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pampango Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. So even if there is a legitimate reason for it that is not excuse and any
explanation of this is just "spin". That's campaigning for you. Once you get an issue that puts the other candidate on the defensive don't let up, even if decent explanation for something.

If the "present" s--t is sticking to the wall, don't let up just because someone explains it. Most people won't hear or understand the explanation and the stench will persist as long as you keep up the attack. Guess it works the same in primaries as it does in the GE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. John Kerry had a valid reason for his "flip flop" on a funding bill
But the Bushbots would hear none of it. Hillary supporters are starting to sound a lot like them right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapfog_1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-23-08 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #4
16. Bingo...
HillShills are sounding and acting more like repukes every day.

Voter suppression in Nevada.

This non-issue "present" votes from his assembly days.

If Obama wins in SC, I'm sure we will all hear how "that's just the black vote, he is just another Jesse Jackson! The Party can't seriously run him in a GE!"

At this rate, I won't be surprised to see bandaids with "Hope" written on them at the Democratic convention.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. If people are too pinheaded to understand senatorial legislative procedures...
...then they deserve to have liars and truth contortionists running the country.

If people can't read or understand basic concepts in lawmaking, then this country is screwed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. What people understand
is that an avoidance of a vote for political calculations is not an endearing quality in a candidate.

What people understand is that saying something like "I voted for it before I voted against it" is completely rookie league, and is not an endearing quality in a candidate.

This is why Barack Obama is not ready for prime time; the Rovian machine will eat him alive over newbie shit like that. At least Clinton...and Edwards, if what they say about Kerry holding him back from being more vocal/forceful are true...won't get suckered into things like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Again, we get back to the issue of not knowing what a "present" vote means
Voting "present" is NOT "an avoidance of a vote for political calculations". As my OP lays out, it is a way to try to make a law better.

Here's an example.

You are a Senator who decides to write a bill that will fund for books in rural communities. Just as you are about to pass the legislation, someone from the other side adds an amendment that states that "abortion is illegal".

Do you vote for that bill? Yes, if you're stupid. Do you vote "present" and slice out the goofy amendment and then pass the bill? Yes, if you're smart.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Yes, it can be an avoidance
In Illinois, political experts say voting present is a relatively common way for lawmakers to express disapproval of a measure. It can at times help avoid running the risks of voting no, they add.

“If you are worried about your next election, the present vote gives you political cover,” said Kent D. Redfield, a professor of political studies at the University of Illinois at Springfield. “This is an option that does not exist in every state and reflects Illinois political culture.”

The vote on the juvenile-justice bill appears to be a case when Mr. Obama, who represented a racially mixed district on the South Side of Chicago, faced pressure. It also occurred about six months before he announced an ultimately unsuccessful campaign against a popular black congressman, Bobby L. Rush.

State Senator Christine Radogno, a Republican, was a co-sponsor of the bill to let children as young as 15 be prosecuted as adults if charged with committing a crime with a firearm on or near school grounds.

- http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22335739


While it does have legitimate purposes, it is also a cover-your-ass maneuver, which is how Obama has made use of it at times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. So her point was that there is a reasonable explanation? Yeah, damning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. It wasn't reasonable
It was like a teenager explaining why everything isn't his fault, it is always something else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-23-08 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #1
20. That makes me like Hillary even less as that would make her manipulative (like Bush*).
She's in effect saying "this action means what I say it does, and if there's an explanation, that's just an excuse". She's trying to win either way. Sorry, I'm sick of Rove tactics already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
THUNDER HANDS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
2. it's a good strategy to confuse the folks who don't know how legislatures work
which, frankly, is almost everyone.

I think that's a fair thing to hit Obama on.

The Reagan comments and the 'ideas' statement and the Rezko thing, IMO, are low blows or utter outright lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. It's the Stupidity, Stupid
Not you...

If a candidate can perpetuate an "issue" that is a lie or distortion knowing that it is not factual and get people to believe that candidate, that's considered a "strength".

:crazy:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. It works to confuse, for sure
Obama hasn't come up with a concise explanation he is able to deliver on the spot. Straight out say, there was a mandatory veto available before the governor's signing; a present vote signaled problems with the bill, which the governor was empowered to amend before signing. Etc. The explanations are too complicated, because it's not a simple thing to explain, but his writers need to break this down into simple, manageable points and get it out there. I don't exactly think it's fair, because it is a distortion of his record and dishonest. However, it is politics and life doesn't often get to be fair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
13. IOW, its a ruse to fool voters. Way to go Obama!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BenDavid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-22-08 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
14. Do you honestly believe folks will read all that? All they and I
included understand that when a person votes Present he is there to vote up or down but chose for whatever reason he could not cast a vote either way.People understand you are either for something or against something and there is no middle ground and then use some slick wording to justify voting Present.

Edwards had obama pegged right last night when he blasted obama for cherry picking his and hillarys votes and obama not able to justify why he voted present.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-23-08 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #14
21. If you wish to remain stupid in life, that is your destiny
If you don't have the ability to read with a 5th grade level of comprehension, it's your loss.

If you'd rather believe a liar, then you are a sucker.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-23-08 06:18 AM
Response to Original message
15. Thanks!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-23-08 07:18 AM
Response to Original message
17. I get it. So, in Nov08, if Obama leads the ticket,
I should pull the lever that's marked "Present".

Meaning, I don't want the Repuke, but the Democrat is unfinished, half-baked.

;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hayu_lol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-23-08 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. According to all these redundant defenses by Obama surrogates...
Obama is not aware that for the past two years, he is no longer in the Illinois Senate but in the US Senate.

A present vote means nothing. OK, can we all write in PRESENT on our ballots?

Gawd knows, we wouldn't want to committ to MR Present.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Lane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-23-08 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #17
22. You needn't go out of your way to justify your screen name...
Votes in the Illinois State Senate are conducted under one set of rules. Votes in the general election this November will be conducted under a different set of rules.

In the former circumstance, a vote of "Present" had the same practical effect as a vote of "No". In the latter circumstance, there is no such rule.

I'm not supporting Obama but this willful ignorance by his critics is really getting me angry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-23-08 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
19. More Rove style Lies from Hillary Inc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 16th 2024, 06:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC