The attacks on those we should support

[Patrick Henry]

Somewhere else in du, there is currently an excellent thread expressing concern about the attacks on the poor.

Too often, I see attacks on liberal leaders. These are the people who do what we want only to be attacked by some of the people here. How does attacking those who help us, hurt Bush?

There have been attacks on the youth. The youth generally know more than adults about Bush. Yet, as has been mentioned by someone here before, 16 and 17 year olds vote in significantly greater numbers than 18 to 14 year olds. Germany has documented this fact. The youth study government, discuss it in class and among themselves and, occasionally, walk out of classes to demonstrate against Bush. It would be a coup for our side to allow the youth to vote. A lot here support the youth vote. But others are extremely insulting in their attacks on the younger generation. Will that get us new members who like kids?

There have been attacks on Bev Harris, who worked hard to bring the truth about BBV to light and to make us aware of what we were up against in the last election. How do these attacks help us oppose Bush?

There have been attacks on Margie Shoedinger, who, pulled herself together enough to file a complaint against Bush for rape. Those who are most impressed with Margie are attorneys, who see her as much more collected than people who have usually been through her ordeal. Now, she's dead. In some circles, the shot to her head would be considered proof of the truth of her allegation. How does attacking Bush's attackers help us get Bush out of office?

There have been attacks on those who believe Bush was responsible for 9/11 and for those who believe he was behind the London bombing. There have been attacks on those who believe Wellstone and Hatfield were murdered. Wouldn't letting the country know that Bush is not necessarily a good guy help us get him out of office?

What I am seeing here is the alienation of our base. What can be done to end these attacks?

Please do not use this as an opportunity to flame the groups or individuals that already have been over-flamed. The purpose of this tread is to see how we can create a harmonious and positive underground.

[TwilightZone]

1. Human nature. We best know what is closest to us.

And, more importantly, we do not know what we personally have not experienced.

Not that that stops people from claiming to be an expert about a topic anyway.

Examples:

1) Some people in very blue states cannot seem to grasp that very conservative states exist "out there" or that Bush's support level remains high in many areas. They don't see how it's possible, because it is out of the realm of their personal experiences.

They insist that Bush's support in these areas is purely due to fraud and further insist that we should be able to waltz right in and take over Nebraska, for example. Their version of political reality is based on their environment and their personal experiences. They haven't lived in a community loaded with right-wing wackos for years.

I've personally lived in conservative places most of my life (largely not by choice) and only hope that the liberal strongholds people talk about are as positive as has been represented, because I'm ready to get out of here.

2) Many people who don't live in the South think that it's populated ONLY with rednecks and Bush supporters. And, they don't seem to grasp how deeply poverty is ingrained in society there. Again, if it hasn't been experienced, it's difficult to relate.

3) People on this very website - in fact, on the thread you mention - assume that poor = stupid. This is ludicrous. I would suggest that we all know rich people who are undeniably stupid and poor people who are brilliant.

4) My personal favorite: everyone in the Democratic Party is a sell-out. Everyone. If he or she voted differently than you believe on ONE particular issue, regardless of the relative importance of said issue, he or she is now, and forever will be, a sell-out.

A subset of this issue is the DINO. It seems that it is difficult for people to realize that people like Ben Nelson were NEVER liberals in the first place, so a moderate voting record should not be a huge surprise every time he votes against us.

If he was a liberal, he wouldn't have been elected in the first place.

Do we wish he'd vote as a liberal? You bet. Will he? Don't hold your breath.

Geez, sorry for the rant. :rant:

[ISUGRADIA]

2. Bev Harris...you mean freeper Bev Harris?

[meganmonkey]

3. The enemy of my enemy

is not necessarily my friend.

And that is all I'm gonna say about that.

[welshTerrier2]

4. "These are the people who do what we want"

you asked why some people attack those who "do what we want" ...

could it be possible that some who criticize don't believe they are doing "what we want" and they they don't believe a certain people in the Party represent their views?

should they criticize the views held by elected Democrats they disagree with or should they "just go along" because they are Democrats?

[Kelvin Mace]

5. I don't know

There have been attacks on Bev Harris, who worked hard to bring the truth about BBV to light and to make us aware of what we were up against in the last election. How do these attacks help us oppose Bush?

How does her attacks against Andy help? Had does her consorting with freepers help? How does her constant lying help?

[ISUGRADIA]

6. Amen to that

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

7. the "discredit campaign"

I don't feel sorry for Bev Harris.
She certainly doesn't have my trust or respect.

I got the BBV email about the impending shuffle in the e-voting venue, and I found the tone of it offensive and slanted.
She was referring to the project called ACCURATE which will have some of the greatest computer scientists/e-voting critics there are, many of whom I have corresponded with. Many who have gone out of their way to help me.

I replied to the BBV email with a "remove me from your list" message.

Nothing more.

Later I got this email:

"Of course, you will be removed. However, I am curious as to why, since we are both election reform groups. I would like to know if you have been subjected to the "discredit" campaign.

I encourage you to find out the truth about BBV for yourself. This is something you can do in three seconds. Simply click the web site and you will instantly see that we are -- by a country mile -- the most prolific source of election reform information on the Web.

So I'm going to ask you point blank: Have you been told negative information about us, and if so, what have you been told?

Our work is represented by our Web site, not by whispering campaigns or gossip.

Thanks, and we wish you and your organization the best. I would hope that you feel likewise.

Bev Harris
Black Box Voting

I replied to that email with:

"I don't like the way you do things.

Don't write to me again."


Later that day, I got a call from "Catherine" asking me why I asked to be removed from the email list.
Of course, there is no way that they could possibly respect my request the way most organizations will do. NO!

I have no trust for these people, seeing how they have treated other people, so I said - I have to many email lists, don't have time for yours.

She said - OH, I thought in your email you said that you didn't like how we treated people.

DUHHHHHH!

She just flat out made me mad, and I told her, you are right -
I don't like how YOU treat people, and I don't want you to treat me the way you treat others. I don't want you harassing me. Don't call me again.

And then, yes I did hang up on her.

It should have ended with me asking to be removed from her crappy little email list.

The only discredit Bev Harris campaign I see is the one that she herself is running, using her own words to show what kind of person she is.

If you want to work with her, that is your thing, but NEVER ask me to have anything to do with her or her group.

She lost me when she publicly posted the firing of Andy on her website, and it went downhill from there. You don't hound a man when he is down.

Even I told my group to let up on one of our opponenents, his mother passed away, and he became "off limits". None of my activists would even consider bothering this man after that.

Bev Harris - No class. No graciousness. Cruel and nasty to others, it won't be me next. She has never helped me anyway. The only return calls or emails I ever got from BBV were from Andy Stephenson.
In fact, I heard from him about a month before he died. What a sweet man.

Andy - rest in peace, you did leave a real legacy, and will never be forgotten. Thank you for all of the help you gave us.






:cry:

[Kelvin Mace]

8. A challenge

Since you like to defend Bev, see if you can answer this challenge.

Explain to me why your "hero" told a bald face lie in her post on her web site.

WiredNews also reported, remember, that I promote bellydance books and that I was making "millions" on a Qui Tam action. They knew both of those statements to be inaccurate spin at the time they wrote them.

http://www.bbvforums.org/forums/messages/1954/9665.html?1124381696

This statement is very clear. Bev claims that Wired News said she was making millions and that she was promoting "belly dancing books". She also accuses the reporter of knowing the statements were untrue.

Yet, when we go to Wired News and look at the story, we discover:

1) It was NOT a Wired story, it was an AP story.
2) It makes neither statement Bev attributes to it.
3) The statements in the story that were made were completely factual.

http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65674,00.html

This is a completely simple challenge. Explain to me why Bev lied or explain how her lie isn't a lie.

[Padme Amidala]

9. Thank you

The attacks on the liberals and the Young Democrats in this forum have been brutal here. Those who suport liberal values and equal rights have been looking for body armor to wear when coming here.

[Joe Chi Minh]

10. I believe a lot of the

negative posts/attacks here, are the poorly-disguised posts of freeper operatives; particularly, many of the anti-Kerry ones.

Why wouldn't they? His massive landslide win of the last election must have terrified them witless. Frantic searches in freeperland for those old, neocon, post-election brown trousers.

"When did you last see them, dear?"

"Why, now I think of it, it must have been right after the 2000 election...".

[BeFree]

11. Mostly...

It is because the attackers are the stupid ones and their attacks are all the proof we need to form such an opinion.

Being stupid is alright, there's nothing really wrong with stupidity. Looking at the mass of knowledge none of us will ever know means we are stupid to so many things.

It's when they open their pie-traps that their stupidity shows. By spending anymore than a few seconds yapping about stuff they have no real clue about, takes them into that "Hey, look at me, I'm stupid" zone, so many typers here have done.

Attacks on the only people capable of helping us out of the hole we find ourselves in is stupid. Placing helpful criticism at their feet is not, but there is so little of that: it's mainly just stupid attacks. Attacks on the poor, the south, the slightly religious. Attacks that do nothing more than elevate one's self while defeating the team effort.

Thanks for posting this thread and keep doing it 'til we get the stupidity down to a reasonable level, eh?

Peace

[Kelvin Mace]

12. Mindless support

of people just because they portray themseles as an ally is suicide.

Just becuase someone sticks a "D" by their name does not make them our friend.

Zell Miller anyone?

[genius]

13. A lot of liberals won't come to the du because of these attacks.

People need to work together to make the democratic underground a more hospitible place. The liberals have been taking a beating here, and most grass roots Democrats tend to be liberal.

[salin]

14. er... are we now defining liberals

as those who believe all of the things stated in the original post?

I am liberal - and do not agree which many of those items. I don't attack folks for holding those positions, however.

Though I do find it odd if those issues rather than issues of justice for the poor, equality for all, etc are now not defining liberal issues. Odd indeed. Perhaps I am misreading the implication of your post - as it I read it as a response to the original post.