Have we Learned NOTHING from 2000?

[Yavin4]

As a DU vet, I "fondly" recall the Nader flame wars of 2001 and 2002. It was all out war fare on these boards regarding whether Nader cost us the election. In the end, Nader did indeed hurt Al Gore's chances of rightfully becoming president. And, it delights me to no end how Al Gore has now become the darling of DU when a significant number of posters here hated him.

Now, we're about to do this folly all over again with Edwards and his house. Just because Bush won't be on the ballot, don't think for a second that you're safe from the fascists. Guliani would make Bush look like a 60s free-love hippie. Bush believes that he can detain you with evidence. Guiliani believes that he can gun you down in the street like a dog without evidence.

I understand your environmental concerns about Edwards' house, but until you can do a full environmental comparison of ALL the candidates' energy usage, shouldn't you withhold your judgment? I recall many Naderites saying that there was no difference between Gore and Bush back in 2001, and boy, they couldn't have been any more wrong.

There's another thread today cheering Tim Robbins' speech from the march on Saturday. Makes me wonder that if Tim hadn't supported Gore, he wouldn't have to make such as speech, and thousands of people from NYC to New Orleans to Iraq would be alive today.

Think long and hard about where we were in Jan. 2000, and where we are today before you destroy a good candidate over one issue.

[Taverner]

1. Methinks the Edwards House non-issue is troll droppings

Left here in order to get the exact effect its getting

[bryant69]

3. I think it's a valid concern for some people

We are in the primary season and we don't have a chosen candidate.

It's a tricky thing because of course the primary fight should be fought hard - we should fight for the candidate we think will represent our interests best. On the other hand if the fighting is too bloody we run the risk of having candidates so bloodied they can't win in the general, and of turning off the activist base because their candidate didn't get the nomination. It's kind of a catch 22.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[watrwefitinfor]

4. It was a test.

I said it on another thread. It was a test, and DU was found sorely lacking in whatever it takes to recognize swiftboating when we see it.

They learned how easy it is to take over the whole place and bring all the important discussions (mass demonstrations, Fitz, EVERYTHING ELSE) to a dead standstill. I saw one thread where the original rabble rouser stood alone against what seemed to be all the sane people on DU. For hours and hours, if not days, everytime someone would lambast him with another argument for sanity, he was there with a shit-stirring reply.

They will do it again.
And again.

Wonder if we could have a forum for swiftboating threads?
Wonder why this was allowed to go on for so long?
It was not an honest debate.

Wat

[Efilroft Sul]

12. More like mole droppings.

The mods here won't let us say explicitly where many DU moles come from, but, see, you can find out if the clue given here skirts the prohibition.

Moles are kicking back with the popcorn and enjoying themselves. They've even got an infiltration guide on the Website That Shall Not Be Named. Supposedly things for them are going swimmingly here. The question to everyone on DU is, are you going to let your chains get yanked so easily?

Taverner's right: the Edwards house is a non-issue. There are far more important things to discuss and debate here in a civil manner. If so many end up fighting so long and so hard over something so little, then perhaps they've fallen down the mole hole.

Log off, come up for air, and laugh at yourselves. Then come back and talk about the things that really matter.

[annabanana]

15. moles

Crafty little diggers... nearly blind in the clear light of day.

[tnlefty]

19. I am neither a troll, nor a mole and perhaps it is a non-issue for you,

but I witnessed the reactions of my environmentally concerned children and it wasn't pretty. But thanks for branding those who question as trolls or moles.

Really helps with discussion or questions doesn't it?

[quiet.american]

2. This NY'er agrees with your comments about Giuliani.

I haven't even clicked on any of the Edwards threads because... it's just seems so... silly.

[sandnsea]

5. Have we learned nothing from 2004???

I am not a fan of Edwards' house AT ALL. However, for the love of god, if you want the story to die -

STOP POSTING ABOUT IT!!!

[anitar1]

7. Plenty on DU want to keep it alive. As if all

prospective candidates are not monied people.Some have less than others. Edwards earned his money--

[sandnsea]

9. Wrong

Mostly it's people defending this shit that keep posting and posting. The very few other posts have been specifically about environmental issues, resource depletion, excessive consumerism, and how it relates to poverty and war.

It isn't about the money, it's about the choices made with the money; and DUers defending greed on the one hand, while yelling at poor senior citizens for shopping at Walmart.

[NashVegas]

6. What I Learned From 2004

The primaries, that is.

There are people who will stop at nothing to throw shit on a candidate who is not of their choice. The Ignore function is your friend.

[tnlefty]

20. Not always true. I love Dennis, but of those declared I was leaning

towards Edward until I saw this monstrosity of a house, and his stance on Iran.

I suppose questioning or disagreeing will be considered "bashing" which I've never received a clear definition of although I've asked several times. It seems that anything that is questioned is considered "bashing" by some, useful info. by others, and a subject of debate by other 'others'.

Just :shrug: and a questioning sigh, I suppose.

[Efilroft Sul]

23. Here's where I'll agree with you questioning Edwards.

His stance on Iran. That's a real presidential matter, and I think that's worth debating.

The "monstrosity" of his house? Yeah, it's supersized, I'll grant you that. But Edwards doesn't need our permission to tell him how to spend his money.

No, I'm not an Edwards supporter. In fact, I support nobody yet. I want to get the complete profile of every candidate and find out who best represents me.

[tnlefty]

24. "I suppose that trying to conserve and concern about global warming

is another concern just for us 'mythical little people', too", is what my 16 yr. old had to say about his house, and that was the mildest of what was said.

My kids have been raised with conservation: we compost and do a lot of things where we can. If we were extremely wealthy we would do more. The first house that my spouse and I built had solar panels when Jimmy Carter gave us 'mythical little people' tax credits for our efforts. Reagan took those credits away, and the technology shifted, also. We're waiting for the nano-technologies or for something else to come along to take it's place - we can't afford to invest twice! I hope that you understand that my concerns about that "monstrosity" aren't just mine, but those of my 3 offspring as well.

I don't ascribe to the idea that the very wealthy should get a pass for their lack of care about environmental concerns when my family has been trying for years.

[Efilroft Sul]

25. Interesting background you provided.

Believe it or not, you and your family's take on environmental concerns is shared by my family. We conserve, we recycle, we're growing our own food. If we could get off the grid, we would, but going solar is probably not the practical way to do it up here in cloudy Pittsburgh. So we're converting everything over to highest-efficiency heating and cooling this year (well, the highest we can afford, let me be honest).

Whereas what I think what Edwards does with his money and home is not enough to disqualify him for my vote yet, I can certainly understand you and your family's disappointment with him. If his lack of not walking the walk (being environmentally conscious) while talking the talk (everyone else has to be environmentally conscious) is enough for you to say you're not voting for him, then by all means withhold your vote because of the hypocrisy. To a degree, I expect a certain amount of hypocrisy from our leaders or potential leaders. They are, after all, politicians. It's not pretty, it's not nice, but it's reality. When the hypocrisy crosses a certain threshold, people no longer support politicians. Reading your posts, I infer that Edwards lost your support because of his house (plus the Iran stance).

At this point, tnlefty, I don't expect any currently declared Democratic candidate for president (which excludes Al Gore for now) to address global warming and the overall matter of energy usage as a major plank on his or her platform. Why? Because nobody has the gravitas of Gore on this matter. However, that could change if Gore stays out and another candidate adopts the entire Gore environmental platform with his blessing. This, of course, has to happen in the runup to the primaries. Any pro-environmental stance taken during the primaries or later runs the risk of being seen as, well, a political move instead of something declared with heartfelt conviction.

One last item, and I want to make this perfectly clear, I am not accusing everyone on the Edwards house threads as being moles. But there's a likelihood of moles, just as I think there are and will be many moles who will stir crap up in threads that support/attack primary candidates. Other web sites like to see us eat our own in emotionally charged battles in GD and know that GD is the fertile ground for mole holes. Just be aware of it, and if you meet opposition in threads, hopefully the disagreement is civil and rational -- just like you have been with me.

Peace.

[tnlefty]

26. I don't think that stating an opinion about something a candidate

has done or said is necessarily "bashing", nor did I mention anything about withholding a vote.

All I can say is that Democratic candidates had better get serious about getting out of Iraq and global climate change. My Bush** votin', republican mother was giddy about the Dems taking over control of both houses to exercise some control over "him", (he's now like Voldemort in the Harry Potter books to her in that she will not mention his name!). Approx. 6 months ago she mentioned that the sermon in church dealt with conservation and she called me to tell me about it. I don't know why she ever voted for the Toxic Texan to begin with, but she's not happy with him now and she is waiting for the Dems to smack him upside his head.

I spoke with her last night and nothing had changed except that she will be absolutely livid if Dimson** does anything in Iran, and she mentioned that the Dems haven't been in office very long, but she is hoping they will strongly stand up to 'he who must not be named' and do something about Iraq, climate change, and restoring the Constitution, The Bill of Rights, and re-establishing the rule of law.

I think that if you do a search on posts that I have made you will see that it is waaaayyy too early for me to support any candidate. A lot of votes could be cast, a lot of positions stated (just like the goofy statement that Biden made about Obama).

I'm waiting to see who declares and who doesn't, and I have my eyes and ears open.

[Efilroft Sul]

27. "Voldemort." Snark!

You know, people have compared Bush to Hitler, the Antichrist, King George III, Caligula, a Sith lord, and others. Your depiction of Bush as Voldemort is new to me, at least.

Should we be lucky enough to not perish in some Dimson-started war and live to be old and grey, I think some next-generation tyrant who takes the global stage will also inevitably be likened to Hitler, Voldemort, Caligula, etc. But I also think we'll see that tyrant compared to Bush, especially if every international decision he or she makes is based on double-reverse antilogic.

For what it's worth, here are two articles about the impending confrontation with Iran:
• http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/013107.html
• http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/5185

Democratic candidates and the 110th Congress better be prepared to make a stand.

Thanks for chatting, tnlefty. I'll be seeing you around on other threads I hope.

[deutsey]

8. Apparently we haven't since it was the Supreme Court and disenfranchisement

of voters in Florida that put Bush in office more than anything.

[The Majority]

10. Guiliani The Snipper

Yavin4 Said: "Guiliani believes that he can gun you down in the street like a dog without evidence."


I'm no Guiliani fan, but isn't that statement going a little far?

The problem with politics today is that rather than debate issues and ideas everybody is busy insulting one another and calling the other person a "criminal".

[Yavin4]

11. Not At All. Ever Hear of Amadou Diallo?

Amadou Diallo was a poor immigrant worker who was just going home at night when police officers mistook him for a criminal with a gun. They then proceeded to unload on him. Guiliani defended the police officers.

http://www.spectacle.org/0300/diallo.html

[The Majority]

13. Tragic

Definitely a tragedy!

I read your reference and this was definitely a tragedy. I looked it up at Wikipedia as well since your reference obviously was designed to include a lot of opinion and pull at a person's emotion. The link below is more factual.

Very sad indeed, but I doubt Guiliani planned it or took action to cover it up. The cops were overly aggressive and the victim made a mistake. When cops with badges tell you to do something you don't reach for your jacket pocket. It still doesn't excuse what happened, but it was not a good thing to do.

I have 12 years of legal experience and a change of venue is not usual either. These cops worked in that local court and criminal system and you don't want friends investigating them or trying them.

Very sad though. This had to be Hell for the Mother.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo

[Vidar]

18. Welcome to DU.

[newyawker99]

16. Hi The Majority!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[The Majority]

17. Hi

Thanks. Glad to be here.

[Strawman]

14. Fortunately, I don't think this "houseboating" buzz will amount to much

or make any difference. People are going to be cynical about anyone who gets nominated. The MSM will see to that. If it wasn't his house it would be something else.

If he can't overcome this bullshit "houseboating," he doesn't have what it takes to be President of the United States. Anyway, I'm confident this won't mean jack shit and he'll move on just fine.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. You know it seems some folks

do not understand that he earned the right to have that house, and quite frankly I have no clue if he have any green elements installed (nor is it my business)

But for some, hey it is more entertaining than watching a car wreck on the freeway

[mondo joe]

22. Precisely. Purity with no regard to practicality. But there are still some who say Gore would

have been only SLIGHTLY better than Bush.