2001 DU spirit:"So let go of those bi-partisan feelings, people."

[madfloridian]

Last edited Tue Mar 10, 2015, 11:49 PM - Edit history (1)

I was reading DU back then. It was my salvation from the ones around me in this area who are mostly now Tea Party and proud of it. They have all their talking points memorized and can spout them loudly and proudly, even though they don't have a clue what they are saying.

I did not join until a year later, but I had kept my sanity reading here.

I came here a moderate/conservative. I became more liberal through the years.

Now I see it is not going to be comfortable to post much about liberal topics, the push is on to head to the middle and not make waves. I don't have to make waves, no one does. But I am glad we made waves about cuts to Social Security. I don't regret making waves about the privatization of education, though it hasn't mattered much. I feel better for doing it.

Read the 2001 Manifesto of a forum with a big heart and many liberal thoughts...setting out to battle the right wing instead of joining them.

https://web.archive.org/web/20010219071508/http://www.democraticunderground.com/about.html

Some excerpts:

The conservatives have turned "liberal" into a dirty word, and we're taking it back. We of the Democratic Underground have decided the time has finally come to lower ourselves to their level. We're talking all out, balls-to-the-wall, light-the-fuse-and-stand-well-back thermonuclear partisan warfare.

No longer will we shrug our shoulders as Rush Limbaugh blithely tosses out another line about "liberal hypocrisy". No longer will we nod and smile politely as Robert Novak body-slams our ideals, kicks them in the crotch, and then pisses all over them.

Well we're sick of it. Not just because they're wrong, but because, let's face it, they're having way more fun than we are. Not only did they steal the election but they got to call us stupid while they were doing it, and now they're going to squander eight years of peace and prosperity.

Understand, it's not Democratic Underground's job to stop them - there are plenty of people around who are far better organized for that. But we can stop them from getting away with it. Every time an immigrant maid, or a tobacco company payoff, or an inconvenient DUI (or two) comes along, we'll remember - and we'll be here for you to vent your spleen. To paraphrase the greatest politician of our time: we feel your pain.

So let go of those bi-partisan feelings, people. Get in the forums and blow off some steam. It's time to stop beating ourselves up and start swinging in their direction...

If I am "swinging in their direction" (the right wing that is)....I would rather not see Democrats of any type or label enabling them or their policies.

I can "let go of the bi-partisan feelings" very easily. I also have so far swung back into the fold when my vote was needed.

[madfloridian]

1. BTW I found this link in Cooley Hurd's great post today on DU's infancy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6344966

Brought back lots of memories.

[JonLP24]

8. I'm getting a kick out of the top 10 conservative idiots

2.John Derbyshire - "Brace yourself: I hate Chelsea Clinton" wrote Mr. Derbysmear in his National Review column last week. Oh really sir? Why so? Here's his ingenious reasoning - "She has not looted the White House, lied under oath, bombed an aspirin factory in Africa to get her personal legal problems off the front pages, raped anybody, used public employees to pimp for her, sold the Department of Defense to the Chinese Communist Party for cold cash, taken a fat bribe dressed up as a 'commodities trade,' or written a book arguing that parents cannot be trusted to raise their children. I note, however, that she doesn't deserve any credit for not having done these things; she just hasn't had time yet." He goes on wax nostalgic about how "the great despotisms of the past" (Stalin's USSR, Nazi Germany, Imperial China) would have killed her, recognizing that the "families of objectionable citizens were a continuing threat." Everyone else in the running for a Pullitzer this year may want to bow out now. Clearly the quality of this man's journalism is not to be trifled with.

Ah, the days when bombing an "aspirin factory" was a controversy. First off, I don't believe it was an Africa but Bush bombed Al-Jazeera twice and wanted to bomb it a third time. Few people know it, much less make a big deal about it.

Rush Limbaugh - Okay, take a deep breath before reading this one. In a promo for his radio show last week, Rush was heard to announce, "If you take away the black vote, Bush won by a landslide". Now slowly, get back in your chair and re-read that. Breathe in. Breathe out. Now spit. That's good. While we understand that he would prefer democracy if only white men were allowed to vote, what Mount Rushmo' fails to have realized is that in Florida they DID take away the black vote and Bush STILL lost. Whoops. Talent on loan from God? More like talent on loan from Gallagher.

https://web.archive.org/web/20010302061153/http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/index.html

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Things have changed!

That's for sure!

[madfloridian]

3. Hey, I see you took the plunge...

the twitter plunge that is. Good for you. Just did a follow.

Yes, things have changed. It was a long journey for me to become more liberal, and now I am expected to just fall in line.

Not sure I am good at that anymore.

[Old and In the Way]

4. you made me a better Democrat!

Thanks Manny... hope this doesn't get Lerted on! /

[madfloridian]

6. He's good at that.

[madfloridian]

5. From this point on...

I get the feel from the years here...if we vary too much or say too much about policies our party should not have we might as well not be here. I have always voted Democratic, campaigned hard for Dean, then Kerry, then Obama. I mean my late hubby and I were active in various ways in real time.

I just hate to see it all come down to guilt trips for those of us concerned about policies.

[sabrina 1]

12. The reason I came here in the beginning was because WE did talk about policies. Right wing dominated

forums were all about personalities, 'lieberals' and 'The Far Left' etc.

But I noticed around the mid 2000s criticisms similar to those we were accustomed from the Right, began appearing on some big 'liberal' forums. They were different, but just as nasty. First saw it on DK, even saw the founder of the Liberal forum tell liberals there he did not like them.

I did a of research back then, trying to figure out why I was seeing the same kind of attacks that are par for the course for the Right, coming from the 'Left'. It was fascinating to learn how and why it was happening.

I think the reason the Left is so hated is because they will not just blindly follow when things appear to be going wrong, or something doesn't sound right.

What is needed to keep control is a blindly loyal, unquestioning population.

I notice less discussion of issues on DU. But lots of drive by personal attacks on good Democrats here.

I doubt that will stop Democrats from continuing to speak up when things, like SS eg, are being placed on the Heritage Foundation's table.

Thanks for your OP.

[madfloridian]

14. Yes, you are right about so much of that.

I know for a fact that some here have other large forums and facebook pages to back them up, but some of us have nothing like that at all. Our posts stand alone in the face of often ridiculous attacks.

It has the primary feel here, which means don't question party policy. It does required blind loyalty.

[sabrina 1]

15. I've heard that, about other sites etc. Don't care, as you said, if you can't stand on your own

or back up your assertions, then you should know you are trying to defend something that just isn't defensible.

Facts are things to refute, so the default is to attack the messenger.

And what gets me is that it doesn't work. So why keep doing something that fails so spectacularly?

[djean111]

7. "The conservatives have turned "liberal" into a dirty word," - and now - so has the DNC.

It is used as an insult, here at DU.

[alarimer]

9. Part of the problem is being out of power versus being in power.

As long as Bush was President, it was good to rail and scream and gnash our teeth. It was about all we could do, in fact.

Then, the Democrats take over (well, at least the Presidency) and then we have to fall in line. It's no longer quite so underground as before. Yet, there are deep divisions within the Democratic Party as to how to go about retaking Congress and about who should run for President.

I have become much more radical in the ensuing years, so much so that I am not willing to just settle for whatever centrists candidate they allow to run. It's not good enough anymore just to hold my nose and vote for the lesser of the evils. It's become clear to me that corporations control our politics. It's just a matter of which corporations. It's Apple and Microsoft vs. Koch Industries. And none of them have the people's best interests at heart.

It is also disheartening the way people have become more like cheerleaders for their "team" than critics. It's more about winning. Some folks seem unwilling to hold Democrats' feet to the fire to make them keep their promises.

[Starry Messenger]

10. K&R

[jwirr]

11. I can't say what I am thinking - I'd get kicked off the board. But I do see the problem - it is

mine also. I am old enough to understand the need to be supportive of our candidate and the president even when they do things we do not want them to do. I understand needing to win - been stung to many times by the Rs . However, I do not want to stop lobbying for the ideas I believe in either.

[sabrina 1]

13. The problem is we are not winning. So something needs to change in order to win

back the voters who in two mid terms now have sent a strong message to their party.

And looking at the stats in those two elections, what is clear is that voters WANT Progressive Dems and policies.

Eg, almost all Progressive candidates retained their seats. So people will go to the polls to FOR what they want.

And voters were busy getting progressive issues on local ballots, clearly believing they are not being heard in DC, and they WON, across the political spectrum.

Studying the results of those two mid terms undermines the false claim that 'this is a 'conservative country'. That has been the excuse used to promote 'centrist/conservo Dems. But it turns out it is simply not true and voters are taking matters into their own hands now, several Liberal Orgs worked hard during those two mid terms on these issues and were successful.

But if the leadership chooses to misinterpret the results, as they did in 2010, 'we need to move FURTHER to the Right', they will lose AGAIN, as they did in 2014.

[Katashi_itto]

16. Exactly. I won't be bothered with a Corporate Dem.

[jwirr]

17. The problem as I see it is that we MAY have some progressives in the primary but when it comes to

the general we have no one unless Hillary starts changing her tune or a real progressive gets nominated. Any vote against the party will most likely lead to a lose to the Rs. And we can kiss the SCOTUS goodbye.

Years ago we could afford to take the chance but today we are in great danger of a total corporate takeover via the Rs. That scares me to death.

I blame this problem mostly on the centrists. How to fight them is the question. If I do not like the Democratic congress person from Nebraska - used to live there - am I better off with an R?

Personally I think we need to follow the example of the teabaggers. They took over the party. They did not jump ship - they pushed the others overboard. We need to find a way of taking our party back without pushing anyone overboard. It would help if we could get other sympathetic parties to come in and help us take it over.

I think politics is like war - it is hell.

[sabrina 1]

18. I agree with you. I think we now have several great Liberal groups who ARE working

hard to take the party back from the 'centrists'. And they demonstrated how to do it in the midterms. They DID vote, but not for candidates who do not represent them.

And the same thing is going to happen IF the candidate is someone they do not believe represents them.

Even if everyone on this forum, which is more than likely, votes for the nominee, that has zero to do with the country at large.

And if we lose AGAIN, they will do the same thing AGAIN, instead of studying why they lost, they will BLAME THE VOTERS.

That's like blaming consumers for not buying your product. Rather than trying to figure out why they lost.

There is enough data now, starting in 2008, to provide them with the answers.

[jwirr]

19. Unfortunately I doubt they are reading it.

[sabrina 1]

20. Or, deliberately misinterpreting it. They WANT centrists in Congress and that is why they back

them financially often against good Progressives.

See the NJ Gubernatorial race eg. We had a good Progressive Candidate, Buono running against a very vulnerable Chris Christie. He was already under fire for his handling of Sandy and the funds for the victims of that tragedy.

Dems not only ignored his Sandy vulnerability, they claimed 'he can't be beaten BECAUSE of his handling of Sandy'.

So, the Progressive Dem was left without funds, up against someone with huge Corporate funding. She was left without much if any support from leading Dems.

She was told outright by the party Leadership they could not help her much financially.

And worse, NJ elected Dems ENDORSED the Republican, Christie. More than 60 of them.

There has been accountability for that in the Party. Elected Dems openly endorsing and voting for the Republican.

And in a Blue state!

Is it any wonder voters are simply disgusted when THEY are told 'you have to vote for the Dem no matter what' when we see THEM doing the opposite?

It makes you think, 'mmm, they are running Centrists when voters want Progressives, and supporting Republicans over Progressives'. What is the message here?

[jwirr]

21. I think that gives us a good idea about what DU activists could do to help this. At election time

create a list of progressives who are running and how we donate directly to them. I do not have a lot of money to give but what I do have I want to go to real progressives. Make it easily accessible here so that everyone can use it.

[madfloridian]

22. An example. I don't have any Dem around here to donate to...so through Act Blue I gave to

Rahm's opponent in the mayoral race.

[jwirr]

23. Yes. I have given through Act Blue also but I never know who to give to. That is were DU can come

in.