The spectacular fall of the ABB coalition...

[DerekG]

A rant for all the independents and free-spirits:

Yes, I was a reluctant member of this merry brood. And yet, for a good year, I bristled when its more venomous adherents savaged those who considered voting third-party or, particularly, for the quintessential boogeyman, Ralph Nader. Whether the vitriol came from someone so esteemed as Norman Solomon, or from one of our own DUers ("Hitler-enabler" was one of their more tempered comments), I have to say, you guys were dragged through the proverbial gamut.

Well, I for one say bravo! to the +500,000 dissenters. In so many words, you "happy few" deemed Kerry just another corporate whore for the War Party, and goddamn it, you were right. It seemed that he and the DLC denizens were the only ones who *weren't* concerned about BBV. More's the pity.

We may have Nero for another four years, but at least the Anybody-But-Bushers mentality fell apart. Ergo, "voting your conscience" might not get a bad wrap anymore.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

1. .

[cidliz2004]

2. Darn, stop whining!!

All of us that think that Kerry has performed less than admirably and has the ultimate nerve to actually voice their opinion about it should be hung!!!!!! Join the group of "whiners". It's kind of like having to sign a "loyalty oath", don't speak your mind and all.

[papau]

3. Is this a Whine - don't try to remove GOP - independents and free-spirits

thread, or can anyone join?

[atreides1]

4. Good Points All

What you state are all good points, and it's admirable that those independents and free spirits voted their beliefs.

But, there will be a price to pay, and even those free spirits will be paying that price with the Anybody-but-Bushers. The preview of that cost is the seven Marines who were killed in the Al-Anbar province this weekend, and the 13 people who died as a result of a bomb near the Green Zone this morning.

The cost will be in blood, the cost will be the draconian environmental policies that this administration will try to push forward in Congress, the cost will be in the final raping of the Social Security system, and eventually the ultimate price that will be paid by all Americans, our freedom.

By the way, the independents and free-spirits were not the only ones who "voted their conscience".

[Minstrel Boy]

6. Much of that is true. However,

Kerry's vision for the war was to "win it" by "fighting better," not to call it bullshit and bring the troops home.

He said US troops would be in Iraq four more years.

The only hope he offered the anti-war movement was that he wasn't Bush. But America's problem is not a matter of personalities; it's systemic. Many of the more egregious calamaties would have ended if he'd been permited to win, and international relations would have become more nuanced, but a broad continuity of policy was assured.

Whether Bush or Kerry, Americans would still be dying in the Middle East for years to come. And that was a pathetic and disgraceful choice to present Americans.

[Voltaire99]

5. I regret voting for Kerry--a collapse of principle on my part

Nice post, Derek.

While the ABB line scarcely impressed me--and the mewling of its fiercest advocates often led me to criticize them here--it can now be revealed, heh: I had an 11th hour failure of nerve and voted for Kerry. What a bad taste that cravenness has left, I assure you.

It was the argument of the usually redoubtable Norman Mailer that got to me: liberalism, he told Amy Goodman and a Democracy Now audience, had been steadily evaporating as a force since his entrance into American politics nearly half a century ago. Now, liberals had almost no power; gaining some power was necessary, even if it meant voting for Kerry, a dud of conservative heart and mind, since Kerry's camp would be at least partly willing to listen to us (when not performing in hoops for money and privilege), whereas the Bushies would never listen to us.

Reasonable, that. So rather than cast a vote that meant something to me, I voted this "get some power" line--even though I realized it was a vote for war, a vote for the corporations, a vote against reason and decency. A vote for the repugnant "Reporting For Duty" symbolism by which the anti-war movement had been seduced into ennobling Vietnam and Iraq in one fell swoop.

I shall never make that mistake again. Unless and until the Democratic Party runs someone in good moral odor, I'll vote independent again. Next time, my conscience, not fear, determines how the lever is pulled.

And what have we to be afraid of? The worst is upon us. It is terribly clear that the great herd of American voters is little different to the one that returned Nixon to power in '72. Let us pander no more to that herd. Let us try to reform and lead it--without stooping or flattering its dark appetites.

[blm]

9. Kerry was the most liberal Democratic nominee of the last 100 years.

And that smelled to you?

Man, I wish people had the judiciousness to actually LEARN about Kerry and knock off the trite attacks. Kerry NEVER accepted corporate pac money throughout his time in the Senate and instead, advocated for public financing of campaigns since 1985.

Only those ignorant of Kerry's actual record would proclaim him a corporate toadie.

Guess you didn't like his stance against the death penalty, or that he advocated for over almost 2 decades for gays to serve openly in the military, or his 10 years of work on the Kyoto Treaty, or his work on CHIPS to expand healthcare to all children, or his advocacy for ex-felons to have their voting rights re-instated, or that he was the man who investigated and exposed more government corruption than ANY lawmaker in modern history.

That smells to you?

[Still_Loves_John]

11. I think there are just some people

to whom the nominee is always too conservative, no matter how libreral he really is, just by virtue of being nominated. It's just as ridiculous for us to try and win their votes as it is to try to win racist southerners' votes.

[sangh0]

12. Some prefer to repeat the repuke criticisms of Kerry

it's easier than learning the facts.

[Zhade]

30. And some use the rw talking point that Kerry is the most liberal senator.

:shrug:

[JohnKleeb]

32. hes not but he's more liberal than given credit for

[Zhade]

33. He used to be, IMIO, yes. Not for the last four years.

But yes, he is more liberal in some ways than he gets credit for. He's also more imperialistic (as any U.S. president must be to win) than many are willing to see.

Mixed bag, methinks.

[JohnKleeb]

36. He's an engima

Thats how I see him.

[Hippo_Tron]

18. I don't think he was more liberal than FDR, Truman, or Johnson...

Well Johnson domestically anyway, Kerry's foreign policy beats the hell out of Johnson's.

[JohnKleeb]

22. Domestically yes I think LBJ beats Kerry

hmm I dont now if Truman was more liberal than Kerry though, Truman did have a lot of liberal policies though, an attempt for universal health care, a repeal of what he called slave labor, Taft-Hartley Bill. Kerry I believe was more liberal than Clinton or Gore though easily.

[wyldwolf]

23. What was so liberal about... oh... let's say FDR?

[Hippo_Tron]

37. Umm, every New Deal program

Social Security, FDIC, WPA, etc. Not so liberal by today's standards because we've become accustomed to the legacies left by some of FDR's permanent programs but they were very radical for his time.

[JohnKleeb]

38. right

also the guy who signed the GI Bill opposed by many conservatives at the time.

[Cheswick2.0]

24. he was barely more liberal than Leiberman

too bad, but he did change over the years.

[welshTerrier2]

20. Kerry ... the jury is still out ...

i offer the following comments about Kerry and the Democrats ...

first, let me say that I'm mad as hell and i'm "probably" not going to take it anymore ...

for me to remain a Democrat, the following things must occur in the relatively near term:

1. the party must take a strong stand to bring the troops home ... the invasion is DEAD WRONG no matter how you look at it ...
2. the party must become a real opposition party ... voting against this judge or that bill is just not enough ... we are getting outgunned everyday on every media outlet ... Democrats, elected Democrats that is, seem to appear on TV to give their cool, reasoned analysis in a much too wonky way ... they come across as pompous professors when confronted with sharp tongued opposition ... they might be right but it just doesn't sell ...
3. the new DNC chair has to encapsulate the spirit of activism that we saw on the internet, especially with the Dean people, during the last year ... an insider, who "has the contacts", but is unable to rally the massive energies of party activists will no longer get the job done ... Democrats need to believe that someone "gets it" and is willing to invest in their energies ...
4. we are losing our democracy ... this problem goes way beyond the issue of election fraud ... even if there had been no fraud, the machinery of our government is owned by powerful multi-national corporations ... policy is made to serve the wealthy few and not the average citizen ... until Democrats are willing to say our democracy is at risk and that it's been seriously corrupted by big money, the battles we fight fail to understand the overall war we need to wage ...

What the hell does this have to do with Kerry you may ask? Kerry's given some indication that he wants to take on the mantle of responsibility to lead the party ... and yet he's given very little indication that he's willing to do the things listed above ... my position on Kerry at this time is one of limited optimism ... I hold out hope that he sees that the "old ways", the "safe ways" cannot succeed ... we need a party leader with stature and credibility ... should Kerry choose the right path, he could be a valuable asset in the struggle we face ... but if all he'll offer is "technical" or "mechanical" observations about how bush has screwed up Iraq, if he goes along with the republicans to "put the country first" while the republicans are flushing it down the toilet, and if he will not speak out about the corrupting influences of big money on our democracy, then his time has passed ...

Things will grow much clearer within the next month or two ... those who step up to the plate to lead will either choose the safe, old paths or they will embrace the new ... and then we'll know the worth of John Kerry to the progressive cause ... limited optimism is still alive; but its days are growing shorter ...

[Zhade]

29. Jeez, blm, Kerry is NOT the Second Coming.

The "most liberal" line is a RIGHTWING talking point. Was Kerry pretty liberal? Sure. Most in 100 years? Pardon my laughter.

I think his vote against the first Gulf War was heroic, and his vote for the second (okay, okay, his vote to "trust" a lying "president" - who stole his way into power and appointed indicted-then-pardoned IranContra figures - with the power to declare war against a country known even at the time to be unlikely to be a threat) to be shameful, or stupid.

I understand you admire Kerry, blm. I admire some of the things he's done, no question (the 1971 Kerry is a model worth following). But this "most liberal in 100 years" line is right up there with your "exposed more corruption than, like, anyone ever" line - it's a wee bit over the top, and not entirely true.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[GRLMGC]

13. Right on! n/t

[wyldwolf]

15. ...and it's just a matter of time...

..before these self-righteous "nonconformists" start whining about their "free speech being stiffled" because someone is disagreeing.

They really have something in common with the extreme right: They're so sure they are correct that anyone who differs with them must be attacking them.

[lateo]

19. It is just a matter of time before...

some of the assclowns that were over zealous in their support of their candidate try to smear the "nonconformists" with sweeping generalizations and untruths...just like the extremists on the dark side do.

[wyldwolf]

21. wrong on both counts..

Clark was my candidate. I supported Kerry when he got the nom.

sweeping genenerizations and untruths

What is in the first post of this thread?

[lateo]

26. Clark may have been your candidate...

for a while but when Kerry got the nod you were one of the most adamantly blasting anyone who had a problem with Kerry.

[wyldwolf]

27. you just made my point

when Kerry got the nod you were one of the most adamantly blasting anyone who had a problem with Kerry.

No. I adamantly defended Kerry. It was folks like you who considered my defense of him a personal attack on you or an attempt to stiffle dissent.

[lateo]

28. Oh I see...

You can do no wrong...riiiiight.

[wyldwolf]

31. Actually, you don't

I never personally attacked anyone for criticizing John Kerry. I did defend him as passionately as others criticized.

Some folks just don't like to be disputed. They take it personally.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lateo]

8. I'm ready to see some of those...

who be smirched the "happy few" ,who knew all along Kerry was going to play along with his masters, eat their crow.


There are several here that I wish I could name but it is against DU policy to call people out.

[Walt Starr]

10. I'm Walt Starr, and I was an ABBer

And I am ready to eat crow:

[lateo]

17. Actually...

It isn't you that I am referring to. There were some over-zealous Kerry supporters that basically tried to take over this message board with their pro-Kerry drivel. Screaming down anyone who dared disagree with the Democratic presidential candidate.

They were so unreasonable about their support for Kerry that I began to believe they were plants from the DNC.

[wyldwolf]

14. Fall? I would say everyone here still would rather have ABB!

I would rather have any democrat than Bush...

On the opposite end, if I have to have a republican, I would rather have most of them than Bush.

[Q]

16. I was an ABB...

...but it wasn't a difficult choice since I always vote Democratic anyway. But I'm surprised that the hard-core ABBers still believe that Kerry was a 'liberal' politician during the campaign and after the election. They fail to see that things can quickly change when power is at stake.

Simply put...Kerry pissed off many that would have voted for him with his pandering to the RWing corporatists and his kinder, gentler warmongering. He would report for duty and hunt down the terrorists and 'kill them'...failing to acknowledge that the 'war' being fought in Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism. He seemed disconnnected with the facts about Iraq. That it was an illegal, aggressive war and that tens of thousands of innocents were being murdered for a Bush* lie. A lie they all felt they had to cover up.

Perhaps ABB is all we had in 2004. But it's going to take more than that in 2008 for voters to go to the booth and vote for Democrats.

[Cheswick2.0]

25. Nader is not a Boogeyman.........he's a real live asshole

I am so tired of people pretending that criticism of Nader is unjustified.

I say bravo to the democratic party for keeping him off of as many state ballots as possible.

[Q]

34. Yes...it's just as tiring as...

...people pretending that the criticism of the Democratic party leadership is unjustified. I would never vote for him...but Nader WAS used by the ABB group as a scapegoat for failed policies that they demanded people vote for against their conscience.