No Need to Say "Welcome"

[NanceGreggs]

In the past few weeks, there have been several posts by former Hillary supporters expressing their decision to now support our presumptive nominee, Barack Obama.

Often these posts are responded to with greetings of "welcome aboard”, or "welcome to the fold” – and I have no doubt that these sentiments are well-meaning and heartfelt.

However, I, for one, see no need to “welcome” Hillary supporters – because they’ve been on-board and in-the-fold all along. They are fellow Democrats, who have never wavered in their desire to see one of our own sworn-in next January. They have always been with us, in the same way Obama supporters have always been with them.

While we may have disagreed – vehemently at times – as to who the nominee should ultimately be, we all did so knowing that in the end, only one would prevail. And knowing that when the time came, we would stand together behind whoever that nominee turned out to be, despite the fact that it might not be our personal choice.

The true Obama supporters have known all along that when all was said and done, the Hillary supporters had our back – in the same way the true Hillary supporters knew we had theirs, should things have turned out differently than they have.

Just as there is no need to welcome those who have been on the same side, the Democratic Party’s side, from the beginning, there is also no need for apologies or regrets.

Throughout this process, we have all said things in the heat of the moment; things that have sometimes been hurtful, uncalled-for, and downright nasty. But it is important to remember that the vast majority of these remarks – even those that have been personal attacks on the supporters of one side or the other – were born of passion for a particular candidate rather than a desire to alienate or divide.

Viewed in their proper context, such comments are, in the end, of no value in assessing blame nor supporting the concept that the division between “camps” was anything more than a desire to see the best Democratic candidate put forward as our nominee.

While we have disagreed as to who the best candidate was, the vast majority of us have never lost sight of the fact that given the choice between the two left standing, we were ahead of the game either way.

I realize that in some quarters, it may unfortunately be acceptable to say that Hillary has been in it for herself, with little regard to those who have supported her candidacy.

While I may have my own personal qualms about the conduct of Senator Clinton’s campaign, I have no doubt that she fully appreciates the efforts of those who have contributed their money, their time, their efforts on her behalf - and those who have given so unselfishly of themselves are to be commended.

The fact that they did so on behalf of a Democratic candidate – whether she proved to be the winner or not in the end – speaks volumes about their patriotism, their commitment to their fellow citizens, and their loyalty to a party that will inevitably lay claim to the presidency at this important juncture in our nation’s history.

So I will not say ”welcome” to those who I know have been on my side – or, more to the point, on our side – from the beginning. I do not feel a need to welcome, as though they were guests, those who have been an integral part of my family all along. I need not make a point of saying welcome aboard to my fellow mateys who have been valued members of the crew since we set sail on our journey to a better world many months ago.

In short, there is no need to reach out to our fellow Democrats and beg for unity, because that unity – despite our individual positions, our bickering, our name-calling, our arguing, our debating of issues that have ranged from the sublime to the ridiculous – has always been there.

Its might will be felt in the months to come as we, together, face and ultimately defeat those who ignorantly saw our “division” as anything other than what it was – temporary and totally unreflective of the outcome of the battle that we, as a united party, are about to engage in, and the resultant defeat we are about to inflict on our common enemy.

[JFN1]

1. Very well said

Unity is our best choice, and our best hope. Glad we're on the same "side!"

[roguevalley]

9. nance, will you stop being reasonable for goodness sake! This

is DU after all! :evilgrin:

Thank you, dear. good post.

[Lady-Damai]

2. Thank you for another brilliant post.

:kick:

[panader0]

3. all vitriol aside, dems will vote together this year

mccain??

[Tesha]

59. Some will, some won't. There's a poll currently active here where 13 DUers have stated...

that they will vote for McCain. Are they all disruptors? Probably not.
Will some of them come around by Election Day? Probably so.

But it's clear that Hillary has caused a real division in the party,
far deeper and more-permanent that any past election. I think you'll
see some pretty fundamental political re-alignments as a result of
this including the likely formation of a DLC/non-foaming-at-the-mouth-
Republican centrist party. (In other words, a place for Lieberman,
Hillary, and other "Gang of fourteen" types and hangers-on to call
home.)

Maybe after that we'll finally see the Democratic Party start to once
again value its populist, progressive, labor-oriented base. Or maybe
a true Green party will emerge from the chaos?

Tesha


Reference:

o http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6207763

[nxylas]

63. Or maybe both

Perhaps the Democratic party will move to the left and merge with the Greens, once all the DLC types have left. Whether such a party would be electable is another matter. I'd vote for it, but I'm hardly typical in that regard.

[mrbluto]

64. Blame, blame, blame.

You say "Hillary has caused a real division in the party"

You could have modified that, you could have softened it, and if you really think about it, is it actually true.

Perhaps partially. Perhaps more than can be attributed to the Obama campaign.

But putting it ALL on her makes it too easy for all of us (some more than others) to ignore their own culpability. It makes it too easy to ignore some serious culprits - like the MSM which basically said "let's you and him fight" and kept the pot stirred since the beginning.

Putting this all on Hillary makes it too easy to ignore the twisted game the corporate owned media has played on us, that we allow them to play.

[Tesha]

66. I meant exactly what I said.

In 2000, for her Senate race, Mr. Tesha and I
were large-scale financial supporters of Hillary
Clinton's run for the Senate. But her action since
that time have turned us into the strongest oppo-
sition to Clinton.

I the division that is happening right now could
be stopped with a single word from her mouth so
*YES*, I lay it all at her feet.

Tesha

[mrbluto]

67. All at her feet?

Tell me this: where would she be now if you hadn't been such a large-scale financial supporter?

Did you you give enough to get some access? What did you do with it? What did you learn about her beforehand? What do you think changed her?

Maybe I am wrong. Maybe she is the prime architect of the current divisions - but you haven't given much reason to change my position yet.

[Tesha]

75. I'm not sure "she changed".

But her votes in the Senate, particularly regarding
the Iraq War Resolution and her votes to enable Bush's
roughshod ride over the Constitution, surprised us;
the votes seemed calculated precisely to prove she
was macho enough to run for President (rather than
to do what was best for America).

And she lost our support at that point.

Given the way many felt about the IWR, and given the
fact that it was no secret at all that many of us felt
that way, it was foolish of her to run. And it was even
more foolish of her to then turn her campaign into a
campaig aimed at destroying her fellow Democrat rather
than the Republican.

Tesha

[Arugula Latte]

77. Well said, Tesha.

You summarized a lot of my feelings and did so eloquently.

[mrbluto]

93. You're bitter - I get that.

Hillary has nigh-50% of the vote, yet it was "foolish" to run her campaign?

Clearly it could have gone either way.

"Campaign aimed at destroying her fellow Democrat"?

Look - she thinks she's the best person for the office - she's playing hardball to some extent, and I think many of these "gaffs" are manufactured in the echo chamber. It's not at all clear that she's working to "destroy her fellow Democrat" any more than is necessary to get the nomination and win the GE.

I say all this, by-the-way, as someone who doesn't especially support her nomination.

I don't hold out much hope for it, but what I hope is that people could look at this a bit less emotionally.

Maybe it would be better if she didn't get the nomination, but I don't see how it's better if we go into a frenzy and brand her as some sort of evil-incarnate.

[Tesha]

96. Don't "project" -- it's also foolish. (NT)

[mrbluto]

97. "project"?

Is that all you got?

I can hardly figure out to how it even relates to what I said.

Look - do you watch a football game and complain about how "mean" the linemen are to the quarterback?

Maybe, if they swing him around by his face mask, patently try to break his legs, or rough him up after the whistle is blown, but not for tackling the guy. That's part of the game.

I see what qualifies as a gaff in this primary (for both candidates) and know Karl Rove is yuking it up somewhere. Obama's bitter comment? Non-news, given the context. Hillary's RFK comment? The same. Given the context of either comment it's clear that some people got nothing better to do than pick the flyshit out of the pepper and make it the lead story in an effort to demonize the target.

I'm NOT a Hillary supporter, but I feel an impulse to call people an this weird need to demonize people all the time. Personally I think we should save demonization for emergencies or the truly deserving. (like Bush, Cheney or Rove)

Hillary is no demon. Not by a longshot.

[Tesha]

99. No, I've got *LOTS* more, but you're not worth the effort. (NT)

[mrbluto]

100. oh....I'm crushed.

"not worth the effort"?

oh my.

You do realize this isn't an encounter group?

It's a political forum.

What kind of Democrat would I be if I just took your word for it on these things?

If you don't like any sort of a challenge then I'm not sure why you're here, unless you like to be told things that you want to hear.

Just gotta love people who just state their opinion, don't engage and then wonder how we got this far into a Bush presidency without him getting impeached.

[KSinTX]

69. You're right, Hillary did nothing

If one allows him/her self to be so easily manipulated, then it cannot be left at any candidate's feet.

[urgk]

80. Those 13 DUers had better stop and think...

...whether their hurt feelings merit a vote for a man who is pro-war, anti-choice, possibly senile and likely to seat another conservative Supreme Court justice. If they know what McCain stands for, know what Obama stands for and can still vote Republican I, for one, have no use for them. Of course, I understand that the wounds are still very fresh, and that people need to vent, but come election time, any Democrat who votes for McCain is either monumentally self-centered or an idiot.

As Al Gore said to an irate Howard Dean during his run for President, "This is not about you, it's about your country."

[Tesha]

81. The count is up to 15 now, with 10 more "staying home" :-( . (NT)

[urgk]

90. To all of them, I'd repeat Al Gore's words to Dean - This is not about you, it's about your country

n/m

[Tesha]

98. Good advice! (NT)

[bjobotts]

83. Right off the bat you start a divisive rant. Hillary divided the party no more than Barack did

over 17 million people have vote for her in the primaries and here you are blaming nearly half the democratic party for dividing the democratic party in a primary. It's a matter of perspective and no I'm not a Hillary supporter but this argument is nonsense. It is people "blaming" others for having ulterior motives that divides the party. If Clinton believes she can best represent the party and "if" she believes there's a strong chance Obama would lose to McCain then she is doing what she believes is best for the party. But people like you are over here saying she is just trying to divide the party and possibly destroy it rather than see her as trying to do what is best for the party like 17 million plus voters think she is doing. It's biased and unreasonable to make such assumptions.

[bjobotts]

84. There are Obama supporters and Hillary haters and over 17 million Hill voters

Let's hope they all vote against 4 more years of republican destruction. Our entire democracy rests on getting the republicans out of office...that should be what is most important. Ending the war/occupation for profit and getting out from under the oil cartels for our energy sources, restoring our DoJ, and getting a national healthcare plan that gets rid of the profiteers. Equal taxation for the wealthiest and restoring the bill of rights. Campaign finance reform which gets rid of election profiteering and brings back the fairness doctrine of "free" time for campaigns, Stopping the privatization of our democracy by profiteering corporations...It all begins with getting a dem president and maintaining dem majorities in congress.

Accountability brought back to government with real oversight and getting rid of the judicial infestation by partisans of the Bush/Cheney administration.

I'd vote for a dead guy like we did in Mo to defeat Ashcroft just to prevent a republican WH. Too much is at stake.

Your post is spot on Nance and I hope we can finally get rid of the McCain will win threat used to blackmail those opposing our candidate of choice.

[bjobotts]

85. Let's see 13 from 50million equals pouting prideful people lacking vision

[Tesha]

87. If you don't like my opinion, I suggest you use "ignore". (NT)

[ccharles000]

4. Great post.

[Bjorn Against]

5. Well said Nance, it is not just Hillary supporters either many of us have supported other candidates

I remember early on Edwards and Kucinich were the most popular candidates on this site, most of us have went over to Obama now but it took us time to get here. Despite our different choices however, we all wanted the same basic thing: to take back the White House from the worst administration in history.

[NanceGreggs]

8. You are absolutely right ...

... and I did not mean to infer that those supporters are any less in "our camp" as Democrats than any other group.

The Democrats are united now - because, as you have pointed out, we all want "the same basic thing: to take back the White House from the worst administration in history."

And WE will not be stopped.

[papau]

41. I agree most Democrats are united-even the Hill supporters that "hate"O will mostly vote for O -but

there is an unusually large group that are saying if no Hill on ticket no way - and many that will vote O but will not do their usual party work and donating (the last should not be an Obama problem given his donation machine - but precinct workers are in short supply).

it will be interesting to see if Obama will do the unite thing and offer the VP to Hill

My guess is that he is not man enough to do so and risk the rage of his wife - so I expect we will have an interesting Nov.

[iconicgnom]

55. I respectfully (?) disagree.

I say it's flat wrong to suggest that whether or not Obama chooses Hillary as VP is determined by whether he's "man enough" to do it. That's just your unsupported projection. It's plain fact that those so-called "Hillary supporters" who claim that if Hillary isn't the Dem nominee they'll vote McCain, would never in any case vote Democratic, and I substantiate this by pointing out that those who vote Democratic share more or less "feminist" values.

As far as I'm concerned, on this business the case is closed.

[JustAnotherGen]

92. Amen!

Edwards supporter here - and I've always been a democrat. Even in the mid 80's when my parents made me stand at the airport to greet Mondale and Ferraro when I was 9 or 10! LOL!

[CaliforniaPeggy]

6. My dear Nance!

Yes indeed.

This is very good...

It's very easy, unfortunately, to lose sight of the fact that we are all, indeed, on the same side.

We must bind up our wounds now, and get behind our nominee...Barack Obama.

Thank you!

K&R, of course!

:patriot:

[Youphemism]

7. But it doesn't hurt...

There are a lot of people who poured their heart and soul into campaigning for their candidate. Whether or not they were a dem all along, it is not always easy to let all that go and climb aboard a new campaign, particularly one you've been fighting against so hard.

So, same cause or not, I don't think it hurts to show appreciation for their feelings and their ability to put them aside for the greater good.

[NanceGreggs]

11. I don't "put aside" anyone's feelings ...

... just as I doubt that the real Hillary supporters would have put aside my feelings, had things gone the other way.

This site, and our party as a whole, has given too much credit to the "power of persuasion" of those who would divide us - not for the sake of one candidate over the other, but for the sake of division in and of itself.

Nice try, GOP operatives here and elsewhere - ain't gonna work.

[Youphemism]

22. There are operatives, yes. But some truly are upset.

I didn't suggest you put aside anyone's feelings. I suggested that hardcore Clinton advocates might have to put aside some of theirs, in order to support Obama rather than their original candidate of choice.

Yes, of course there are lots of republicans taking advantage of this situation and getting people worked up.

But there are also clearly some people -- the people those republicans have been trying to take advantage of -- who really feel loyalty to Hillary, and will have to go through at least some measure of emotional upheaval in order to support Obama in the General Election.

While the republicans are trying to incite their anger and disappointment over Clinton not becoming the nominee, I think it's not a bad thing to show some small measure of empathy for those supporters.

I don't think you and I disagree. I just suggested that it doesn't hurt to welcome Hillary supporters as they come to grips with supporting the candidate who was not their first choice.

[NanceGreggs]

25. No, I don't think we disagree at all.

My feeling is that we don't need to "welcome" Hillary supporters as though they were not a part of us throughout.

No doubt it will take some time for people to get over their disappointment and anger. But when they are ready to come home, they should not be made to feel that Obama supporters are magnanimously welcoming them to the table - when the truth is they have had a rightful place at the table, as a family member, all along.

[Youphemism]

30. Yeah, but I still welcome returning family members back to the dinner table. :)

[NanceGreggs]

31. I think you've missed my point ...

... and that may be my own fault, rather than yours.

My point is that there is a difference between welcoming back a family member who has always had a right to be there, and "welcoming back" someone who has disagreed with you and has, by virtue of doing so, forfeited their rightful place at the gathering until and unless they declare themselves "on your side".

[Youphemism]

34. I understood the point, that's why I said we agree...

I was just suggesting an alternative perspective...

Just as folks who have been married 50 years still say "I love you," to each other, so it can be reassuring to let people know that they are welcome, even when they never left.

But we're probably beating a dead horse here. (That's just a metaphor, I wasn't referring to the one Hillary bet on.)

Sometimes I tend to detract from my own point.

[NanceGreggs]

38. And sometimes I tend to be a dead-horse beater myself ...

... while busily missing my own point!

:hi:

[The Doctor.]

72. Next time I see one, I'll ask them if they brought fruicake.

"Next time bring beer".

[hisownpetard]

73. Nance - Someone may have lived in my town for years, but if they move in next door,

I'm sure as shootin' gonna go over and say "Welcome."

[NashVegas]

95. Well There's the Crux

Some people see DU as a place to gather and discuss their opinions in and on the campaign.

Others see it as a place to campaign.

Those campaigners, who have a particular agenda, will always make DU GD: P participation miserable during the primaries. The only way to post here during primary season is to put a crash helmet on.

For a really great demonstration, go out to the other forums and look at how many wonderful, thoughtful people there are posting and contributing to DU. Most of them haven't set food in GD: P since December.

It's a shame.

[mrbluto]

61. The essential point...

...of Nancy's post, as I take it, was to point out the subtle indictment implicit in "Welcoming" people to a party they already belong to. It casts their previous stance as heretical, and their "coming around" as capitulation. Who likes to capitulate? Not me.

Done with malice or smugness it denies opponents the dignity of having been a loyal opposition. It is an implicit threat to future loyal oppositions.

The Democratic party (IMHO) is the party of reason and compassion - we can't afford to intimidate loyal opponents - we need them! When you stop to think about it you realize that every good idea has at first been in the minority - good ideas have to start somewhere. It's not like everyone wakes up and has telepathically learned the better way. A healthy opposition, loyal to the overall objective, saves us from the sort of limiting groupthink that has enabled the Bush administration to do what it has, and is causing the Republicans their current brewing disasters. If only they had sincerely listened to us - the loyal opposition!

Examining the possible snarky spin on what would ordinarily seem like a friendly gesture is a useful exercise. It's part of self-policing. It helps us all be alert to the dog-whistle phrases that should be no part of the conversations Democrats have amongst themselves. (nor the entire country overall, but let's work on the beams in our own eyes first.)

[Straight Shooter]

76. I don't need to respond to the OP because you have said it all for me. Thank you. n/t

[mrbluto]

94. Maybe I should start a thread....

...about the "loyal opposition" idea.

Many around here seem to have trouble keeping it in mind.

She's no saint, but, on the whole, I don't think she's disloyal.

Thanks for the complement by the way.

[Straight Shooter]

101. All the saints are dead.

:D

Your posts have been most enjoyable to read on DU, but as for the overall political atmosphere this year, I've reached the point where I'm about 1 inch from the line that separates caring from apathy. :shrug:

[HCE SuiGeneris]

10. We will achieve our goal...

that of a new Democratic president come Jan. 2009.

K & R

[JeffR]

12. Alerting. Pure flamebait.

;)

[NanceGreggs]

14. You Wetzelbill/Kurovski nutcases ...

... can take it to the convention - where you will, no doubt, prevail.

[JeffR]

18. Well, if Kurovski doesn't get back here soon

it might be necessary to start a draft Mercer movement. Wetzelbill/Mercer? Not sure if I like it, but it would bring in the Eye Spy vote (all three).

[Olney Blue]

13. I love your post, Nance.

I first supported Joe Biden, then moved to Hillary because I admire her knowledge and dedication. I was also excited by Obama's candidacy and it was a very hard choice for me. There are millions of Democrats who feel like me throughout the country and I am hoping so much that we come together soon.

Anyway, I will work hard for Obama, and no one has to tell me "welcome." Like you say, I have been here all along! :hi:

[WillyT]

15. Aw Hell... My Mom Taught Me To Be Polite...

Doesn't always work though.

:evilgrin:

I hear ya Nance.

:hi:

[myrna minx]

16. K&R n/t

[madamesilverspurs]

17. Oh, yes yes yes!

But at the same time, how breathtakingly sad that "our common enemy" is a designation necessarily applied to fellow citizens instead of Bin Laden. Not to suggest that Republicans haven't tarred themselves with that particular brush. After all, especially over the course of the last several years, they have done much to deprive us of those things that give our nation its historical uniqueness; and they have done so to a degree beyond anything Bin Laden could ever dream of accomplishing. If 'they' are ever to be welcomed back to the table, they must first engage in the kind of soul-cleansing introspection that brings renewal. That said, none of us is foolish enough to hold our breath on that regard. More's the pity.

[stillcool]

21. and what really is our enemy..

is all of that which divides us. It is done to us, and by us. And it seems to work every time, and everywhere. Look at Iraq.

[Willo]

19. K&R n/t

[ladywnch]

20. once again, Nance, eloquence and class ........

lets all go take it to 'um in November!

[cbayer]

23. Now, that's what I'm talking about.

Thanks. What a great antidote to the "purge" threads.

:hi:

[BlooInBloo]

24. I think it's still nice to say. :)

[MyNameGoesHere]

26. They have always been with us, in the same way Obama supporters have always been with them.

Selective amnesia?

[NanceGreggs]

29. No, not at all ...

... rather a clear vision that family in-fighting, no matter how intense or vitriolic, does not equate to a family divided when the obnoxious next-door neighbours are in need of a good ass kickin'.

[Elspeth]

27. This is first thread of your recent ones that I will kick.

It's a good first step.

[Swamp Rat]

28. k&r

[AZBlue]

32. Good point.

And I'm one of the guilty of saying "welcome" - but you're right, we're all Dems and we all want to see McCain beaten. I've never mixed that "welcome" with a sense of "aha, we won another one" and I wouldn't want it to be taken that way.

[Honeycombe8]

33. You may have been in the same ocean, but you are just coming aboard the Obama ship.

A welcoming is always polite and an expression of approval.

Go with it. People put "welcome" mats at their front door all the time, even though the people coming were already on the block.

[NYC_SKP]

36. Nance= An island of sanity in a sea of...

...well, you know...

I've always been a fan of BO and the OP.

[Honeycombe8]

65. People are free to be courteous and welcoming. If the recipient doesn't want to accept it,

that's her prerogative. But it is not up to someone coming aboard to dictate to others how they should act. A bit arrogant, to say the least.

Just be polite, and say "thanks," when someone is genuinely happy to see you. Spitting in the welcoming party's face is not de riguor.

[Tatiana]

35. K&R Very well said. n/t

[Duder]

37. No Need to Say "Welcome"

Instead we could say...



Yours is probably the right attitude though. :)

[NanceGreggs]

40. Oh.My.God.

I LOVE that doormat!

We had one for years that simply said "GO AWAY!" We figured that anyone who took it seriously was too dense to ever have been a friend of ours to begin with.

[cliffordu]

39. K&R Sorry I'm late, Nance!! Excellent piece, as usual!!

[mrbluto]

42. How about "sorry"?

That's what I think many want to hear.

Myself? I don't need to hear anyone say sorry to me.

I would like like people to examine how they've conducted themselves on this board.

80% or more should feel fine about that.

There are others that should closely examine the logic, tactics and tone they've used.

And ask themselves if they're in danger of becoming like the monsters they set out to fight.

That said I think the OP takes a useful and sensible tact - we always were in the same party. Hopefully we can all keep that in mind, and not just when one is "winning", because there will be disagreement in the future.

Hopefully what will distinguish us in the Democratic party is that we remember that we have arguments because there are problems (to be solved), not that we have problems because there are arguments (and give into the impulse to squelch).

In other words: Let's be the party of reason. (and compassion)

That's what holds up in the long run.

[NanceGreggs]

43. Hell must have frozen over when I wasn't looking ...

... because we actually agree on something.

"Let's be the party of reason and compassion. That's what holds up in the long run."

As for those who need to "closely examine the logic, tactics and tone they've used", most of them are no longer with us - and the few that are left will be gone within the next day or two.

And good riddance, because they were never "one of us" to begin with.

[ruby slippers]

45. I started trying to be nice, but they are trying not to be nice back to me...sniff

[mrbluto]

49. They've been traumatized.

It's basically a party that depends on the Stockholm syndrome.

It'll take persistence.

And we probably want to be careful about turning our back on them for some time.

We had Smedley Butler to thwart Prescott Bush & Co. in '34, and we're dealing with Jr. now, so It'll take atleast 75 years if we're vigilant.

Though Jefferson suggests it might take longer.

[mrbluto]

47. Regarding: "they were never 'one of us' to begin with"

Twice in one night.

I agree. It seems clear that a plurality, if not a majority, of the invective thrown on this board has not been home grown to the Democratic party. And it seems some of the more easily excitable people went along.

I shared unease about the idea of "President Hillary" from the very beginning, but became shocked at seeing her cast as "evil incarnate" and a DINO.

But the telling thing was some of the invective versus Edwards. No Obama supporter I've ever met in person seemed to feel the need to paint him evil like I've seen on occasion on here.

The simple explanation - many of the invective throwers weren't sincere members of the Democratic party.

If you think back to Rove's dirty tricks (and Atwater before him) it would be naive to think they wouldn't send some agent provocateurs to punk us.

If you google my posts and look at my earliest ones you'll see that seeing that is what prompted me to ever post on this board.

I couldn't stand by while the possibility of dialog was destroyed.

That's what tends to motivate me, because what do I know policy-wise? I have opinion, maybe some fact. But when it comes to how a conversation is going and the tactics in play I feel much more confident about speaking out.

p.s.; I have complemented you before. I'll have to google it myself to find it. I think the title was "Exactly.....right" referring to your take on some issue.

[ruby slippers]

44. I welcome your suggestion but maybe some people welcome the welcomes???

[NanceGreggs]

46. There's certainly nothing wrong in saying "welcome" ...

I am just sensitive (maybe overly so) to the concept of "welcoming" people back to the fold who never really left.

I put myself in the "other side's" shoes. Had this all played out differently, I would not want to be "welcomed" back as though I'd been the prodigal son, suddenly aware of my errant ways in having supported the candidate who didn't win.

Hillary supporters have been as staunchly Democratic in their views as Obama supporters have been. The fact that we have supported different Democrats should not be perceived as having been "right" or "wrong" - merely different.

That's all I'm trying to say here. Perhaps I have been less than eloquent in choosing my words - but I hope, nonetheless, that the meaning behind them is not completely lost.

[ruby slippers]

48. no, Nance...I was just trying to be humorous. You said it well in your intro....

I was just trying to be funny and put a smile on other's faces, that's all...

[1trackmindGOP]

71. Well...what do you recommend we say?

Usually these people write a diary to express their desire to unify for the common cause of defeating McCain...it is very impolite not to take notice of the effort they have made to put away their differences for sake of unifying for the common good of defeating McCain.

[BigBearJohn]

50. that's the first time I have agreed with you in months.

[calimary]

51. Brava!

Excellent points in here.

Should be said, read, and spread.

:toast:

[Raine]

52. I agree but I still like to

let them know how GLAD I am to have them onboard with Obama. :-)

[saltpoint]

53. Nance, you play ball in the big arena.

Olympic-caliber class and insight.

Recommended with loud, sustained cheers.

:toast: :thumbsup: :hi: :dem: :hug: :yourock: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[hfojvt]

54. dang it, I had this all cued up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCaUJN6MFrw

"Yeah, we tease (them) alot
'cause we got (them) on the spot
welcome back ..."

Okay, that WAS unnecessary

:hide:

[iconicgnom]

56. Nance, you have splendid leadership skills

[Revlon10]

57. Kicked and Recommended.

Kicked and Recommended.

[Lerkfish]

58. I agree, however, many keep saying they're still "considering" voting for Obama

and want to be "persuaded" to do so. They demand we "be nice" to them, or they won't vote for the nominee. Many threats have been made, direct or veiled, that OUR BEHAVIOUR or manners determine whether they will decide to vote in November.

in light of that, it would appear they are asking us to welcome them back politely, so the perception of separation is in some cases being started with them, and the incumbent proper genuflection on our part seems to be a polite welcome back.

[Window]

60. Excellent post Nance.

[TragedyandHope]

62. K&R for a great anti-rant!

:kick:

[not_too_L8]

68. K&R

[sui generis]

70. What I take away

I'm just glad DU does not represent the street. I think people are more polite on the "the street", generally speaking, both sides.

Face it, apologizing for or even forgiving some of the nastiness here is irrelevant to any place but here.

As you said, real democrats will do the right thing no matter what and nobody in the real world needs permission to be a democrat from anybody on DU.

:hi:

[lumberjack_jeff]

74. How do you do that?

It is a rare skill to be able to totally redeem ones self with one post.

:hi:

By my accounting you now have a bankroll of 20 piss-off-Jeff posts before needing to write another of these.

Recommended.

[grantcart]

78. I welcome this post

also would you really respect Hillary's opponents if they were wishy washy?


The number of irritating and unreasonable supporters is the same on both sides - too many.

[ann_american2004]

79. Wow how nice of you to notice, OP

Quote: "However, I, for one, see no need to “welcome” Hillary supporters – because they’ve been on-board and in-the-fold all along. They are fellow Democrats, who have never wavered in their desire to see one of our own sworn-in next January. They have always been with us, in the same way Obama supporters have always been with them."

How very very nice. Isnt that just the sweetest? *barf*

Quote: 'Throughout this process, we have all said things in the heat of the moment; things that have sometimes been hurtful, uncalled-for, and downright nasty. But it is important to remember that the vast majority of these remarks – even those that have been personal attacks on the supporters of one side or the other – were born of passion for a particular candidate rather than a desire to alienate or divide.'

Well...I've been lurking on and off here since 'Shuffle on to Buffalo' Kerry, and I hadnt expected to see the verbal bloodshed that was going on here for the last months. Disgusting. Shameful. I dont think it was passion. Some of it was just an outright need to hate and it didn't matter if the name was Pres. * or Sen Clinton. Hate is hate. And those who were driven by hate can try and make an excuse that it was 'passion' but everyone knows hate for hate and they will need to apologize otherwise their 'passion' plea is worthless. And the moral fiber of those people will always be questionable.

Obama '08

[Raster]

82. It is now time we all move on. We have work to do, and the challenge is daunting.

This party, this nation, this people, this planet. We are at a precarious crossroads in so many ways. The future of humanity as we know it is contingent on all of our actions at this time.

"...that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

[nichomachus]

86. Please vote for McCain

If you want four more years of the criminal behavior we've had for eight years
If you want to see public education totally destroyed
If you want to see an end to Social Security
If you want to see Medicare disappear
If you want to put your job, your children's jobs, or your grandchildren's jobs in jeopardy
If you want a fascist Supreme Court for the rest of your life
If you want to see even more young Americans slaughtered in foreign countries for no reason
If you want the ultra wealthy to get wealthier, while the middle class disappears
If you want corporate criminals not held accountable
If you want the government and religious wackos to make the most important decisions in your life
If you want to see young women slaughtered in back-alley abortions
If you want to be spied on by your government
If you want to see the Constitution completely done away with

If all of that tickles your fancy, then John McCain is the guy for you.

[Joanne98]

88. Well said.

[AtomicKitten]

89. We need to put a period at the end of this nomination process and move forward to the GE.

Be there or be square.

:party:

[JustAnotherGen]

91. Beautiful!

Recommended!