Why I Would Like to See Conservatives Allowed to Post on DU

[Time for change]

Though I am proud to consider myself a liberal, I believe there are several potential advantages to allowing conservatives to post on DU, which I would like to discuss. First, however, I want to make it clear that I am not necessarily advocating this. I have discussed this issue with my son, EOTE, who has been a member of DU since its first days, which is almost four years before I joined, and he feels ambivalence about this idea. He informs me that it was tried in DU’s early days and that it didn’t work very well because it led to chaos. Despite the potential advantages that I see, if allowing conservatives to post on DU means that uncontrollable chaos will ensue, then obviously it would not be a good idea. But nevertheless, I would like to express my thoughts on this because these issues are important to me.

A necessary premise that leads me to express these views is that some conservatives have ideas that are worth discussing here. Some DUers who have read a number of my posts may find it surprising that I say that, since many of my posts have expressed substantial bitterness towards Republicans and their viewpoints. But keep in mind that when I express those views I am not referring to all conservatives, or even necessarily to all Republicans. I consider myself to be a very tolerant person, even towards conservatives and Republicans – which means that I believe that I am almost always ready to give a person the benefit of the doubt to start with. Therefore, although I very much dislike most conservative opinions, and although I believe that many who hold those opinions do so in bad faith, I also believe that there are many conservative opinions that are held in good faith by decent people. And to be honest about it, I feel that I am far from having a good understanding of why people hold those views, and I would very much like to understand them better. That being said, here are what I consider to be some of the advantages of allowing conservatives to post on DU:


Exposure to a wider variety of opinion

While fully recognizing that banning conservatives from the DU is not the least bit unconstitutional, illegal, or unethical, I nevertheless believe that it is instructive for the purpose of this discussion to consider a portion of the rationale for our First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, I believe that one of the three rationales for our First Amendment put forth by the ACLU is pertinent to this discussion:

It's vital to the attainment and advancement of knowledge, and the search for the truth. The eminent 19th-century writer and civil libertarian, John Stuart Mill, contended that enlightened judgment is possible only if one considers all facts and ideas, from whatever source, and tests one's own conclusions against opposing views. Therefore, all points of view -- even those that are "bad" or socially harmful -- should be represented in society's "marketplace of ideas."

This First Amendment argument by the ACLU speaks of the benefit to “society” of exposure to a wide variety of viewpoints. Although “society” in this context is meant as a whole nation, I believe that this argument could apply to the DU as well.

Of course we have the opportunity to be exposed to conservative viewpoints without having them on DU. And as a matter of fact, I do try to occasionally read books with conservative viewpoints (while simultaneously trying to avoid garbage) for this very reason. But having them available on DU could potentially facilitate discussions in a controlled environment (i.e., subject to DU rules of civilized conduct) which could make them more fruitful than they would otherwise be.


Develop a better understanding of conservatives and their viewpoints

This reason is an extension and embellishment of the first reason that I discussed, above.

Why, you might ask, is it important for us to understand conservatives and their viewpoints? Well, for one thing, one of the main reasons for DU’s existence is the presence of conservatives and their viewpoints in our country. Therefore, it seems to me, the better we understand them and their viewpoints the better able we will be to accomplish the goals that we believe to be important.

Take, for example, what I see as perhaps the core difference between liberals and conservatives – our approach to the problem of poverty in our country. A recent DU thread about a homeless person who requested a dishwasher box to live in received 127 greatest page votes. Undoubtedly, the reason why so many DUers feel that that thread is so important is that we have a deep and heartfelt belief that one of the primary purposes of our government should be to ensure that all of our citizens have the opportunity for a decent life. And, we consequently feel that the dishwasher box thread points to a national disgrace which must be addressed. Most conservatives probably see a situation like that much differently. They believe that government should not have a responsibility to look out for the least fortunate of our citizens.

I very much want to understand why they feel that way – especially since a large number of them claim to be followers of Jesus, who was himself very much concerned about the welfare of the poor. Do conservatives feel that government should have no responsibility to the poor because they just don’t care? Do they believe that the poor have only themselves to blame for their fate, and therefore government should not get involved? Do they believe that the poor are better served by being left to find their own solutions to these problems? And if they believe these things, why do they believe them and what evidence do they have to support them? Discussion of these issues between conservatives and liberals hold the potential to educate both of them.


It could sharpen our minds

Like most other people who post a lot on DU, I’ve received my share of criticism – but I can’t ever remember being criticized for expressing a view on DU that someone considered to be too liberal. Why is that a problem? Well, I think that it’s somewhat of a problem for a similar reason to why most of us believe that George Bush surrounding himself with similar thinking people is a problem: It has the potential to give us the impression that our opinions are more solidly based and widely agreed with than they really might be.

I don’t mean to exaggerate this issue. There is, of course, a great deal of disagreement and argument on DU. But as I said, there is very little of this particular type of disagreement – at least in my experience.

In the outside world, almost all of us interact with people from time to time who are more conservative than us. Sometimes we discuss politics with them, and I’ll bet that many or most of us would like to do a better job of convincing them of our viewpoints. I believe that on-line discussions with conservatives could help us with that.


Establishing a rapport with them will help us all

Though I am very gratified by the results of our recent mid-term elections, I have to say that they didn’t do much to change my belief that our country is still way too conservative. In fact, I believe that there is a reasonable possibility that in 2008 we could lose the House, the Senate, and the presidential election, followed before too long by a long lasting, crucial, and disastrous shift in our Supreme Court. My point in mentioning those depressing thoughts is that I believe we need to recruit new people to our cause, and I believe that one way to do that is to facilitate conversations with conservatives.

I believe that because I believe that some conservatives are reachable by us and really do share our values – though they may not know it. That is why shortly before the recent elections I posted “A Plea to Moderates and Conservatives”, both on DU and on the Free Republic, regarding the elections.

The reason that I think many of these people don’t currently recognize that they share our values is that our corporate news media has done a great deal to demonize liberals and Democrats over the past several years – to the extent that many “conservatives” hate us without having much of an idea of what we stand for or what we believe.

I recently read a book, “Confessions of a Former Dittohead”, by Jim Derych, that I believe sheds some additional light on this phenomenon. A former avid devotee of Rush Limbaugh, Jim Derych hated women who had abortions – until he met one. Recognizing that the woman was human caused him to completely re-think his views on that issue. He also hated homosexuals – until he met one. Same principle. And on the same subject, I believe that a major reason why there is a lot less racism in our country today than there was when I was young is integration. Once we get to know people, and come to recognize the common humanity that we share with them, stereotypes tend to fade away.

Thus I believe that there are many conservatives and Republicans out there who could be won over to our side once they get to know us. A small percent could make a tremendous difference in a national election.


Closing thoughts

Well, perhaps it wouldn’t work. I have to admit that the good majority of conservatives really don’t share our values at all. And as for the hard core 30% or so who still approve of the job that George Bush is doing – It’s hard for me to think of those people without getting upset. And yet, I’m sure that some of those people just need to be educated.

With regard to each of the issues that I covered in this post, I feel that DU has accomplished a tremendous amount. Like many other DUers, I feel that having the opportunity to interact with hundreds or thousands of other people who share my basic values, in a world that often seems to be coming apart at the seams, has helped me to keep my sanity over the past couple of years. I have learned a great deal from participating in DU, and it has done more than any of my other activities to keep my mind sharp since I joined (Certainly more so than my day job, which has been a great big target of the Bush administration). And who can say how much crucial information we have disseminated and how many thousands of minds have been changed and improved as a result of DU, along with the rest of the liberal blogosphere, as recognized by such people as John Conyers (scroll down to the end of the post) in his great report and Jane Hamsher?

Could allowing conservatives to post here improve upon all that? I’ve discussed several reasons why I think it might, but on the other hand, it could stir up a big hornet’s nest that would be very difficult to control. Perhaps a single forum could be set aside on an experimental basis. Food for thought, anyhow.

[lonestarnot]

1. No thanks, no stinkin' up DU.

[trumad]

4. Been there done it---and that's why I'm here at DU.

[liberaldemocrat7]

119. Republicans love their family and friends but there's where the love and compassion ends.

Republicans love their family and friends but there's where the love and compassion ends.

I use that as a starting point about Republicans.

This statement also reflects their willingness to cheat people as long as they profit, hold power, keep the advantage, etc. Republicans tend not to care about people they do not know.

These Republicans use these general rules to mask their meanness, and slaveholding, confederate, philosophy.

They come up with rules such as states rights so they don't have to deal with a federal government that would take away their right to abuse people economicly, and in the areas of civil rights, except if it involves authoritarian religious views such as placing prayer in schools, banning abortions, spying on citizens who oppose them, suddenly their states rights front falls and they want to use big government conservatism to shove their authoritarian agenda down our throats.

Many Republicans want to turn this country into what CHINA approaches with a rigged private market of monopolies, duopolies, triopolies, quadropolies and with a one party state.

No I don't want to see Republicans post here, they can post on FREI REPUBLIK, APPALLING PUNDIT and in the yahoo boards.

[natrat]

who is stopping them

if a conservative posts something that is not a personal attack-fine----deleting those kinds of post is fucked

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. I disagree with all of your points.

Except for "closing thoughts." Those were indeed closing thoughts.

[ecstatic]

3. oh but they do! nt

[lonestarnot]

10. as illegitimate, stepford children trolls until they are banned by the

super admin staff.

[txindy]

35. Yep, they troll amongst us.

:rofl:

[MaryBear]

53. Yes they do, and

they are not all trolls.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

5. There are plenty of forums that allow both sides of the fence to post

I, personally, live in the middle of Republican central and come here to more enlightened discourse. If DU were like that I'd have to find another forum.

[uppityperson]

9. These are my thoughts also.

There are places like that to go to. DU is different in not being like that.

[Marie26]

6. Me too

They can have their own little play area, and we can observe them in their natural state - like a Jane Goodall thing. It might help figure out what makes them tick.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

7. no... this is our "safe place"

there are many other good sites out there if you want to converse with them.

[MaryBear]

55. To be conservative is not necessarily to be an attacker.

Respectful posters are what I value.

[Wonk]

8. Here's an idea: Go start your own website, make it how you want. nt

[tabasco]

115. That's what I was gonna say !

This is not kindergarden for ignorant wingers.

This is where progressives meet to discuss how to move this country FORWARD.

[Union Thug]

11. I hear their damned opinions every day, 24/7. Why would I want them here?

[driver8]

141. Exactly. I come to DU to get away from the narrow mindedness and hatred

of all things that don't conform to their little world. I come here for intelligent discussion, alternative viewpoints, reasoning, information, and to hang with compassionate and caring people.

If you want to listen to conservatives spew their bullshit, there are plenty of places you can go.

We need conservatives on DU like we need a case of the clap.

[jody]

12. Do you believe every plank in the Democratic Party Platform is liberal?

See http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

If not, then do you believe DU bans people who support planks that you believe are not liberal, i.e. conservative?

[Time for change]

51. No and no

But I don't understand why you're asking me that.

[jody]

69. Your two no answers probably means people who support those planks already post. n/t

[Time for change]

92. Ok yes, I see your point.

I talk about that in post # 76:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2770454&mesg_id=2772960

[jody]

99. Thanks. The notion of what is and is not liberal is debatable. For example, I support the

right of every law-abiding citizen to keep and bear arms (RKBA) for self-defense. I see no difference in that right and any other rights explicitly listed in the Bill of Rights or implicitly protected by the Ninth Amendment.

For me, protection of every basic right is a liberal issue and therefore my RKBA support is liberal but some DUers who oppose RKBA for handguns or all guns contend that being pro RKBA is a conservative position.

Their position is contrary to the Dem party platform that says, "We will protect Americans' Second Amendment right to own firearms, and we will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists by fighting gun crime, reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing the gun show loophole, as President Bush proposed and failed to do." See http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

[Time for change]

106. Yes, it certainly is debatable

Of course, RKBA is part of our Bill of Rights. I must admit that as far as our Bill of Rights is concerned, the second amendment is not something that I am terribly interested in. But I have never argued against it, and for that matter I have never heard anyone argue against it (though perhaps that's just because I haven't been paying that much attention).

I don't think that arguing for certain controls that would limit access to firearms for known violent criminals or mentally disturbed people is the same as arguing against our Second Amendment. I don't buy the "slippery slope" argument of the NRA.

[jody]

109. I encourage you to visit DU's Guns forum where the discussion is often acrimonious and

frequently leads to the dreaded Tombstone for posters.

Have a nice day, :hi:

[jonnyblitz]

13. looks like they are already here posting based on some of the

crap I have been reading on some of the threads.

[A wise Man]

82. Now that post I agree

sometimes I think some of us here in DU ARE too conservative, especially when it comes to impeachment of Sir BUTTHEAD.

[TomClash]

14. No thanks

Here's my question: have you ever been on a board with conservatives where you've "established a rapport?" I haven't.

Food for thought? I'm not hungry and they aren't going to feed my head anyway. :)

[Time for change]

50. I haven't spent much time on conservative boards

Out of interest, I've lurked on the Free Republic a small amount, and like I note in the OP, I posted a thread there. The response was what I would have expected from a bunch of kindergarten kids.

But I don't think that that's germane to my discussion here. Anybody who acted like that could be immediately banned, and then we wouldn't have to worry about them any more. We would treat them exactly the same way that we treat any conservative troll who posts on DU as it is now. The only ones we would keep would be the ones that we could have a civil discussion with.

At least, that's how I envisioned it.

[TomClash]

74. I understand your reasoning

Your post was thoughtful, but only a very small number would qualify. I posted on an open political board once and the "conservatives" called me names like "pinko" "traitor" "faggot" "raghead" and "jew lover." Who really needs that?

[Sapphocrat]

15. You want to mix it up with conservatives...

...then go to one of the dozens of message forums that will let you do just that, or start your own.

The day Skinner welcomes conservatives here is the day I log off DU for the last time. While I'm sure that would please quite a few people, that's the one thing that would get me to leave, no ifs, ands, or buts. There's nothing to discuss. It's a dealbreaker for me -- and I know I'm not alone.

[driver8]

142. You are not alone -- I would be right there with you.

This wonderful place called "Democratic Underground" would cease to exist.

We support democracy; the freepers do not.

We support our Constitution; the freepers do not.

They don't have anything to say that I need to hear...I've heard enough already.

[demosincebirth]

16. No thanks, I get flamed at enough on DU, without

any freaking freepers.

[Island Blue]

17. Computer says nooooooooo. n/t

[karlrschneider]

18. Short answer: No. Long answer:

No fucking way. There are plenty of wingnut sites DUers can lurk to see what the bastards are up to, we sure don't need them cluttering up our own board, besides don't you think we ALREADY have enough
flame-throwing?

yikes

[BlackVelvet04]

19. I'm the administrator on another board

that allows conservatives. Quite frankly it doesn't work very well. First of all we get the same arguments from them over and over and over again....whatever the rightwing talking point of the day is and it really gets wearisome.

The biggest problem is flame wars and insults and their demands that the admins take sides which we do not do. Most have left the board or been banned....we only banned when the insults became so outrageous that they could no longer be tolerated and then of course we were accused of being unfair.

[Time for change]

93. Interesting points - but isn't it possible to

consciously allow conservatives while still maintaining a liberal web site? For example, I believe it's fair to say that daily kos does that in a sense. They say that they welcome conservatives, and yet it is a liberal website, and I don't believe that they have trouble with conservative disrupters.

I've posted there a few times, but I like DU better.

I guess that doing that would probably mean taking sides, which I think would be justified if you maintained that you were a liberal website.

[BlackVelvet04]

144. We've tried over and over again....

we've INVITED conservatives to the site but eventually a flame war starts and every time the conservatives take it to new heights. We have one conservative who is still there. I was cyber stalked by two conservatives...it wasn't pleasant. We don't ban conservatives on sight, only when they become abusive and they eventually do.

[bobbie]

20. Gosh, Cons have plenty of places to spew their toxins

They've owned the infrastructure for decades, ever since their heros started assassinating progressive leaders in the 60's. I'm not mailing invitations to 'em.

[pooja]

21. There are other forums to discuss difference within... Let's keep

a community that offers relief on a bad day and joy on a good day...

I don't mind debating a debate.. but let's have some place to harmonize. It feels good to be here. It empowers and invigorates most of the time. I would really like to do without conservative bashing.

[Catchawave]

22. I'm married to a conservative....

I have all the opposing views I can handle right now :)

[yorkiemommie1]

47. me too

DU is my haven.

[yasmina27]

73. Me too

but he is a true Goldwater-style conservative and hates these neo-cons in power right now as much as we do. He was thrilled the other night when he saw a commercial on tv from the repubs saying "Take our party back from the religious right" (or something to that effect - I didn't see it).

[Redneck Socialist]

23. Nah...

There's plenty of places you can go argue with the pukes. DU is a break from that.

[bowens43]

24. I come here to get away from conservatives.

[pitohui]

25. conservative democrats, okay, but not all conservatives

there should be no house room given to the rants of rampaging wingnuts, they already have fox news, most of the rest of teevee, most of the newspapers, come on

some argument can be made for democrats who are more conservative than others, i sometimes think DU is weighted a little heavily toward the whacky vegan pro-polygamy nuts but on the other hand those folks probably think i'm a little whacky myself

no self-identified GOPers or self-evident freepers should be allowed to post -- we already know what happens on the "mixed" boards, the voice of reason and progressiveness is drowned out by the voice of the bums in their basement who have nothing to do all day except post propaganda and bigotry

we have so few safe spaces that i don't understand why we should welcome freepers into one of those few

there has to be a place where we can speak our minds w.out constantly being called out by racist pinheads repeating karl rove talking points

[Time for change]

54. "There should be no house room given to the rants of rampaging wingnuts"

I agree. That wasn't my intention. Those people could be banned immediately.

I'm just talking about people who are willing to have a civil conversation.

[fudge stripe cookays]

63. You're fooling yourself.

Freepers are not able to have civil conversations with us.

I am not able to have civil conversations with them.

They are not wanted here.

[blue cat]

26. I looked for a place that I call home and found the DU

This place makes me feel like I'm not alone in the world, as it feels here in red TX. I engage with real life freepers every day, who repeat the talking point of the day and never take any input no matter how hard I try.

[nini]

27. maybe just one forum for them to discuss with us

I wouldn't suggest all forums though. I've tried posting at another site and there was just no talkin to 'em

[gollygee]

28. We fight too much among ourselves

we don't need constant debate. We have too much of that already.

There are places for that. This is for people who are, for the most part, like-minded.

[Possumpoint]

41. Reality Check

Without hearing the opposing view, where is your reality check. I'm not saying conservatives or Republicans are always right, far from it. Sorry about the shock, neither are Democrats. Politics, like life, isn't black and white. It's all shades of gray. Without hearing from the other side the group think is in danger of spinning off on a weird tangent.

I've had posts removed from DU without explanation and been told by conservative forums " go back to DU you troll". I am both liberal in some views and very conservative in others.

I've now started my stop watch to see how fast this post is removed.

[uppityperson]

48. There are places where everyone can post.

Your reality check can be the world or those other forums.

Many of us have had posts remved and there is no explanation given. That is how it is here. You can try pming the mods, or emailing DU to ask, but even then you might not get an answer. That is just how it is.

[Time for change]

49. I doubt very much that your post will be removed

DU doesn't work like that.

[Wonk]

61. Reality has a well known liberal bias

[gollygee]

83. I get enough of that IRL

I know more conservatives than progressives in my life. I like the fact that DU is a haven of like-minded people. Well, fairly like-minded. :D

[Lone_Star_Dem]

114. You've broken no rules in this post that I can see

I fail to see why you would expect to see it removed. I could be just a bit slow today and have missed something however.

If you bothered to read this thread you would have seen that the vast majority of us are exposed to Republicans in large volumes on a daily basis. DU provides a forum where we can come and hash out party (read: Democratic Party) issues without having to deal with the hate filled Republicans who troll the net.

I don't go trolling on Republican forums. Politically, I find them to be far too single minded, blind to reality, bigoted twits for my taste. I do enjoy conversing with my neighbors and community members who are Republicans, however. We know how to be respectful of each other, something you don't see much of from Republicans on the internet.

What I've noticed is when someone from another forum says how DU should allow Republicans to post it's always a foul tempered jerk who is just looking for a fight. What I don't get is why anyone finds that amusing, or how they value their time so little. :shrug:

We know the opposing views, we just don't agree with you. Just like you know our views and just don't agree with them. I'm sorry if you don't see how we balance you out, but we do.

Anyway, welcome to DU! (Again, I'm sure) :hi:

[hfojvt]

155. considering our history of flamewars in GD

it's not like we are monolithic with everyone just saying 'ditto' to every liberal OP, whatever that is. We have plenty of reality checks within this big tent. One problem I see though is that we tend to make Republicans into caricatures. Anyone voting Republican is seen as a Bushbot, a FReeper, a talibornigain. We see them as we want to see them - in the simplest terms, the most convenient definitions. I agree more with the OP, that we need to understand them better if we are going to win their vote, and we need their vote, if not for the Presidency, in many Congressional districts in Kansas, the Dakotas, Montana, Virginia, etc.

[Tatiana]

29. I understand Republicans and their viewpoints. I disagree with them. Vehemently.

I hear their viewpoints at work, on the radio, I see them all over television: on Faux, on CNN, on MSNBC, on ABC, on NBC, on CBS. I read George Will, Thomas Friedman, Robert Novak in all the major newspapers.

I am INUNDATED with the conservative viewpoint. I come here for a breath of fresh air and sanity.

Sorry, I like DU the way it is.

[ScreamingMeemie]

30. Thanks but I can go somewhere else if I want to read their hate speech.

This is DEMOCRATIC underground. :hi: There's enough crap posted here most days as it is.

[jgraz]

31. Please, don't we have enough dumbasses posting here already?

:evilgrin:

[NMDemDist2]

32. you are a liberal see? and as such a conservative would feel it's his

God given DUTY to rip your head off.

while I understand and applaud your sentiment as the highest expression of support for the 1st amendment, I have to say

NO FUCKING WAY! :blush: excuse my french..... BUT

if I want to tangle with freeps, i'll go to the yahoo boards, or the newspaper boards and one of the many many other places both sides mix it up. we have enough flame wars around here without adding the freeps talking points, straw men arguments and atrocious spelling and grammar

[Hekate]

33. I encourage you to start your own discussion group; it would be a valuable experience for you

Good luck with it elsewhere! :hi:

The Radical Cons have had it all their own way in the public sphere for much too long. They are even starting to get a hearing on NPR in the name of "balance" -- yesterday I saw an op-ed in the LA Times about how we really, really have to invade Iran as our next order of foreign policy, and today I heard the same *hole holding forth on NPR.

They have worn us all down and caused a spike in the sales of anti-depressants. They've nearly killed the soul of our nation.

Have them here at DU? No, thank you. We need this refuge of sanity.

Hekate

[Mythsaje]

34. I used to post on the about.com Civil Liberties boards...

A LOT of "conservatives" post there.

I was there when Bush won the Presidency (or had it given to him). He wasn't Mr. Popularity with the generally Libertarian group posting there at the time. I was there on 9/11. In a matter of a few short days I watched the "anti-government, anti-authority, and pro-freedom" crowd go nucking futz.

Within weeks, there was no talking to these people.

It was the Iraq war that finally made me leave. They bought the arguments hook, line, and sinker. Me and a few other people were smart enough to see the writing on the wall, but the majority of them didn't want to see it.

I SAID it would be a disaster, that we wouldn't be greeted as liberators, and it would damage not only our standing in the world, but also do serious injury to our military.

I spent some time away from politics and then, last year, found DU. It was like coming home. Sure, we argue amongst ourselves about some of the silliest things. But I find a lot of that debate to be healthy. We have similar, if not identical, ideologies.

I went back to the CL boards about six months ago to check in... They're clumsy, hard to navigate, and the crazies are STILL in charge. From a place populated by people that claimed to distrust government power, they morphed into a cheering section for some of the worst abuses of authority we've ever witnessed.

I don't need to debate these people. I already KNOW how they think.

That's why I'm glad DU doesn't let them come here and poison our well. Believe me, there's enough opposing views on DU already to generate healthy debate. I'm left libertarian... Others are NOT.

If anything, I think that the mods should have a little more hands-off approach to certain things. But that may be a carry over from the CL boards, where you were allowed to say ANYTHING and if it was over the line, everyone ELSE jumped you for it. Free Speech was NOT debatable there. It was a plain fact.

That's the only thing I ever miss about it. Believe me. There's nothing else TO miss.

[bigtree]

36. there's too much goddamned time spent here debating ridiculous ideas and notions

instead of supporting efforts to take the arguments to Bush and the republicans


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[Wickerman]

37. That was a very thoughtful and well-written post

and if I didn't violently disagree with nearly everything you wrote I'd be inclined to give it a Recc. I doubt what you suggest will ever happen again. If it were to happen, I'd terminate my account and be gone.

[Midlodemocrat]

97. As would I.

I come here to get a respite from the crap being spewed all around me. I don't need to listen to those idiots here.

Happy Thanksgiving, Wickerman!

[Wickerman]

105. Hey, Midlo!

Always a pleasure to see you out and about on the boards! Enjoy your Holiday, too!

My favorite inclusionary link for this time of year:

http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Nov2006/munro1106.html

[Kelly Rupert]

38. Nah, and here's why:

they'd all just be trolls or idiots here to flame and disrupt. It's not worth dealing with two hundred "So, libs, how about John Edwards buying a PS3 at Wal-Mart! Guess that's what happens when you don't study hard and get a good education!" and "BUT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND YOU NEED TO SUPPORT THE TROOPS" threads a day.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

39. I Don't Even Need To Read The Mile Long Post. Short Answer? No Way In Hell.

There a billion places for you to go if that's the atmosphere you want. That isn't the purpose, mission or community that DU was meant to be.

This is Democratic Underground. It is meant as a place for Democrats to gather with a purpose of coming together towards common goals of liberalism and forging strategies, exposing lies, educating ourselves and becoming more politically aware while being spared the barrage from the republican minded. Now granted, we still have to deal with the dem bashing anyway, though theoretically we shouldn't have to, but at least it's coming from other liberals under the big tent.

If you want expanded political spectrum viewpoints, there are a ton of other boards for you to frequent if you so choose. It's not like by being here we are bound to this site only and cannot venture elsewhere. But as far as this community goes, it is designed as a gathering for liberals and progressive minded folks only and that's the way I hope it always will stay.

The last thing this site needs is being an open forum for both sides of the aisle. The entire purpose of this site was to get away from having to deal with all that bullshit. So no thank you and no way in hell.

[in_cog_ni_to]

40. NO thanks. They already have their venues to spew their crap.

We don't need them polluting DU.:puke: I really don't give a shit what they think, how they feel, why they think and feel the way they do. Whatever their reasons, they're wrong.

That's why I'm a member of DU and not FR.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

42. Here is the problem with this. Because DU is a partisan site, even if you were to allow

carefully moderated debate, the type of Republicans it would attract would disproportionately be the type inclined to, ahem, soil the flag of the opposition.

The only place where I've seen fairly successful, relatively civil, moderated debate on political topics is on a nonpartisan site that is not primarily focused on politics, where posters are required to pay in/register to post (they are "invested" in the site and it costs them money if they get banned for being an ass). And again, the moderation is quite active there.

People are mostly not in the framework of being a partisan troll on such sites sometime because they are not there to "infiltrate" the enemy camp, as they come here to do, if you can see the difference. They may advocate for a side, but there isn't the tendency to see oneself as being in your "home base" or infiltrating "the enemy".

[BleedingHeartRN]

150. This statement is so true....

"The only place where I've seen fairly successful, relatively civil, moderated debate on political topics is on a nonpartisan site that is not primarily focused on politics, where posters are required to pay in/register to post (they are "invested" in the site and it costs them money if they get banned for being an ass). And again, the moderation is quite active there."

I can count on one hand the number of "thoughtful" conservatives that I've had intelligent debates with online. We were on a forum for members of our profession, and found common ground that way. There were approximately 10 of us that could engage in lively political debates without it decompensating into a flame war (which was strictly prohibited, and heavily moderated anyway). However, you always had the dimwits that threw in whatever talking points they heard on Faux news, and even worse, the tattletales that were offended by everything, and went crying to the mods the second any debate got a little warm. We had to be so nicey-nice the whole board became so saccharin and dull, everyone with a brain left.

If DU was forced to employ such restrictions, it wouldn't be nearly as much fun. You'd never be permitted to use words like 'freeptard' or 'wingnut.' Hell, it got to the point that we weren't even allowed to refer to neocons as neocons, because someone found it offensive.

[The Straight Story]

43. Naw - that would be like letting atheists into your church

and we can't have that :)

[Sapphocrat]

45. No, it would be like inviting cockroaches to dinner. n/t

[Lex]

64. EXACTLY.

Besides if I want to try to debate a conservative, I'll log in on one of the many, many, many boards there are for that sort of thing--the yahoo boards spring to mind.

[applegrove]

44. No way. They don't want discussion on issue. They want half the time

on the air to spread their lies. And they have been pining for the DU for almost a year. No way. We in the "reality based community" need a place to call home. Where we can discuss the issues in a real way. We don't like the myths of the cons. Sounds like most of America doesn't like the mystics either. Even the mystics have turned on Bush.

Forget it. We are the "reality based community" and we like an adult forum where people are encouraged to be responsible human beings rather than children.

[sendero]

46. It won't really work....

... I'm agree with you in principle, but I've seen it tried and it is simply unworkable.

If it makes you feel any better, there ARE conservatives here. I'm a "conservative" Dem, although most "conservative" Dem pols leave me cold.

How am I a conservative? I believe that money does not grow on trees, and that governments and families must strive to spend it wisely. I believe that law abiding citizens should have the unfettered right to own firearms, and that criminals don't give two shits about any firearm laws. I believe that war is a last resort, and we are in a war of first resort. I believe that folks should be able to speak their minds, including using words that a tiny minority find offensive. In fact, I believe in free speech so much that I think Micheal Richards had the RIGHT to say what he said, just as he has the OBLIGATION to suffer the consequences (I don't ever use the N word and think white folks never should)

There is plenty of diversity of viewpoint here at DU. There are lots of folks here who have the same basic goals, but don't agree at all on how to achieve said goals. We don't need any stinking, lying, talking point spewing Republicans' help, really we don't.

[Mythsaje]

67. That's not a "conservative Dem" position...

That's mainstream. What Thom Hartmann likes to call the "Radical Middle."

I'm a left-libertarian, according to the last test I took, and I agree with you completely.

[JHB]

113. Dare I use the phrase "Ditto" ;)

...from another self-described left-libertarian.

[KSU Wildcat]

52. Very valid points.

To defeat the enemy it helps to know and understand what they are all about. Who knows we may be able to win some over with our logical thoughts and ideas.

[UTUSN]

56. No no no no no no - non- nip - nep- nunca

Our own disagreement ain't enough??????

[cynatnite]

57. Yeah, what you said...I second that n/t

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

58. Nah, sorry......

Conservative views are fine. It's conservative republicans themselves who make me sick with how willing they are to sell their principles out just to have "one of our guys" in the White House or controlling the Congress.

Although I do think all trolls and flames from freepers should be redirected to a forum where we can make fun of them.

[A Simple Game]

59. There are already more fiscal conservatives on DU

than there is in the entire Republican party!

[Book Lover]

60. I disagree

The dialog you describe - and I agree that it should be fostered - would not be well served by happening here at Democratic Underground. Let a new place be made. That would allow the dialog to flourish in its own place, making its own rules and environment, unencumbered by DU history.

[Sapphire Blue]

62. Open your eyes & you'll see plenty of them.

[LTR]

65. No offense, but how 'bout a big HELL NO!

There's a ton of boards out there for the 'Bloods and Crips' to spar.

Plus, I like it here amongst the folk who think (kinda) like me. And believe me, there's plenty of disagreement here already.

Besides, most of the freepers who have posted here have acted like dickheads, started flamewars, and spouted nonsensical talking points that they gleamed off Hannity or NewsMax. When DU started, there were quite a few wingnuts around, and they proved that they just couldn't play nice.

So sorry, I've gotta disagree with you. Let the freepers stand outside and look in at the party. 'Cuz they ain't invited in.

[WindRavenX]

66. we have enough here at DU, no thanks

[spillthebeans]

68. The problem is that the Republican party has become anything

but conservative.
Big government, no fiscal responsibilities, adventures abroad and
the constant revelations about the Velvet Mafia don't even allow a representation of social conservatism.

I think that people are not informed enough to be conservative, if they were they wouldn't vote for many politicians in the GOP.

It's the oldest trick in the book called "divide and conquer" and people quarrel with each other without ever knowing why, while the politicians laugh at the way to the bank.

[Time for change]

96. Today's Republican Party is 95% fraud and corruption

And I very well may be too generous with that statement.

It is probably well to make a distinction between Republcians and "conservatives"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2770454&mesg_id=2773689

[spillthebeans]

120. Basically you have a dog & pony show

at the establishment level, and a handful of people who really care what the voter wants.

Take the new elected D-Nancy Boyda in Kansas for example http://nancyforcongress.com/issues.php,
she wants to inform people about the NASCO Super Corridor and fight illegal immigration.
To do that she wants to get together with R-Ron Paul and others in the http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/


I don't know if the division between conservative and liberal is a natural thing.

One thing that most people unites is that they don't want war, they want a honest(not corrupt) gov.,freedom and decent standard of living.

Is this possible in an environment where the Military industrial complex owns the media,
and the e-voting machines serve other purposes than counting votes?

Can the people solve the issues without coming together?


Just read what the la times had to say about evangelicals and how they are used by the Republicans
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-faith13oct13,0,3875008.story?coll=la-home-headlines

But if you show it to a hardcore evangelical he wouldn't believe it, people sometimes want to be lied to.

[TheBaldyMan]

70. conservatives already post on DU

they aren't barred unless they overstep the well defined bounds on posting, as does any liberal poster who goes outside that line. Everybody can post already, unfortunately some people come here to troll and they are the ones who get banned.

More than a few DUers are not what I would call a liberal.

on edit: The RW has more than enough outlets to inform the rest of the world about what they think, DU is supposed to be an oasis of liberal thought. The raison d'etre of DU is to provide an outlet that is denied elsewhere. The conservatives tend to echo talking points, it's not debate in the received sense more a refutation of the lies of the establishment.

[Time for change]

76. I think that there is a subtle distinction

The DU rules say that only progressives and moderates are welcome, but then go on to say that "conservative disrupters" are banned. So, it's not clear to me what the rules are for conservatives who don't disrupt.

We all realize that lots of people post who hold views that are more conservative than our own. But it would be difficult for mods to ban someone who expressed views that were considered too conservative because, where do you draw the line? So, my interpretation of the rules is that someone would be banned for being too conservative in the absence of bad behavior only if they identified themselves as a conservative.

Anyhow, I certainly didn't mean to stir up all this bad feeling. Nor did I have in mind that our oasis of liberal thought would be disrupted, which is certainly one of the main reasons why I spend so much time on DU myself.

The "conservatives" that I refer to in the OP are obviously not the same kind of people that so many of the responders to this OP have in mind, as I can tell by reading all the negative and sometimes even hostile comments. I still feel certain that there are some people who refer to themselves as conservatives with whom we could have productive discussions without disrupting our site or our oasis of liberal thought -- especially if they were confined to a single forum, something along the lines of the 9-11 forum perhaps.

But perhaps my idea works only in theory, but not in reality.

On edit, also, I think that there would still be some conservative ideas that would be banned for content alone. Racism, for example. In my opinion, racism is generally a conservative value, though I imagine that today there would be few conservatives who admit to it. And yet at the same time I am certain that there are many people who consider themselves "conservative" and yet are not the least bit racist.

[TheBaldyMan]

78. conservatives may not be welcomed with open arms but they do post

if they keep the discourse civil they are in for a hard time anyway. I pity anyone that tries to defend a WH or Fox News talking point.

The tone in certain fora is less than genial at the best of times. (Yes, I mean GD and GDP) I also find quite a lot of DUers have views radically different to my own, so different in fact that we experience what can only be described as mutual incomprehension. In my case DU gun nuts, I just don't understand the want or need for a handgun. We just have to agree to dis-agree.

If it's like that between DUers imagine what happens when a moderate republican starts posting.

[provis99]

71. forget inviting conservatives

they believe what they believe, and we believe what we believe. Once you hit 18, your political ideas are pretty much fixed for life, so even if it were civil debate, it would be frustratingly pointless. I come to DU because it satisfies me that their are others whose opinions are similar to mind, like to bash conservatives, and don't have to put up with their trolling crap. Free speech is ok, but that doesn't mean I gotta listen their garbage.

[Sapphocrat]

72. You really think so?

That "Once you hit 18, your political ideas are pretty much fixed for life"?

If I believed that, I should open a vein now and be done with it* -- there would be no point in debate.

In the 27 years since I was 18, my views have shifted in a number of ways, on both social and fiscal issues. My father's politics didn't begin to mellow until he hit his 60s; my mother, at 85, is still getting more liberal by the day.

May I ask how old you are?


* That's pure hyperbole; I never would open a vein.

[Stand and Fight]

137. I must strongly disagree with your point...

I must strongly disagree with your point, "once you hit 18, your political ideas are pretty much fixed for life."

For most of my youth, I was a foster child. During that time I was a self-described, "staunch Republican" who believed that people should "pull themselves up by their boot-straps." I firmly believed in the death penalty, thought abortion reprehensible, was for strict fiscal control, and thought that the homeless had only themselves to blame... At the same time I had no problem with homosexuals, felt that there should be a distinct separation between church and state, and was a complete and admitted pacifist when it came to war. Back then I only read the newspapers—I did not read, analyze, and ask questions about the nature of the news or the motivations that prompted certain actions. That has changed as a result of several things; namely, being homeless for several months, losing a brother and a bother within a year of each other, and being, of all things, on active duty in the Army in the lead-up to the Iraqi War. I started to read and analyze and QUESTION what I was reading. Likewise, I begin to question a whole hell of a lot of my views. The more I learned about how things really worked, reflected on how often the media distorted the truth, and STOPPED pre-judging people I begin to change. I began to become a better Christian and far more liberal. I no longer believe that people are always able to pull themselves up by their boot-straps because when I was homeless, I had been applying EVERYWHERE to get a job, but I could not. I find the death penalty barbaric and contrary to my Christian values. I disagree with abortions, but I do not subscribe to the belief that life begins at the moment of conception, and I likewise believe that women have the ABSOLUTE right to choose. I am, however, still very much for strict fiscal control -- this was one of the main reason I left the Republican party. I still have no problem with homosexuals getting MARRIED, and feel that calling their marriages "civil unions" is an exercise in semantics and thinly vieled bigotry. I am deeply alarmed by the role that religion has started to play in our government, and think that we must fight to ensure that it's role is reduced. Sadly, I do now believe that war is sometimes necessary, because of the attacks on 9/11, but I am ardently opposed to the elective and criminal war in Iraq...

I am a different man at 28 than I was at 18, and so I have to strong disagree with your point.

[Sapphocrat]

143. Stand and Fight, I nominate you...

...as head of the U.S. Liberal Christian Activist Caucus somebody really ought to establish. Someday. Soon.
:thumbsup:

[B Calm]

75. I haven't seen a republican CONSERVATIVE in years.

[Time for change]

94. It's difficult to discuss this issue because there seems to be little

agreement on what "conservative" means these days.

John Dean considers himself a "conservative", and yet he is very much opposed to most of today's Republican Party. In "Conservatives Without Conscience" he differentiated "conservatives without consciences" from those "with consciences", which he considers himself to be. He made list of about 20 characteristics of "conservatives with consciences". I was unable to find a single trait on his list that didn't apply to myself or most DUers.

[BelgianMadCow]

77. I am as idealistic as you are - and I agree with your main point & the advantages

I too think that it is in the HONEST opposition of ideas, in a true debate, that the right balance can be found. I often find myself playing devil's advocate just because I like debate. And all the "me too" pile-ons can get kind of boring.

So I have often thought exactly what you wrote, but you did it better :-)

But I have to admit I have no online discussion experience outside of DU, and all the people in this thread stating they have and describing their experience indicate it would become a hornet's nest as you described yourself.

Personally, I'd like one separate forum (which you and I could then heavily moderate for example) where these viewpoints would be allowed.
But I don't see how to set it up so that the rest of DU, which is a safe haven to me, you and practically all of the thread posters, is spared.

Since we both seem to have the seem urge to debate and convince, but do not have the experience on other boards, maybe this all just means we should go post on some of the existing mixed boards and see if we end up as desillusioned as the other thread posters.

[Time for change]

104. Thank you BelgianMadCow

I have had a little bit of on-line experience with conservatives. As you know, I took your advice and posted "A plea to moderates and conservatives" regarding the election on the Free Republic. The responses I got may as well have been from kindergarten kids. I used my son's account to post that. He is a DUer, but he occasionally posted on FR. I wouldn't exactly call him a FR troll, his purpose being to add a little bit of sanity to their discussion, and to point out when they were factually incorrect. It worked for quite a while, until my post got him banned within a few seconds.

I have no doubt that the posters on this thread are not exaggerating about their bad experiences with conservative web sites.

But I thought that if appropriate rules were used and enforced on a liberal website such as DU, it could be successfully done without changing the basic character of DU. Perhaps I was wrong, and perhaps I will never know.

Thank you for your encouraging words.
:toast:

[EdwardM]

79. What's wrong with conservatives?

Those guys in the Whitehouse right now who claim to be conservatives, but are just assholes are giving true conservatives a bad name. I guarantee that Barry Goldwater would be against that jerk in the Whitehouse right now if he were still alive. Hell, he might have even joined the Democratic side.

[Time for change]

98. I agree absolutely -- Goldwater, when he was alive, had no respect

for these thugs and criminals who currently run our country:

http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/blumenthal/2004/02/26/goldwater/index.html

[Hubert Flottz]

80. BAD IDEA...

I've seen it tried before. It's why the DNC's chatboard shut down in 2001!

[Bridget Burke]

81. Conservatives already post here.

Some Democrats are "Conservative" on certain issues. OK!

A few others spout predictable Right Wing Talking Points & think they're fooling us. (Clue: They aren't.)

But this is a Democratic Board & needs to stay that way. Anyone is free to browse here. And you can try some other boards--& still post on DU.

[blondeatlast]

84. This is like my neighborhood bar and I don't like outsiders telling me their 'hood

beats mine.

NONONONONONONONONONONONONONO. NEVER. there are plenty of forums where we can take each other on.

[DemonFighterLives]

85. Oh Please NO!

I don't even have the time to read all of your arguments, but I came here for Sanctuary. If you want to debate hardheads, I'm sure you can find plenty of those places.
From my experience, tons of information could be provided them, but they don't seem to see it. They don't even seem to give on a point or two.
They can do their thing wherever they do, but don't pollute this site.
BTW, there is plenty of diversity on this site and I don't agree with all, but I hold my tongue and move forward.
:dem:

[Horse with no Name]

86. Your passion is to be commended

But what drove me here was my participation on one of those boards that allowed conservatives.
It is the same recipe:
1. Liberal posts idea
2. Thugs dogpile.
3. They insult your mother.
4. They insult your children.
5. But they never insult your idea because the idea wasn't bad to start with.
It's bad enough having to deal with trolls. The day DU opens the door freely for these little fucktards, is the day I log off for good.

[earth mom]

87. Thanks but no thanks-there are enough trolls around here as it is! eom

[loveandlight]

88. what is going on here

Several posts like this have happened in recent days. I don't understand why all of a sudden these people feel the need. Do you really think the conservatives are ready to "talk" now?? Just as Bush has carried out his bipartisan agenda by resending to Congress his most conservative nominations to the bench, there is no talking to most conservatives. They have there ideas, values opposite from most of ours, and I see no need to get into that here on this web site. This site is for us, the progressive majority, to talk about policies and issues and strategies to best promote our goals. I get plenty of conservative nonsense everywhere else in the world. Stay away from here! Stop asking, it won't happen or this site will be destroyed from within.

[mondo joe]

89. No thank you. There are numerous boards for that sort of debate.

I like having one progressive board.

[messiah]

90. I agree like I said years ago there should be a forum for open and free debate on DU

[Time for change]

91. Some clarification

I can see that my idea is pretty much uniformly hated around here, so I'm sure that nobody has to worry about it being instituted. The DU administrators know what they're doing, and the last thing they would want is to alienate masses of DUers, even if they did find things to like about my idea. Like I said early on in the OP, I am not really advocating this, but just expressing some of my ideas on the subject. Perhaps most of you are right, that it wouldn't work well. But I would like to clarify a couple of things, because I think that most of you are misunderstanding what I have said:

First, I think that most of you have in mind a very different type of person than I had in mind when I use the word "conservative" in my OP. With regard to the Bush conservatives, Freepers, etc., that most of you refer to, I believe that there are few people who dislike them as much as I do, as I have expressed in the following posts:

The propensity for Republicans to be involved in bribery scandals
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2462924

The role of racism on our road to tyranny:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2269258

Torture in the Bush administration:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1890766

My discussion of the evil of the Bush administration:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1761034

Christianity and Republican morals:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1208179

But those were not the kind of "conservatives" that I had in mind. My idea was more like the John Dean type of "conservative". Dean has written some very important books lately, including "Worse than Watergate" and "Conservatives without conscience", making some very important contributions to our national dialogue IMO. Yet he still considers himself a conservative.

Secondly, many have expressed the view that my idea would change the core character of DU, thereby changing from the "safe haven" that we all love so much into something very different. That was certainly not the intention of my idea. I thought that my idea could be implemented without changing the character of DU in that way, since we have a liberal administration. Perhaps I am mistaken that that could be done, but I just wanted to make it clear that that was what my intention was.

[tnlefty]

118. Since you mentioned him, have you heard what a lot of these modern-

day "conservatives" have had to say about John Dean when they call into c-span? Pretty much the same things that I've had them say to my face when I've referenced him along with a couple of others in conversations, i.e., that he's a traitorous bastard for pointing out that the pResident is breaking the law and that this current misadministration is worse than watergate. I've had people tell me that he's a goddamned liberal! (That certainly cracked me up).

I don't think that you'd have the more thoughtful conservatives wandering in here for discussion, but the wingnuts would show up in droves.

I'm surrounded by the nutjobs in my everyday existence and I really don't want to deal with them here. :hi:

[blondeatlast]

139. Precisely. Dean is a thoughtful conservative in the truest sense of the word

and despised by the kind of knuckle-draggers that would find their way here.

[Norquist Nemesis]

95. Sorry, I'm surrounded day in and day out with Conservatives

DU is one of the few little islands that I can 'virtually' be and not have to deal with being a Dirty, Loony, Tax and Spend Liberal. In a way, DU is sort of like training practice for the real game and it helps give me the "tools" and "skills" to fight.

[Dora]

100. Take it to the mods.

[LWolf]

101. Perhaps it might be a good start

to allow liberals and progressives who express dissent with the Democratic Party, or who do not follow the party line, or who work for 3rd parties, to join the conversation. Of course, they/we are already here, but I mean to blatantly express disagreement with the party, or to propose people or ideas outside the party line that are in agreement with liberal, progressive, democratic principles, without the tombstone effect.

One idea takes politics beyond the Democratic Party and focuses on the issues that ought to drive politics. Another idea allows conservatives to lobby for a more conservative Democratic Party, but it's still all about the party.

Which is more Democratic?

[Time for change]

108. But isn't it already true that one can express those ideas without

getting tombstoned? It seems to me that I have often times expressed such opinions without any adverse effects from the mods or the administration.

[LWolf]

117. Ask the many that have been tombstoned.

Since some were my friends, I still chat with them, and they would not agree with your statement.

I'm referring to a change in rules, though. While I'm a registered Democrat, I lean independent and don't march in line very well. I'm unhappy with TPTB that determine the direction of the Democratic Party, and I'm unhappy with the voters that allow them to. It's ok to say that.

It's not okay to campaign against a Democratic candidate, and may not be ok to campaign against parts of the party platform I might disagree with. It's not okay to support legitimately good people and ideas that are not Democrats. Independent thinking outside the party box is tolerated to a point, but not encouraged.

[walldude]

102. I don't have time to waste arguing the same old

proven points to conservatives. It's pointless, there is already plenty of debate on DU, why would I want to waste time debating people who have yet to learn the difference between truth and fact. Plenty of places for that.

[kentuck]

103. A freeper would respond to this post as such:

The Democrat Party is a bunch of yellow-bellied cowards! They have kept George W Bush from winning this war. They should be shot for treason! Everybody knows the Democrat Party is for queers and cowards. etc..etc...
=======================

Then, how much constructive debate could we have after such comments? And that is exactly what would happen. So, it's not a good idea at this time.

[Time for change]

111. You're right that that's how a Freeper would respond

And then, even if my idea was initiated, that person's post would be deleted and the Freeper would be immediately banned from the site, and then we would never have to worry about that person again.

That's the way I see it.

[Phillycat]

107. No. Just no. nt

[slestak]

110. Conservatives posting on DU?

[ProfessorGAC]

112. No Thank You!

Your whole premise seems based upon a need to get a diversity of views. Well, first of all, the views here are already diverse, since liberalism, by definition, promotes change and everyone has different ideas at the same time. There is a lesser tendency toward orthodoxy (notice i didn't so NO tendency), and therefore more diversity of opinion.

Secondly, the conservative movement has had a one million watt bullhorn in their hands for more than 20 years, and have been shouting into it for the last 12. I don't think that heraing the ideas and views of people who support a philosophy that has taken the shape of politics of the LCD.

The radical right has willfully and aggressively targeted the least and dimmest, and have actively pursued issues that reveal the darker angels of our nature. I have zero interest in dealing with the "views" of folks like that.

If i want to hear from people who think strictly in two dimensions, i'll read a comic strip.
The Professor

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

116. Absolutely not.

Go check out the story about the first week of DU's life, and you'll understand.

They won't want to discuss.
They won't want to debate.
They won't want to talk.

They just want to shout us down until we give up and go away.

You want to debate "conservatives", go ahead and go to the MediaMatters.org comments section, or Huffington Post.
There's plenty of them there.

Or better yet, make your own website. This is Skinner. Elad. and EarlG's house. So it's their rules.

[VOX]

121. Take a look at the Huffington Post comments where freepers are allowed...

They've turned that place into a raging sewer, complete with mutant crocodiles. The right-wing posters there turn every single thread into a swamp that inevitably flounders off-topic.

No, a thousand times no, NO freepers at DU. They will transform this vibrant liberal community into a steaming stress-pit. :grr:

[personman]

122. Sure seems like we have enough already.

Helping to spread their talking points probably isn't helpful to our goals.
If it's a popular enough idea though, maybe they could do an 'opposing ideologies' forum section like revolutionaryleft.com

[wryter2000]

123. Not until they join the reality based community n/t

n/t

[philosophie_en_rose]

136. but reality has a well-known liberal bias!

:)

and we don't want them junking up our fiction boards. :)

[warrens]

124. There are plenty of sites for that

I agree with you. Preaching to the choir (and getting embarassed by some of the moonunits around here) is boring. If you're really interested, PM me and I will suggest a good site where all sorts of people, united only by their hatred of Bush and fascism, chat. I'm one of the few out-and-out libs, but I've never had any problems there. I'd rather an honest person with whom I disagree than a crook who mouths the right words.

[ComerPerro]

125. there are already enough DUers spouting conservative BS, I don't need to hear it from freeper trolls

[Der Blaue Engel]

126. Amen to that

:puke:

[ItNerd4life]

127. No, DU navigation is too well designed and logical

Conservatives wouldn't be able to figure it out.

[Cleita]

128. They do post at DU. We call them DLC and there are some

Republicans and quite a few Libertarians that are regular posters here that I know of. It's the freeper trolls that aren't allowed to post.

If you want really conservative views just surf the RW websites of the American Enterprise Institute, The Heritage Foundation and the Project For a New American Century and you will discover that they aren't debatable because they generally have their facts tailored to fit their ideals. I don't think we need that at DU.

If you feel like you want to convert anyone of them with facts, there are other boards you can go to for this purpose.

[Warren DeMontague]

129. Yes, god forbid there be ONE place on the internet where the idiots can't shout us down.

Feh.

Next!

[Zavulon]

130. I'll pass, thanks.

Exposure to a wider variety of opinion.

I already know what they think. In most cases, I vehemently disagree.

Develop a better understanding of conservatives and their viewpoints.

I already know what they think. In most cases, I vehemently disagree.

It could sharpen our minds.

I already know what they think. In most cases, I vehemently disagree.

Establishing a rapport with them will help us all.

I'm not interested in a rapport with them.

[Brewman_Jax]

131. No thanks

Like the above posters, I have to share a workplace, watering hole, etc., with the brain-scrubbed brain-dead scumbag freeper hypocrites who support the Bush* Administration, but don't want to sacrifice for it, whine about their wasted tax dollars on "those people" while they whine that rich people pay too much. Just said goodbye to one of freeper job associates who left for "greener" pastures. You can't teach stupid people to think any more than you can teach a pig to sing.

There are thousands of sites for you to debate them as they spew their ignorance and regurgitate RW radio squawk 24/7. We don't need them here.

BTW, hang around long enough, one or two will pop up. You might get to debate them before they're tombstoned.

edit for content.

[philosophie_en_rose]

132. Conservatives are not going to class up this place or 'improve it' in any way.

Exhibit 1: Conservative trolls. Oh yes, they do indeed improve this place with peals of laughter. But we have enough conflict here over our own differences. No conservative is going to improve the dialogue here.

Exhibit 2: Whiny ass Conservative trolls. There is such an entitlement in the Hate Mail Bag. Wah! Wah! Wah! People whooped my ass in a debate where I only said cutouts of Bush should be worshipped in all schools. Intolerance!

Exhibit 3: Mod to freep ratio. How many more mods would it take to enforce tolerance of freepers?

Exhibit 4: Any old freeper post. Take your pick. Somehow, I don't allowing hate-filled rants and Bush-loving stupidity is going to elevate the discussion around here.

Exhibit 5: Free Republic and DU's stalker site. What worthless pieces of trash! If you can find the redeeming value of speaking with those people - please show me.

Exhibit 6: Every other political site - DU is a place by liberals for liberals. Other political sites become solely about factions and antagonism. Can you imagine a whole board that is the equivalent of a Nader thread? :scared:

[LittleClarkie]

133. If they come here honestly and behave then sure. And some are already here

because they've jumped ship.

[Alexander]

134. Some of us put up with enough knuckle-draggers in real life.

I already put up with the middle finger, getting yelled at, sworn at, my car keyed, liberal bumper stickers ripped off, right-wing bumper stickers put on, people trying to start physical fights, and childish name-calling in real life because I dare to have a liberal opinion.

This is in a college-town suburb of Phoenix, by the way, and we finally elected a Democrat to the US Congress, though just barely. This is probably itself an oasis of liberal and progressive thought in Maricopa County, and that's not saying much.

As it is, there are enough nanny-state liberals and hysterical, insulting posters here. Conservatives are allowed here, but thankfully the rules keep it so that they are mostly reasonable, logical individuals. As it is, I have enough fun trying to debate with many of the so-called liberals here.

Many of us are red-staters and have to put up with enough juvenile antics in our lives. I use this forum and YD meetings as my oasis from this crap, and already there's plenty of disagreement and name-calling.

Let me share this final thought with you. The day Free Republic allows liberals and progressives to post there, is the day I will advocate allowing conservatives and Bushbots to post here.

[trogdor]

135. We used to have a "fight club" here.

Anybody could post about anything. As I recall, enforcing decency rules and such were a nightmare.

[MamaBear]

138. No. Sorry.

There are dozens of places around the web to "sharpen your mind" (!?) by trying to communicate with conservatives. I come to DU to have a place where I sharpen my mind trying to understand the views of my fellow liberals. Our views are widely divergent. Haven't you noticed?

I would, however, wish you every success if you wanted to set up a site where liberals and conservatives met to talk. I might even make a donation for the asbestos suits to be worn by your moderators, if you could find any, to settle the disagreements that would arise among the moderators themselves.

Like I said, good luck.

[driver8]

140. When the conservatives start posting here...I'm outta here.

Been there...done that.

It starts out all nice and friendly but eventually it turns to shit. They don't want to listen to another point of view; they just want to force their opinions down your throat. If you offer them your sources for information, they will tell you that your sources "are slanted to the left and full of shit." If you make a point that does not go along with their line of thinking, then "you are full of shit."

Then the name calling starts. I have been told that I am "anti-troop", that I "support the terrorists", "do not love my country", and that I am a "traitor". This was all on a veterans' board with fellow veterans. I can only imagine what it would be like if the other crack pots find their way here.

Thanks, but no thanks.

[Minnesota_Lib]

145. There are many mixed boards where you can debate cons. We have enough...

...internal debate and disagreement among ourselves here as it is without adding them to the mix.

I debate cons in other forums on other websites dedicated to that when I feel the need. I'd prefer to keep DU as a place where we can interact and debate the issues from our own common Democratic perspectives.

[Dragonbreathp9d]

146. With limitations

maybe only in a certain forum (Debate), and as long as things are kept fairly civil. I think it is kind of hypocritical for a liberal website to not allow freedom of speech and dissenting opinions - things that are argued for in our society everyday

[TheFarseer]

147. The main problem is

you get people on here telling you how great the Iraq war is and I just don't want to hear it. My mind is made up on that one. I think there is plenty of room for different opinions, but why the hell would you want to waste your time debating a Sean Hanitty disciple on why public schools and the minimum wage are unconstitutional? There's just no room for some things on our board, I'm sorry.

[Generator]

148. Exactly for the most part

all they do is repeat propaganda. That's all they know how to do. I was on a "mom's board" before I came to DU and it was the political stuff that made me leave. They don't give a crap about FACTS. They hit and run and you could hand them reams of proof that they are wrong, and it will end up with, "I still think Saddam hid those weapons in Syria, so Bush was right." So there is NO getting through. In fact, if I went back there TODAY, I'm sure I could expect the same damn arguments I heard in 2003.

[TheFarseer]

149. I hear that crap about the WMDs are in Syria

and even more mind-boggling, in Iran - the mortal enemy of Saddam Hussein. How the hell could they have moved the weapons with the entire world watching? Did they hire David Blaine and zombie Houdini? Even if we are in bizzaro world and they DID move weapons that didn't exist right in front of our noses, didn't they think this could happen? Why are we safer now with rogue WMDs floating around? Thank God we invaded - now the weapons could be f*cking anywhere!

[susanna]

151. Long story short...

regardless of your tolerance, your intelligence, and your ability to conduct an honest conversation, a large percentage of folks are not able to stick to any realistic boundaries on that score.

What would happen would render DU a pit-fight with no information efficiently available for the side it supports, aka Democrats and other similarly-minded progressives. So I completely disagree with your premise.

In my day-to-day life, I personally have "conversations" with right-wingers all the time (family, friends, etc.) I come to DU to get away from that. So I vote a big NO to your suggestion, as well thought out as it is.

[Octafish]

152. There's enough bullshit on here the way it is.

Multiplying it by even a fraction only adds.

Let turds post elsewhere.

[piedmont]

153. I'm for it, but keep them in a rumpus room or something...

as someone else said, I don't want them stinkin' the whole place up. But it would be nice to have a few around to point & laugh at.

I think it's a valid point though that having to defend your views sharpens your mind and makes you develop a solid rationale. It's why DU is currently kinda useless for me to talk about the environment or abortion rights or several other issues-- there just doesn't seem to be much disagreement on those issues (though maybe I'm wrong?). Sometimes I do feel like I'm the customer in that Monty Python sketch who wants to have an argument.

edited to add "them" to title

[ForrestGump]

154. Bet you anything that many or most of the kind of

'conservatives' who'd respond to an invitation would not be the kind of people who'd bring anything positive to this place and would likely bring substantial negatives. I've seen them in action elsewhere, including where the tone is allegedly 'neutral,' and -- just as it's impossible to logically argue, for example, evolution in the face of faith -- there is no rational discourse possible with the worst of them (and the worst of them are disproportionately likely to post regularly on the Internet). Not that I'd know a whole lot about that from personal experience, their f***wittedness once or twice prompting me to an uncharacteristic full-frontal assault on the scum before I left the offending boards in acknowledgment of the quixotic nature of my suicide-bombing runs.

The modern American conservative is not a good person. At this stage in the game, in my opinion, they are enemies of the biosphere -- willingly aiding and abetting (enablers, at minimum) the destruction of our species and of every living thing on the entire planet. We don't need them here. We will never be able to get through to the worst of them, anyway.

To hell with American 'conservatives' of the past two or three decades...some of the 'liberals' who post here are detritivore enough without adding overt right-wingers to the mix.

[jgraz]

156. Is *THIS* what you're interested in reading?

Follow the link and read the comments by gellman:

http://youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=I7jppW4WHgQ&fromurl=/watch%3Fv%3DI7jppW4WHgQ

This is the kind of "discussion" you want on our board? Conservatism is not something you have a debate with. It's a dying fantasy reserved for mental defectives, emotional cripples and soulless, money-fucking robots. Letting them in will only cheapen our discourse and make it impossible for normal adult humans (a.k.a. Liberals) to have actual debates about actual issues.

In other words, the reason we don't allow Cons on this board is the same reason your toilet only flushes in one direction. To keep the shit as far away as possible.