Berno-Hill DU war: Shots fired at Fort Skinner.

[dutch508]

backscatter712 (23,662 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027461024

OK, so a prominent DUer was banned for disloyalty to the Democratic Party.


Still seeing some gravedancing over that.

Well, here's my take.

BEFORE I am a Democrat, I am a democrat. I am a progressive. I am a socialist.

I believe in protecting the environment.
I believe in keeping us out of destructive and pointless wars.
I believe in equal rights for black people, for Latinos, for Muslims, Christians, Jews, Atheists, for women, for the LGBTQIA community, and for every human being.
I believe in a secular government, not theocracy.
I believe in helping the middle and lower class, and pushing back against predatory big business.
I believe in health care for all.
I believe in making college education accessible to everyone, regardless of ability to pay, and without incurring crippling debt.
I believe in opposing demagogues and fascists.
I believe in fair trade, instead of outsourcing work to the countries that pay the lowest wages and treat workers the worst, leaving us here hung out to dry.

That is where my loyalties lie.

Not with a political party. I register as a Democrat, participate in Democratic party processes, and work to elect Democrats in order to further the goals I have above.

I'm not a ****ing idiot, so for those looking for a TOS violation, no I'm not going to vote to Naderize the party or the country. Yes, I know what Duverger's Law is.

BUT, I am only loyal to Democrats if they're loyal to what I believe in. And I'm not going to blindly follow the diktats of characters like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz just because she puts a "D" next to her name.

As far as I'm concerned, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is as bad as any Republican. She's as corrupt, as abusive of power, and as devoid of integrity or loyalty to the values that Democrats purport to promote.

The Democratic party, at its best, promotes strong values, and makes our country a better place.

But the Democratic party at its worst falls to corruption, kisses the ass of the powerful, and throws the little guy to the wolves, while giving an unctuous smile and saying "What are you going to do? The Republicans are worse! We suck less!" If you think I'm going to give my loyalty to those who pull that shit, you've got another thing coming.

I'm sick of false promises. I'm sick of kabuki dances. I'm sick of dealing with those that would resort to smears and dirty tricks to win an election, instead of running on the merits. We're not going to let a good man get Dean Screamed so the billionaires and Wall Streeters get a candidate that does little more to them than tell them "Cut it out."

I'm sick of fair-weather friends for the LGBTQIA community, and minorities, and civil rights. I want someone who will stand for what's right, and do it with dignity, even if the fight is lost.

The Democratic Party is a means to my ends, not the end itself. And when the Democratic Party fails to uphold its values, and my values, it will lose my loyalty, and I will find creative new ways to promote my values.

So stop demanding I bend the knee and kiss the Democratic ring. You want my loyalty? EARN IT.

Oooo.....

Name removed Message auto-removed

 

Buzz Clik (33,871 posts)
3. This is DU. There are rules and ToT.

Oh, IBTL.

840high (10,048 posts)
7. We don't have a nominee yet.

Hekate (32,129 posts)
120. Awww, Mr. No Star swears he'll stop contributing to DU.

I'll tell you the same thing I've told complainers for the last 13 years: Nothing in the world stops you from starting your own site.

NYC Liberal (17,057 posts)
8. This site from Day One has existed to elect Democrats.

Advocating voting against the Democratic candidate in a general election has ALWAYS been against the TOS here, as it should be.

The entire purpose of DU is supporting the Democratic Party:
Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office


Posters who support voting against Democrats are well within their rights and they may believe they are doing the right thing. That's fine. But DU isn't the place for it. DU is one of many political websites, and other sites may be more suited to those who may not vote for Democrats or support independent candidates.

If there ever came a time where I felt I could not support the Democratic Party, then I would stop wasting my time here.

Hillary is paying off DU and the DNC with money she got from who knows what and from who knows where... Sure, DU is about finding the best candidate.

Hepburn (20,984 posts)
56. So even if a D is a not liberal or even a bit of a progressive...I must support her?

I will definitely encourage people to vote for the the liberal candidates...that is what this site is all about...not just the D-word, but a liberal.

MeNMyVolt (407 posts)
97. I think you misunderstand the TOS during the primaries.

Who's sock puppet is this?

Hekate (32,129 posts)
112. I was witholding judgment about BS despite his fans here, but not so much any more....

He's a DINO, just not the way the whiners usually mean. That DNC database is a very expensive very BFD and he only has access to it because he signed up to be a Dem. As an Independent from Vermont, the only database he ever had was the one he accumulated on his desktop Macintosh from his political career in one small state.

The behavior of not one but several of his staffers is beyond the pale -- is illegal, amounts to theft -- and he owes an apology to the DNC and to Debbie Wasserman Schultz for it.

Instead, his supporters have gone ballistic and he himself is claiming victimhood and filing a lawsuit against the DNC. This is the very definition of chutzpah.

P'tui. I am completely disgusted.

Yes, Bern isn't really one of us...

zalinda (4,768 posts)
144. He didn't get FREE access to the database

he had to pay for it. You RENT the database and then add to it, with your own calls. New people in Bernie's database vs new people in Hillary's database, you can bet that Bernie has more new names in it. Bernie doesn't need the names of Hillary's supporters, if they were in the original database, he already has the names. If they are new names to Hillary's database, they already made their minds up to vote Hillary, so why bother?

Z

paleotn (1,221 posts)
134. horse shit.......he's far more a Democrat than Hillary and her Wall Street cronies. He's voted with our party on the vast, vast majority of occasions. He's voted nearly every time like a REAL Democrat and not some horse shit Republican light (authorization for the Iraq war comes to mind.) In fact he's been far more reliable in that respect than most of those who call themselves Democrats. He's not wrecking the party. He's dragging her back to her FDR roots. If you don't like that, then maybe you belong among the Republicans. At least they're honest about their horse shit and don't hide it with empty platitudes and mere crumbs for the people they supposedly champion.

Adrahil (5,514 posts)
164. You are not required to be a member here, right? If the site does not meet your political needs, you are free to go elsewhere. You are not compelled to post here. But the site owners have the right to define the TOS. you agree to them when you make an account here. You may leave anytime you are unwilling to abide by the TOS. But it's not OK to agree to abide by a TOS and then ignore it, and then for folks to act like people have the right to do so. They don't.

I think the Berniebots need to be forced to wear a yellow star with the letter B on it as their avatar. That seems fair.

backscatter712 (23,662 posts)
19. I suppose I'll get banned from the site if the only Democrats we're given to support are characters like Joe Lieberman, Mark Pryor, Ben Nelson, Zell Miller or Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.

Because I'll be damned if I'm going to lift a finger to support characters like that.

LaurenG (24,768 posts)
48. Do you not remember the pumas? Many are still here and what did they threaten to do?

Vote for a f'ing McCain* Palin ticket. I was here, I saw it with my own eyes, yet they weren't banned.

So maybe the rules apply this time, who knows but there were many clowns running around here when it was Obama vs Clinton and some of them remain to this day.

Cha (169,201 posts)
147. manny was banned for advocating others not to vote for the Dem nominee but of course they are completely ignoring that and misrepresenting why he was banned.

No big ****ing surprise there.

davidn3600 (4,646 posts)
194. Ever notice that 99% of the people who say that are Hillary Clinton supporters?

Bernie supporters aren't worried about Hillary voters voting Democrat if Bernie is the nominee.

But the Hillary supporters feel like they have to make threats and angry rants about party unity in order to get everyone to vote for Hillary.

So shouldn't that tell you who's the stronger progressive?

There is more... much more...

[Skul]

Who is this Cha, DUmpy?
I don't recall it.

[Carl]

Who is this Cha, DUmpy?
I don't recall it.

An ancient old scrunt that acts like a horny teenage girl on her first period towards Obozo.

[DUmpsterDiver]

Tom in Tibet could get the loonies back on the grass, but no, he was shuffled away too soon.

[franksolich]

Well, one of those once-in-a-blue-moon instances where I agree with a primitive on something:

Hekate (32,129 posts)

112. I was witholding judgment about BS despite his fans here, but not so much any more....

He's a DINO, just not the way the whiners usually mean. That DNC database is a very expensive very BFD and he only has access to it because he signed up to be a Dem. As an Independent from Vermont, the only database he ever had was the one he accumulated on his desktop Macintosh from his political career in one small state.

The behavior of not one but several of his staffers is beyond the pale -- is illegal, amounts to theft -- and he owes an apology to the DNC and to Debbie Wasserman Schultz for it.

Instead, his supporters have gone ballistic and he himself is claiming victimhood and filing a lawsuit against the DNC. This is the very definition of chutzpah.

P'tui. I am completely disgusted.

I saw a headline--but not the story, as I was going along too fast--that Methuselah apologized to Messalina Agrippina during the Democrat debate this evening.

Apologies of course are nice, but atonement, recompense for one's wrongs, is even better.

What'd be best is if the Bernie bullies fell on their swords in shame and embarrassment, for having shown themselves so venal while at the same time bragging about how morally superior they are to everybody else.

But seeing the dull bland nondescript WillyT and the bitter old Vermontese cali primitive commit seppuku, hari-kari, is perhaps demanding too much of their arrogant, selfish egos; and so probably the best one can expect is that Methuselah drop out of the race, leaving the lady in peace and quiet.

[Ptarmigan]

Who is this Cha, DUmpy?
I don't recall it.

I have seen her before. She does not leave much of an impression.

[I_B_Perky]

one thing I thought I would throw out there... isn't bernie an independent and not a dem?

[Chris_]

one thing I thought I would throw out there... isn't bernie an independent and not a dem?

That's what I thought.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders

[CollectivismMustDie]

The Hilitarization of DU is coming, and its going to be fun to watch.


CMD

[obumazombie]

Who is this Cha, DUmpy?
I don't recall it.

I was wondering the same thing.

Cha (169,201 posts)
147. manny was banned for advocating others not to vote for the Dem nominee but of course they are completely ignoring that and misrepresenting why he was banned.

No big ****ing surprise there.

169,000 posts and this is the first I've read.
Not saying I keep up with DU, but Iv'e heard much more from those with much less in the way of posting.
Are posting numbers inflated, like dead people posting under that username ?
Or can you buy your way to certain post count levels like the stars and the Valentine hearts ?
My money is on buying their way out of obscurity.
Probably with other people's money too.

[miskie]

Cha has been there for a while - it used the old mole technique of rapid post-count inflation by posting tiny little responses, sometimes single emoticons to inflate its numbers.

It didn't get brave until hitting about 100 thousand posts.

[Skul]

Da Cha is testing the 2015 waters. I suspect an early 2016 DOTY run.
It will fail.

[Big Dog]

I was wondering the same thing.


169,000 posts and this is the first I've read.
Not saying I keep up with DU, but Iv'e heard much more from those with much less in the way of posting.
Are posting numbers inflated, like dead people posting under that username ?
Or can you buy your way to certain post count levels like the stars and the Valentine hearts ?
My money is on buying their way out of obscurity.
Probably with other people's money too.

170,000 posts?  That would be 32 posts per day, every day, since W's first inauguration in 2001.

Inconceivable!

[obumazombie]

^I just watched that movie again yesterday !

[franksolich]

The Hilitarization of DU is coming, and its going to be fun to watch.

Well, it's high time; it's like eight years overdue.

This is something I don't understand about the womens'-libbers on Skins's island--no matter how blatantly obvious it is, no matter that it's so obvious even a blind man can see it, they never see how the Democrat party wages war on women.

Given that the various contributions of women to the Democrat party far exceeded whatever blacks did for the Democrat party, 2008 should've been Messalina Agrippina's year; it was long past the women's turn.

But no, they got denied, by the selfish greedy upstart racists, who insisted it was the blacks' turn first.

And oddly, the primitives in 2008 had a candidate who fit both needs here, for a woman candidate and a black candidate--both at the same time--the former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney.

But the primitives paid her no attention at all; true, she was black, but.....she was a woman, and women are second-class people in the Democrat party.  Best to have a black who's a male.

It truly astounds me, the way women's-libbers stick with the Democrat party no matter how many times the Democrats stick it to them.

[freedumb2003b]

I believe in protecting the environment.

As defined by my Masters and no matter how many poor people it starves and makes homeless

I believe in keeping us out of destructive and pointless wars.

My Masters decide which ones are constructive and pointed.

I believe in equal rights for black people, for Latinos, for Muslims, Christians, Jews, Atheists, for women, for the LGBTQIA community, and for every human being.

Except Christians, Jews, and Conservatives.  Those get no rights.  And if muslims kill my family before my eyes, oh well...

I believe in a secular government, not theocracy.

Except for any religion NOT Judeo-Christian.

I believe in helping the middle and lower class, and pushing back against predatory big business.

No matter how many jobs are lost and so long as "helping" doesn't cost me anything personally.

I believe in health care for all.

Unless I have to pay for it.

I believe in making college education accessible to everyone, regardless of ability to pay, and without incurring crippling debt.

Until my personal student loans are paid and, of course, as long as I don't have to personally pay for it.  I will NOT take away the huge gun that was placed at the temples of those, like myself, who ran up huge college debt.

I believe in opposing demagogues and fascists.

Unless there is a (D) after their name.

I believe in fair trade, instead of outsourcing work to the countries that pay the lowest wages and treat workers the worst, leaving us here hung out to dry.

I also believe in trade wars where we lose 25% or more of our employment base to enable this.  I am OK with losing my job since I can depend on free stuff, which brings me to:

I believe in free stuff for me and those I deem deserving.

[freedumb2003b]

It truly astounds me, the way women's-libbers stick with the Democrat party no matter how many times the Democrats stick it to them.

Given the way most liberul womyn look, it is as close to sex as they will ever get.

[obumazombie]

Given the way most liberul womyn look, it is as close to sex as they will ever get.

It's not innate.
They have to work hard at being that fugly inside and out.
Kind of like Rosie O'donnel.

[CC27]

Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:46 PM
backscatter712 (23,671 posts)

OK, so a prominent DUer was banned for disloyalty to the Democratic Party.


Still seeing some gravedancing over that.

Well, here's my take.

BEFORE I am a Democrat, I am a democrat. I am a progressive. I am a socialist.

I believe in protecting the environment.
I believe in keeping us out of destructive and pointless wars.
I believe in equal rights for black people, for Latinos, for Muslims, Christians, Jews, Atheists, for women, for the LGBTQIA community, and for every human being.
I believe in a secular government, not theocracy.
I believe in helping the middle and lower class, and pushing back against predatory big business.
I believe in health care for all.
I believe in making college education accessible to everyone, regardless of ability to pay, and without incurring crippling debt.
I believe in opposing demagogues and fascists.
I believe in fair trade, instead of outsourcing work to the countries that pay the lowest wages and treat workers the worst, leaving us here hung out to dry.

That is where my loyalties lie.

Not with a political party. I register as a Democrat, participate in Democratic party processes, and work to elect Democrats in order to further the goals I have above.

I'm not a ****ing idiot, so for those looking for a TOS violation, no I'm not going to vote to Naderize the party or the country. Yes, I know what Duverger's Law is.

BUT, I am only loyal to Democrats if they're loyal to what I believe in. And I'm not going to blindly follow the diktats of characters like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz just because she puts a "D" next to her name.

As far as I'm concerned, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is as bad as any Republican. She's as corrupt, as abusive of power, and as devoid of integrity or loyalty to the values that Democrats purport to promote.

The Democratic party, at its best, promotes strong values, and makes our country a better place.

But the Democratic party at its worst falls to corruption, kisses the ass of the powerful, and throws the little guy to the wolves, while giving an unctuous smile and saying "What are you going to do? The Republicans are worse! We suck less!" If you think I'm going to give my loyalty to those who pull that shit, you've got another thing coming.

I'm sick of false promises. I'm sick of kabuki dances. I'm sick of dealing with those that would resort to smears and dirty tricks to win an election, instead of running on the merits. We're not going to let a good man get Dean Screamed so the billionaires and Wall Streeters get a candidate that does little more to them than tell them "Cut it out."

I'm sick of fair-weather friends for the LGBTQIA community, and minorities, and civil rights. I want someone who will stand for what's right, and do it with dignity, even if the fight is lost.

The Democratic Party is a means to my ends, not the end itself. And when the Democratic Party fails to uphold its values, and my values, it will lose my loyalty, and I will find creative new ways to promote my values.

So stop demanding I bend the knee and kiss the Democratic ring. You want my loyalty? EARN IT.

What DUmmie was banned?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027461024

[Ptarmigan]

Well, it's high time; it's like eight years overdue.

This is something I don't understand about the womens'-libbers on Skins's island--no matter how blatantly obvious it is, no matter that it's so obvious even a blind man can see it, they never see how the Democrat party wages war on women.

Given that the various contributions of women to the Democrat party far exceeded whatever blacks did for the Democrat party, 2008 should've been Messalina Agrippina's year; it was long past the women's turn.

But no, they got denied, by the selfish greedy upstart racists, who insisted it was the blacks' turn first.

And oddly, the primitives in 2008 had a candidate who fit both needs here, for a woman candidate and a black candidate--both at the same time--the former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney.

But the primitives paid her no attention at all; true, she was black, but.....she was a woman, and women are second-class people in the Democrat party.  Best to have a black who's a male.

It truly astounds me, the way women's-libbers stick with the Democrat party no matter how many times the Democrats stick it to them.

I am surprised that Cynthia McKinney did not get votes in 2008. I remember the media kept saying Hillary Clinton would get the nomination in 2008. They were wrong as it was Barack Obama. I do not think Hillary Clinton will not get the nomination in 2016.

The radical feminists at DU have overrun it for years. They were not banned like other groups that overran DU in the past. That should of been a red flag right there.

[franksolich]

I am surprised that Cynthia McKinney did not get votes in 2008. I remember the media kept saying Hillary Clinton would get the nomination in 2008. They were wrong as it was Barack Obama. I do not think Hillary Clinton will not get the nomination in 2016.

The radical feminists at DU have overrun it for years. They were not banned like other groups that overran DU in the past. That should of been a red flag right there.

I recall very well--and it's in the archives here--back in 2008 reminding the primitives they had a candidate who could fit both bills excellently, a woman of African derivation.

They could've killed two birds with one stone, supporting Cynthia McKinney.

But.....but.....but she was a woman, and so despite her blackness, wasn't good enough to be the Democrat nominee.

<<<if was a woman, would be as mad as Hell at the Democrat party.