Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So...what exactly counts as "bashing the party" or "attacking Democrats" these days? [View all]NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)99. SSDD (as many others have noted).
It is simply your opinion that the ideas were rejected.
No, this is a fact. It was in all the papers and all over the news. Surely you must have read about it.
The ideas are popular, are nothing but positive,
Nope. They were clearly rejected. Attacks and smears on Democrats and the Democratic Party are the furthest thing from "positive" that I can imagine. You can't blow smoke up my ass. I'm smarter than you're giving me credit for.
you have the ability to put me on ignore or to avoid the threads I start.
What good purpose does it serve for anyone to let any distortions and false claims go unchallenged? That makes no sense. I'm not inclined to let attacks on Democrats or the Party go unchallenged and unanswered. (Perhaps you've forgotten already? I shouldn't have to remind you or go into any details about some very offensive comparisons that were recently made.)
If I was disrespecting Hillary or other public figures,
Kamala Harris? (There's much more, but it really serves no good purpose for me to go into details. I think you know what I'm getting at without having to dredge up all that mess again.)
If I had anything whatsoever to do with JPR,
Who said anything about that? Not I. Only you. You keep mentioning this over and over again. In my interactions with you, I've never written a single word about that site. I've never accused you of having anything to do with that site... yet you CONTINUALLY bring them up.
It's something you like to talk about, out of the blue, for no apparent reason, and apropos of nothing previously discussed. Why? Guilty conscience? Something else? Kinda like this:
Marge: "Homer, I'm home!"
Homer: "I didn't go to Moe's I've been home all day what makes you think I went to Moe's? You keep accusing me of going to Moe's! Nobody saw me you can't prove a thing."
Marge: "Welcome home, Homer. How was work today!"
Homer: "Well, I didn't go to Moe's if that's what you're hinting at!"
See what I mean? What are you trying to convince me of? Why the obsession to convince me that you're not associated with JPR when I've never made that accusation? I don't care about that site and have no interest in that site or its members. Why do you?
If I was saying our party was no different than the GOP,
Ah, but you don't have to say it. Others say it, then you defend them and advocate their rejected ideas. Not much of a difference.
I've done none of those things and nothing close to any of those things.
That may be what you believe, but it's not entirely accurate.
There is nothing meriting your relentless personal hostility in that.
I'm not personally hostile. We disagree. I refute unrealistic and rejected ideas. I scorn and reject the unreliable dead-ender Stein-faction. "There's nothing wrong with that." (Why does my contempt for Stein-voters bother you so much?)
Popular, progressive ideas are simply popular, progressive ideas.
Apparently not as popular as you imagine them to be. Otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation at all, would we? You have no justification in trying to silence me.
You have not justification in trying to silence Hillary. There's no reason that we shouldn't be able to talk about "What Happened" and you'll never silence the discussion no matter how painful or embarrassing Hillary's words may be. She deserves to be heard.
It serves no good purpose for her to wait EIGHT TO TWELVE YEARS as you've previously suggested. It's unfair to demand her silence as you've previously suggested.
If that's not being "disrespectful to Hillary", I don't know what is. Do YOU think it's being respectful to shut her up? Seriously... be honest with me. Just a moment ago, you bragged that you'd never been disrespectful of Hillary, yet just a few days ago, you were trying to silence the discussion and suggested that she was wrong to write her book, that she should have waited EIGHT TO TWELVE YEARS, etc etc etc. (Was that being "respectful"?)
The correct answer is that it was NOT being respectful. There's a double standard going on here, and I'll call it out every time I see it. I understand why you keep suggesting that I should "put you on ignore"... but I'm not going to do it.
You have no justification in trying to silence ME. I have as much right to be here as anyone. I'm not going to let anyone bully me off the board as someone tried to do recently by accusing me of "stalking" because I replied to their repeated replies to me (and because we're interested in similar topics). And then there was another time that someone didn't like the waving emoji and tried to bully me about that as well.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
132 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So...what exactly counts as "bashing the party" or "attacking Democrats" these days? [View all]
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
OP
Let's call those who want radical changes radicals. We all want to improve everything politically,
Hortensis
Sep 2017
#34
The problem is that NO Republicans want to create a truly representative government.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#55
NO. The problem of this discussion is those on the farther left who feel that way.
Hortensis
Sep 2017
#59
You haven't been here long, but I already expected you to twist and disagree.
Hortensis
Sep 2017
#68
There is a very real disconnect in your presentation and the real world. There is no common ground
JCanete
Sep 2017
#54
I don't have a website and I didn't block you. I truly want to hear what you have to say on this.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#11
The message of the primary is not a rejection of all of the ideas of Bernie's campaign
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#86
Keith isn't saying that those ideas must be given up on. He didn't repudiate them himself.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#92
The fact that you believe that doesn't obligate me to stop posting in support of those ideas.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#96
I make no false claims/distortions. I don't lie. And I'm not in any "Stein faction".
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#100
Stop splitting hairs and playing word games. You're not helping your cause at all....
NurseJackie
Sep 2017
#105
Actually no. In the last few days, virtually any critique of anything the party does
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#24
And when I sent you that private message, I simply hadn't seen the sign that you didn't respond
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#33
More accurately, you haven't admitted that you've posted things bashing the party
mythology
Sep 2017
#46
I only did that because I didn't want to break my commitment not to respond in the thread.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#61
I didn't block you, nor do I have a website. I'll look and see what happened.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#12
I'm saying that people should respond on the merits of ideas-of ANYONE's ideas.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#111
I've done a number of posts saying he neede to take a stronger antiracist stand in public
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#45
I do attack the right. It's just that 2016 proved that we can't win by attacking the Right.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#29
I'll expand on it, then. I base my analysis on the fact that, in the 2016 campaign,
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#47
I wholly agree with you that there is no economic justice without civil rights
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#129
I think the line should be drawn between constructive criticism and scorched-earth criticism.
Willie Pep
Sep 2017
#66
Since when is a particular independent the only person who is qualified to speak on progressive
pnwmom
Sep 2017
#94
I never argued that Bernie was the only person who could speak on progressive principles.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#97
I'm not concerned about Bernie as much as I am about winning over his supporters.
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#114
The problem is that Bernie himself is making it harder to connect with his supporters,
pnwmom
Sep 2017
#115
There were threads here with titles like "the voters will never elect a socialist Jew".
Ken Burch
Sep 2017
#113
An attack would be like when the (far) left wing of the party went after Kamala Harris.
LonePirate
Sep 2017
#101
bold faced lies about the DNC is not "open discussion" and neither are half truth when it comes
uponit7771
Sep 2017
#116
How about posting an out of context comment and insinuating the worst betrayal?
Hekate
Sep 2017
#127