Replies

Well, I see you've been tombstoned on DU already. Dunno how long I'll have here, but, out of respect for your honesty, I used the same username here as I do there also.

So, I'm an evilDUer (I can say that, you can't )

Your thread at DU was titled "Don't be a Nancy-Boy (or "Why is the Democratic Party trying to commit Suicide?")" and I thought I might try to answer that for you, along with a couple of points in your post.

A lot of us have decided after Tuesday (and some of us, BEFORE Tuesday) that trying to be imitation Republicans hasn't worked all that well (translation: the result sucked big time). So, there are those of us who think, ok, fine, let's give the American people a REAL choice. Yes, Pelosi is liberal AND progressive, and although I didn't know about the Democratic Socialist Party membership, I wouldn't be suprised if she is.

She's also ... ahem... agressive about it. Some of us *like* that. You may think progressives are wrong - but how often lately, have you seen a progressive laying out his or her policy ideas clearly and unapologetically? Answer? You haven't. You mentioned the mushy center... a lot of us don't like the mush. We have beliefs about the role of government in a civil society - and yes, we think it should be bigger than you think it should be. But there is no debate of those philosphies when people just say "me too, only better and more" to the pablum that passes for "centrist" policy.

So, let's have a REAL debate, and see what the American people think. They might disagree. Then again, they might agree. We won't know till we try, right?

(Note, I should add that most of us DON'T think that it's "suicide," as you put it. We think that, given a REAL, unambiguous choice, the American people WILL choose our vision over yours. We could be wrong, but I, for one, would rather find out than cower in the shadows, deathly afraid somebody might discover we have *oh horrors!* liberal ideas. And truly, given the Republican control of all three branches of the government, what have we got to lose?)

I should add that most of us DON'T think that it's "suicide," as you put it

I know that!

But I was wondering why you believed this was such a great idea. For some absolutely unfathomable reason (the PC were embarrassed to be linked to socialists) the DSA took the link to the Progressive Caucus off of it's web site.

The link I just gave you is broken, but... here is the Google cache. Oh yeah, I love Google. Just try a search on your own for Pelosi Progressive Caucus or Pelosi Democratic Socialists America and you can find the link yourself on Google. And here is more proof of the link between DSA and the Progressive Caucus.

I must say, aside from the leadership at DU, most of you have been exceedingly polite when I stepped into your territory.

ACK! There's no editing of posts after you post them? Ok I just wanted to note that the crack about you not being able to call me an evilDUer was *supposed* to be followed by a grin, but the angle brackets must have "disappeared" it.

The funny thing about Democrats is that on the one hand they claim that Republicans won this election because America "voted the war" instead of voting the economy, but on the other hand, they elect to be their spokeswoman their one senior Congresswoman who voted AGAINST the war.

By their own logic, Pelosi is the wrong choice. She voted against the war, and it was the war that decided the elction (per them). Fortunately for us Conservatives, the dual-identity of Democrats continues to be in play.

In 2004, Democrats have to defend 19 Senate seats (versus 14 for Repubs - presuming that there are no more defections - particularly in Florida). In that same year, the Democrats have to fund their Presidential run. To say the least, money is going to be rather tight for them, especially after the way that McAwful raped Sanchez in Texas for over $30 Million this time around. Moreover, Democrats in Florida mortgaged the Florida teachers' union headquarters building for $1.7 million this year to fund McBride's TV ads (a 30 year mortgage of interest plus principle for 30 minutes of air time), among other such tactical mistakes.

On top of those items of note, Pelosi will be making her national push to retake the House (since that's her power base).

And in this environment of tight money, the Democrats are going to be fighting an uphill fight against the most popular wartime President in American history.

In short, the Democrats are going to get creamed; moreso because mainstream Americans don't identify with shrill San Fransisco socialists (if they did, there would be a lot more Pelosi's visible in the Heartland, and there aren't).

But this is all expected. It is only natural for Democrats to recoil into a fetal position that resides solely in its core base of Left-leaning baby-boomer radicals (after such a "shock" as this most recent election, at least).

Faced with choosing between winning and their core beliefs, the Democrats chose "winning" in this most recent election, lost badly, and are now fleeing back towards their core beliefs (as witnessed in Pelosi).

Oh, but you don't think that the Democrats chose "winning" over their core beliefs in this past election?! Well, consider first that McAwful was promoted over (tenured) Smith (who is Black) to his position as DNC fundraiser/spokeman. Then Page, who is Black, was dissed for elite-White-name-recognition Mondale to replace Wellstone. The Wellstone rally-at-the-memorial also shows that Dems were far more concerned with "winning" than with mourning their fallen comrade. Moreover, consider that lilly-White Pelosi is getting promoted over the one man who had the courage to stand up to Gephardt, Ford (who is Black). Not that any of this is really a new trend, Democrats blasted Clarence Thomas, who is Black, as well (but that was long before this current election fiasco).

And now that we are back to dealing with today and the future, we can see that the Democrats are retreating from their "winning" strategy back towards their core principles (i.e. fight against the war, even though Democrats are publicly stating loudly, longly, and often that it was the "war" that won the election for Republicans).

And I encourage this trend. Go Pelosi! Freepers are rooting for you to first smash Ford and then to later show all of America that you are a pro-choice, card-carrying international socialist who wants to nationalize healthcare (hey, anyone remember how well Republicans did after Hillary tried that very thing back in 1993??) and leave Saddam Hussein alone to develop all of the nukes that he cares to build.

I'd be hard-pressed to think of a better person for Republicans to have as a visible opponent than Pelosi.

I'm licking my chops. I can't wait. The next thing that would thrill me would be for Dashcle to be replaced by a Kennedy, Byrd, or Rockefeller. Heck, since White, California radical females seems to be the current rage among Democrats, why not have pro-Cuba Boxer or Feinstein replace him?!

Mmmm... Tasty Democrats self-imploding by actually revealing their true colors. Delicious (and good for the future health of our great nation)!

I suppose there is something to be said for leftists being open about their beliefs. But then, why did you guys support the deeply dishonest and corrupt Clinton (and end up being fanatical, last-ditch defenders of him)? And why have you leftists in the RAT Party been so contemptuous and abusive towards Nader and the Greens? Seems to me honesty would suggest that you join them.

I have never seen a DUer kicked off of here or moderated unless foul language or extrememly nasty comments are aired.

As for DU, I would go over and visit sometime but I have already been kicked off. I was not rude, but I do not hide my views and they booted me off.

I used to post a lot at Freedem. They actually liked me there but they never agreed with anything I said.

Now, onto the American peope chosing the Left over the right. It is suicide, no doubt about it. I will explain why...

I make a middle class salary and do quite a bit aof good for my community. I had one of my liberal employees come up to me and tell me that the state should have 3/4 of my income. Let me tell you something, I part with almost 50% of my income now. I can not afford a house.

In Massachusetts, many Democrats are moving to GOP states because the cost of living is less. Of course, most of them see no correlation. It is getting to the point where you have to be really rich or really poor to live in MAssachusetts. Guess what happens when you eat the middle class? MAss might have felt that they NEEDED the money(Thats another debate.), yet now they get NOTHING from the people they have driven away. So, since they could not stop taking, now they have ZERO.

I have my own business, Truck Drivers get more pay then me. Most union laborers here get more pay then me. I CANT LIVE here and have to move. Yet, you want MORE. If you all left me alone, I WOULD produce more and even though at a lower tax rate, you would get less of a percentage, you would get MORE revenue. You see, I am talking about economic reality, while you are talking about ideaology. Oh, I might add all of the taxes that Mass collects from my workers would ALSO be gone.

Anyway, my point is that your average person wants to have a life and when things go to far to the left, that life is taken away. As a matter of fact, my Leftist worker said I need to have MORE then 50% taken out of my pay today. I can homestly tell you that that would leave me homeless.

I just figured I would get the ball rolling and say greetings. :D Remember, there are over 60000 people here so dont take it personally if someone insults you, ok?

Perhaps you will learn something of Conservative thought. I am pretty well versed in left-wing thought but I am willing to listen. I dont want to to bore you to tears so pleased to meet you.