Skip to main content

I'll admit I lost interest in DKos some time ago, when the tone of the site passed a threshold which I couldn't reconcile with the desire to effect real, permanent, positive societal change.  For that matter, I couldn't reconcile the atmosphere around here with reality itself.  I looked elsewhere for intelligent debate.  I stopped by occasionally, only to see pie fights, abuses of the site's infrastructure, and calls for more moderation.  Then, Kos raised the ban hammer and started whacking it around like a child having a tantrum.  Anyone suggesting that putting Democrats in office wasn't going to solve our problems was history.  Now, I see positive coverage of Occupy Wall Street on the front page.  WTF?

NOTICE
This diary was written by, and will be read by, human beings.  Therefore, your ability to find flaws in the reasoning contained herein may not prove what you think it proves.  By reading further, you agree that this is an unfortunate but unavoidable fact of life.

One of the core principles behind the OWS movement is that the political system itself is broken.  In my opinion, the protest is about forcing the system itself to change--or, failing that, replacing it with a better one.  Putting the 'right' people into elected office, then insisting that they 'do the right thing', isn't going to bring about the needed changes.  The protestors aren't trying to take the power of the system away from some people and give it to other people.  They're trying to create more and better ways of circumventing the existing system.  When the alternatives to working within the old system become powerful enough, the people working within the old system will no longer hold the power they have held.  They won't be able to do business in the ways they have grown accustomed to doing business.

In other words, they're strongly suggesting that electing more and better Democrats, then holding their feet to the fire, is pretty much pointless as long as you're doing it within the existing political, social and economic systems.  There they are on the front page of Daily Kos, those 99%ers who have dared to take to the streets with signs announcing that they will no longer accept the choices the existing systems have to offer.  If there is one overarching message to these Occupy protests, it is that they will be creating their own choices from now on, thank you very much.  The protestors have made it clear that they refuse to be bound by any political ideology, nor will they allow their movement to be co-opted by any politicians or the parties they belong to.

During the DK Great Purge of 2011, people were banned for suggesting much the same thing.  Kos explicitly warned the entire community that anyone openly espousing the idea that broader and stronger support of the Democratic Party and its candidates was not The Answer To All Our Problems would be dealt with severely.  To make sure everyone believed he meant it, he suspended or deleted the accounts of members whose on-site activities fit that description.

Yet, there the OWS protesters are...

on the front page of DailyKos...

saying, basically, 'F**k That'.

I don't get it.

Poll

Is the Occupy Everywhere movement consistent with the goal of electing more and better Democrats?

9%7 votes
4%3 votes
4%3 votes
5%4 votes
12%9 votes
44%33 votes
6%5 votes
6%5 votes
0%0 votes
8%6 votes

| 75 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Why are the two exclusive? (19+ / 0-)

    Pretty flat thinking, that, innit?

    I jumped ship from here during the extremities of stoopid too (only came back to get news from OWS and found it a far better place).

    Demonstrations by themselves aren't enough to change anything.  A million people showed up in NYC to stop the Iraq war.

    Elections by themselves aren't enough to change anything.

    Doing both (and other things as well) might make a difference.  Worth a try.

    •  A million people showed up for about four hours (6+ / 0-)

      then went home.

      Civil Obedience never changed shit.  That doesn't mean The Occupy Movement won't.

      Dear 1%. If you "stand with us", then move your fucking money.

      by JesseCW on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:30:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I do not mean to suggest (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hippie bitch

      that one must either support the Occupy protests, or the efforts to elect more and better Democrats.  Kos has taken the position that one may not be a member here and also be openly critical of the site's primary objective.  The Occupy protests are very critical of (although not entirely dismissive of) this site's primary objective.  I'm suggesting that posting positive coverage of the Occupy protests on the front page is not consistent with the 'new rules' of site moderation Kos instituted when the Great Purge took place, and the ban hammer came crashing down, earlier this year.

      •  It wouldn't surprise me to see (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Whimsical, Bronxist, Onomastic

        people who constantly try to spin OWS as anti voting for democrats fade into the mists of banishment.  I kinda hope they do.  Naderites (and their cousins) get us nowhere.

        •  that's a position, and a clear one (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Urizen

          I neither agree or disagree with you, because I have no personal stake in who gets banned from DailyKos and who does not.  I doubt the OWS movement is anti-voting-for-democrats, and I'm not particularly concerned about who wants to spin it as being that way and who does not.

          I do, however, have a great deal of curiosity.  I thought it was unwise for Kos to come down so hard on members who were not supportive enough of the goal of electing more and better democrats.  It seemed to me that one had to be completely on board with the idea that that effort was the most important thing one could do to improve the political, social and economic climate in this country, or one would be 'invited' to leave.  That smacked of ideological purity to me, and I predicted privately that it would be a step in the direction of irrelevance for the site.

          As I see it, in some ways, the site is a lot less relevant than it once was.  I may be wrong, and even if I'm not, that doesn't prove a causal relationship.  If saying so is an a site offense, I won't fight it if anyone wants to get my remarks here removed.

          •  before I left (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            just one victory, Onomastic

            it seemed to me this place had turned into a playgroup for narcissistic blowhards screetching at the tops of their fingertips 24-7.  I stopped coming around after Jane Hamster bought presence on the wrecklist and made common cause with Grover Norquist.  The site got a lot of attention (and traffic), Hamster got herself on the teevee, and, IMHO, we totally fucked ourselves on the healthcare issues.

            Maybe all that noise made it seem relevant, but it sure didn't seem to accomplish anything.  The 2010 elections didn't turn out very well for us.  A lot of people like me disappeared.  I was actually sort of shocked when I came back a couple weeks ago (figuring I'd hear from on the ground OWS folks) to find that actual discussions were taking place instead pissing contests about who was a "true" progressive.

            Quieter now, but I like some substance.

      •  yup (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BigAlinWashSt, Onomastic, Urizen

        I have been gone from dkos for a long time now and only came back because I was curious about how OWS was being covered. I think it's great that it's getting good press here, but am also curious about the short term memory of the mission of this place. I don't care all that much, just find it interesting. Glad to see I'm not the only one.

        "Don't ever trust a fart." -John's mom

        by hippie bitch on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 01:09:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think you and Kos may not be interpreting (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sylv, Urizen

        the 'new rules' in the same way. I think the Great Purge improved tone and behavior here.

        Just my opinion, of course.

    •  Exactly (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      InquisitiveRaven, Urizen, Sylv, Onomastic

      Many of us are stalwart Democrats, even stalwart Obama supporters, and stalwart OWS supporters. People like diarists simply can't wrap their heads around that.

      •  I'm probably going to regret this, but... (3+ / 0-)

        I'll try again.  This diary is not about my personal political beliefs.  It is about the apparent contradiction between the stated objectives of the Occupy movement, and the activities which may get one banned from DailyKos (as I understand them).

        No where in this diary do I state that one cannot support the President and the Occupy movement at the same time.  There are good reasons for supporting the President, and other Democratic candidates.  One may do so, and still believe that doing so will not actually solve our problems.  It may only buy us some time in which to create real solutions which may or may not involve electing more and better Democrats.

        The assumption that one may know the inner workings of another's mind, and the limitations thereof, solely from the contents of a diary posted on DailyKos is... um... not very sound.

        •  Are there stated objectives of the OWS movement? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          skohayes, Bronxist, vigilant meerkat

          I might rephrase your comment thusly:

          The assumption that one may know the inner workings of a large group of quite diverse protesters, and the limitations thereof, solely from the contents of the signs they hold up is... um... not very sound.

          As far as I know, no one has polled protesters all around the country to discern how many of them have decided voting is a pointless exercise.

          •  I'm not sure where (0+ / 0-)

            you get the idea that my knowledge of, and admittedly imperfect understanding of, the Occupy movement's objectives is based solely on the information contained on their cardboard signs.  Just to clarify:  it isn't.  Nevertheless, I see what you did there, and yes it was pretty clever.

            I read an article recently by Dahlia Lithwick, in which she pretty much tears apart the premise that the objectives of the Occupy movement are, due to the size and diversity of its participants, too confusing to be understood.  Further, that the movement's refusal to appoint representatives or draft a list of demands in no way makes it difficult for anyone with eyes and ears to understand what they want, nor how they intend to go about getting it.

            I don't mean to imply that the individual protestors themselves are united in the belief that voting for more and better Democrats is pointless.  What I mean to say is that those things which we may reasonably conclude about the values of the Occupy movement seem (to me) to be inconsistent with the idea that electing more and better Democrats is job #1 for the American people.  And that seems (to me) to make their message inconsistent with past practice regarding enforcement of the site's rules as they relate to advocacy of this, that, or the other thing.

            I accept that the things I've tried to express here are not as clear as I would like them to be, and the fault does not lie entirely with the inherent shortcomings of the English language.  I have no wish to blame the aforementioned lack of clarity on failures on the part of readers.  Unless they are.  Then, I do mean to.

          •  #OWS Polling Data (0+ / 0-)

            Advisors for President-Elect Barack Obama feared the new administration would face a coup if it prosecuted Bush-era war crimes, according to a new report out this morning.

            by Kurt Sperry on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 01:03:45 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  now I remember why I left (0+ / 0-)

          I wish diaries like yours, with what seem to be sincere questions, could spark lively and intelligent debate. I haven't read all of the comments here, but wouldn't be surprised if at some point you get called a troll. You raise good points and you're not at all alone in your curiousity. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, I guess.

          "Don't ever trust a fart." -John's mom

          by hippie bitch on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 01:14:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Here's the problem (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          skohayes, glorificus, Onomastic, Ana Thema
          apparent contradiction between the stated objectives of the Occupy movement, and the activities which may get one banned from DailyKos

          should say:

          apparent contradiction between the WHAT I THINK THE stated objectives of the Occupy movement, and the activities which may get one banned from DailyKos

          •  good catch (0+ / 0-)

            I accept your edit.  However, I believe I already covered this in a subsequent comment, posted above:

            I don't mean to imply that the individual protestors themselves are united in the belief that voting for more and better Democrats is pointless.  What I mean to say is that those things which we may reasonably conclude about the values of the Occupy movement seem (to me) to be inconsistent with the idea that electing more and better Democrats is job #1 for the American people.  And that seems (to me) to make their message inconsistent with past practice regarding enforcement of the site's rules as they relate to advocacy of this, that, or the other thing.
  •  Mitch McConnel-Happy valentine day? (0+ / 0-)

    just another sockpuppet..

    "Time is for careful people, not passionate ones."

    "Life without emotions is like an engine without fuel."

    by roseeriter on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:23:59 AM PDT

  •  the point being (17+ / 0-)

    it's all well and good to say the existing system sucks and one won't be participating in it.  but until viable alternatives arise, what else is there but more and better dems?

    to repeat:  i'm all for a better way.  bring it on.  it can't be said enough that we need instant run-off voting and we need it now.

    but that better way is yet but a dream.  here in reality, we have a two-party system.  if wishes were horses, beggers would ride, but this right here is what we got right now.  

    even if one views the dems as simply a stopgap to further damage until said vision comes to pass, that's a win we have take.

    My goal is to make the world safe for anarchy. - 4Freedom

    by Cedwyn on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:29:29 AM PDT

    •  "Arise", eh? (8+ / 0-)

      Better systems don't "arise" through some inevitable process.

      People create them.

      They don't create them by calling them pipe dreams.

      Dear 1%. If you "stand with us", then move your fucking money.

      by JesseCW on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:32:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I agree that there is merit in both approaches (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cedwyn

      While I believe that electing more and better democrats is far from the path to a brighter future many here believe it to be, I don't believe it is a worthless effort.  It's one thing we can do to alleviate some of the suffering, while the system continues to slowly collapse.

      I also believe that the Occupy efforts are the closest thing I've seen in a long time to a movement which directly addresses the real problems we face, in a way which might have a chance of laying the foundation of a replacement for the rotten system we have now.

      My point is that the latter ought to be a bannable offense, as I understand the rules.  Yet it makes the front page.  That's inconsistent.

      •  There isn't. (0+ / 0-)

        One "approach" is to throw some rotten bits of potato over the barbed wire to "help" those interned.

        The other is to cut the fucking wire.

        The first does not help.  It just makes the cowardly feel like they've done something, so they don't have to confront their cowardice.

        Dear 1%. If you "stand with us", then move your fucking money.

        by JesseCW on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 10:49:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I'll Donate Here....Not To National Dems Or Obama (5+ / 0-)

      http://www.fairvote.org

      FairVote acts to transform our elections to achieve secure access to participation for all, a full spectrum of meaningful ballot choices and majority rule with fair representation. As a catalyst for change, we build support for innovative strategies to win a constitutionally protected right to vote, universal voter registration, a national popular vote for president, instant runoff voting and proportional voting.

      Existence is no more than the precarious attainment of relevance in an intensely mobile flux of past, present, and future.~~~ Susan Sontag

      by frandor55 on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:52:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Others see it differently. (7+ / 0-)

      If you do not want to submit to a dysfunctional system, Stop Participating In The System.

      "The common assumption amongst Americans is that nothing can be done without mass action resulting in “compromise” from leadership. That the healing of our cultural dynamic is a “top down” process. That one person alone has little at his disposal for bettering the world. In fact, it is always self aware and self sustaining individuals who build better societies, not angry mobs without understanding or direction. Individuals blaze the path that the rest of the world eventually follows, and they do this through one very simple and effective act; walking away.

      By walking away from the corrupt system, and building our own, we make the establishment obsolete. This philosophy could be summed up as follows:

      Provide for yourself and others those necessities which the corrupt system cannot or will not, and the masses (even if they are unaware) will naturally gravitate towards this new and better way. Offer freedom where there was once restriction, and you put the controlling establishment on guard. Eventually, they will either have to conform to you, attack you, or fade away completely. In each case, you win. Even in the event of attack, the system is forced to expose its tyranny and its true colors openly, making your cause stronger."

      Full link here, including how to stop participating:

       http://www.zerohedge.com/...

      I appreciate that you need to continue the broken system as it is.  Fear is the Mind-Killer.  As long as you and yours let your fear run your beliefs and goals, you will continue to get more of the sameoldsameold.  Good luck with that.

      •  the thing is (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        elmo, Floja Roja, Onomastic

        i see an awful lot of walking away and not so much building something else.  

        and until the building outpaces the walking away, the system we have is the only game in town.  given that something's going to happen in the meantime, walking away only strips one's ability to influence events.

        get IRV and get it now, city by city by county by county if we have to.  

        but UNTIL we have alternatives, it makes no sense to not at least mitigate damage.

        My goal is to make the world safe for anarchy. - 4Freedom

        by Cedwyn on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 11:17:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cedwyn

          I vote for Democrats because I believe that the least they will do is make an effort to mitigate the suffering of the people they've been elected to represent.  I also believe that the least they will do is just about the most they will do, until doing business the way they have done for so long is no longer even an option.

        •  Actually... (4+ / 0-)
          walking away only strips one's ability to influence events.

          Being poor strips one's ability to influence events.

        •  IRV ain't an answer to any of the problems (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ohmyheck, priceman

          we actually have.

          Money would have as much, or more, influence.  The same goes for the value of "free media".

          It's staggering that anyone could possibly fail to see that.  

          It's not just that it's not a panacea, it's that it's not even a measurable improvement.

          I've remarked before about people who argue for building a levy with sugar packets instead of sand bags, but this is one of the few times I've seen someone advocate the use of empty sugar packets.

          She's the sort of person who would not only happily stay in Omelas, but would ask "Couldn't life be more wonderful if we threw a few more kids in there?"

          by JesseCW on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 12:10:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Mitigate the damage? (3+ / 0-)

          The damage is already done.  The LEADERSHIP of the Democratic Party has aided and abetted the Republicans in doing permanent damage to this country. Rank-and-file are now waking up to that fact.  The rank-and-file Democrats are now a huge problem for the Leadership, since they do not share the same values.  "Saying" that they do is one thing.  Their actions have proved otherwise.

          What you insist upon having is a concrete system, pre-fabricated, so that you can safely shift into it.

          It doesn't work that way.  It is a process.  It is a journey.  It has stops and starts.  It has mistakes, that make for successes.  It takes some time.  It is messy.  It is a miracle.

          It will be developed, painfully for some, less for others, but no pain, no gain.  It will be scary.  Each person will have to overcome their personal fear.  No one can do it for you.

          You can hang on your dysfuntional system, and tell us it is all we have.  You can demand that we have a new system ready and waiting for you to support.  But who is to say you won't then criticize the new system as not meeting your criterion?  And then the next criterion?  and on and on.

          Your comment shows that you didn't bother to read the link I provided. I will quote some of it here:

          The obvious question now is; how can each one of us use this strategy in our daily lives? Here are just a few easy applications:

          1) Focus On The Federal Reserve--inform everyone you know of just how it has negatively effected the financial system.
          2) Take Back Your Savings
          3) Build Barter Networks
          4)  Start A Micro-Industry- Large manufacturers and business chains relying on the model of globalization will have absolutely no ability to rebuild mainstreet commerce,so the average American will bring it back through local industry
          5) Start An Activist Group--The establishment HATES when you do this.  Without the coordinated actions of aware individuals with a common focus, nothing is going to change.

          What Tyrants do fear is balanced insight, self reliance, and exceptional force of will. A handful of men with these attributes are far more dangerous to a corrupt system than thousands of citizens driven only by insatiable anger. To overcome oppression, we must first overcome ourselves.

          The ability to step outside the paradigm, the ability to act without permission, and charge the gates without apprehension, is the key to toppling totalitarian systems and exposing the great lie of our age; that we cannot exist without the cage we were born into.

          These aren't just words.  This is a call to self-awareness.  It is a call to look inside oneself and decide if you are going to be your own hero, or a sheep. (No offense to sheep)

          •  hahaha (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Onomastic, kestrel9000

            and you've obviously never bothered to read my sig.

            It doesn't work that way.  It is a process.  It is a journey.  It has stops and starts.  It has mistakes, that make for successes.  It takes some time.  It is messy.  It is a miracle.

            in other news, the sun will be rising in the east tomorrow and water is wet.  

            change doesn't happen instantly...now where have i heard that before? hmmmmm...

            so, given that change does take time, do you think there will be any game except R vs D come 2012?  that's but a year out, you know.  i.e., there is currently, as we type, no viable alternative for enacting laws we want; this is not a direct democracy.

            is it too radical a paradigm to suggest that one can be fully supportive of OWS, but still believe in affecting change through electoral politics?  how do you think the right got so powerful in the first place?  by starting small and everywhere.

            it's possible to still vote and participate in this system while supporting OWS values and the long-term goals of reform.  in fact, doing both is ideal.

            because until someone can explain to me how not voting furthers our causes...

            speaking of self-awareness, you do get that the problem lies not so much with our political system -- it's got a lot to commend it -- as it does with the rampant abuse of it, right?  and you do realize that the true root of it is with our dumb-ass media happily playing handmaiden to GOPaganda?

            you get that we are fighting a 30-year plus full-court press from the right, don't you?  and that the complicit media and anemic education programs the GOP has wrought are the biggest problem, not politicians per se or our political system as it was designed?  

            i mean, do you want to scrap our system of representative democracy outright?  is that what you're talking about here?  because that's the conclusion pointed to by giving up on reform of our system.

            What you insist upon having is a concrete system, pre-fabricated, so that you can safely shift into it.

            ...You can hang on your dysfuntional system, and tell us it is all we have.  You can demand that we have a new system ready and waiting for you to support.  But who is to say you won't then criticize the new system as not meeting your criterion?  And then the next criterion?  and on and on.


            i am not insisting or demanding anything, nor do i maintain some nebulous list of criteria.  nor is this about what i want, or even about me.  

            it's a stone-cold reality that congress is what it currently is.  it's not going away anytime soon.  neither is the presidency.  it's a stone-cold reality that third-party candidates have been splitters more often than not and handed the election to someone nobody really wanted.  it's a stone-cold reality that running for city office and making bigger changes locally is both easier and a better ROI.  

            yay!  OWS is driving the narrative.  they don't want to be associated with either political party.  yay!  so do most honest churches, but what does that get anyone?  there are lots of different kinds of power; the kind we most need is the kind that influences legislation.  

            so, again, how do we affect the most desired outcome with the system that currently exists?

            personally, i'd mandate that everyone leave the country once in their lives.  i'd demand that everybody has to wait tables for a few months.  i'd make "noblesse oblige" article 1 of the constitution.  i'd leave education to people who crave the knowledge and not have universities be money-oriented diploma mills.  everyone would have to read dune.

            because here's another stone-cold reality:  society has to shift.  we're getting there.  this is a momentous time.  but until everyone groks all the fun trippy dippy hippie stuff about love your brother and we're all connected, etc., we've got one hell of an uphill battle.

            ever read childhood's end?

            pee ess:  take your condescension and stuff it.


            My goal is to make the world safe for anarchy. - 4Freedom

            by Cedwyn on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 07:44:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  pee ess, pee ess: (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Onomastic, kestrel9000

            is it time for a constitutional convention?

            My goal is to make the world safe for anarchy. - 4Freedom

            by Cedwyn on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 07:54:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Get what? (11+ / 0-)

    So you lost interest in the site, and this post is reaffirming why you don't like it?

    4d65822134b38

    Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit.

    by LaughingPlanet on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:29:50 AM PDT

  •  Here's another unavoidable fact of life (5+ / 0-)

    Writing a NOTICE in bold warning us of the pitfalls of finding flaws in your diary does not accomplish what you may think it accomplishes.

    Score Card: Marriages won by me, 1. Marriages destroyed by me, 0.

    by Steven Payne on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:38:44 AM PDT

    •  Indeed, the premise of the notice (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hippie bitch

      works both ways.  The fact that I feel the posting of OWS articles on the front page is strange, since some of the Occupy movement's basic activities are things which have gotten people banned from this site in the past, may be due to some failure of understanding on my part.

      That's why I made it clear that I don't get it.  Not that I understand everything I need to understand, and something is definitely wrong.  Not that I'm not interested in hearing anything which might increase my understanding, and thereby change my opinion.

      My understanding may indeed be the problem, and the reason why I imagine an inconsistency where there is none.  I'm open to hearing constructive input, once you all have gotten past pointing out the obvious as if it were some kind of 'gotcha'.

      •  Alright then (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        diffrntdrummr, mapamp, Sylv

        The major fault I see in this diary is the presumption that the values of the majority of Kossacks can't align with the values of OWS because this site is fundamentally dedicated to electing better Democrats to office. I don't see these goals as mutually exclusive. To highlight my assertion, I give you this short diary written by Representative Barbara Lee as an example. I'm not thrilled with the Democratic Party much of the time, but I do believe it is the best vehicle we have at the moment to effect change.

        Score Card: Marriages won by me, 1. Marriages destroyed by me, 0.

        by Steven Payne on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 10:29:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  actually, I don't assert that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          hippie bitch

          the values of the majority of Kossacks can't align with the values of OWS.  I assert that, as I see it, Kos' rules regarding on-site activities, and the specific enforcement actions he has taken to enforce them, appear inconsistent (to me) with the values of the OWS movement.

          While the values of the OWS movement and its active supporters may not be monolithic, nor easily summed up in slogans and sound-bites, there are some common and consistent themes among them.  One of those themes seems to me to be that the system is badly broken.  Maybe it can be repaired, maybe not.  But electing more and better Democrats won't change a whole lot, until major changes to the system are brought about.  The protestors are trying to force those changes, by fostering an environment in which the existing system loses power and relevance.

          It has been my understanding, since this year's uptick in moderation and enforcement of the site's rules, that placing greater importance on making changes to the system than one places on efforts to elect more and better Democrats will be considered a violation of the site's terms of use.  That's the way it looked to me, when accounts were being suspended and deleted en masse.  Maybe my understanding of those events, and what they mean, is flawed.

  •  The problem is.... (3+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    wilderness voice, Whimsical, mapamp
    Hidden by:
    Kurt Sperry

    You're confused.

    You want to believe that OWS is all about dumping the current political system. You're projecting onto OWS what you want to see. I think there is only one thing everyone agrees on that reflects OWS - economic justice.

    I know you hate Democrats. I know you want a third party system. I know you want this site to dump its focus on electing more and better Democrats and you want this site to embrace third party politics.

    Until and unless Markos agrees with you, its not going to happen and you're POV simply isn't welcome here. So why you continue to stick your foot in the crack of the door trying to wedge your POV onto a site that you basically despise is an enigma to me.

    •  *Sigh* (3+ / 0-)

      Again, there is not nearly enough information about my personal political beliefs in this article for anyone to even begin to lecture me about what is wrong with them, much less to point to the specific flaws in what I believe as the source of my limited understanding.

      But hey, thanks for the free analysis.  I'll grant you that it's pretty amazing in its thoroughness, even though it's tragically wrong.  And thanks for the free trial, and the sentence too.

    •  You "know" he hates Democrats? (4+ / 0-)

      Really?  How do you "know" that?  What a bunch of baloney.  You don't know fukall about this guy's personal beliefs.

      I am getting pretty damn sick of people like you who tell people they "hate", when you don't know that, you just project some feeling onto them, without any proof whatsoever.

      The projection is what YOU feel.  Maybe it's time to look in the mirror.

      •  All one needs to do (0+ / 0-)

        is review your comment history, your HRs and your uprates to see that why my comment struck a nerve with you.

        •  Is that IT? Why don't you respond to what I (0+ / 0-)

          actually wrote?  Where did this guy ever say he "hates" Democrats?  Prove it.  Or admit that you are wrong, and being a Dick by accusing someone of something you have no idea about, and spouting hyperbolic bullshit, just to make yourself feel like you are The Big Man at DKos.  

          You know what they say about guys who always have to prove that they are a Big Man and be a constant bully?  Ya, this:

          Photobucket

          And I stand behind every comment I write.  Just because I write the truth and don't put up with your BS, and have no problem calling you out on it---ya, feel free to link to my comments.  It would be a compliment.  People can see that calling out internet bullies isn't all that hard and works wonders.

          Pushback sucks, doesn't it?

          •  Ya that about sums it up (0+ / 0-)

            You write the truth? Well, go for it. Share some truth.

            Who do you plan to vote for in 2012?

            You don't need to be "big man" to answer that question. Give it a shot.

            And again, your track record on this blog speaks for itself. Its pretty damn bad.

    •  Thanks for the HR Kurt Sperry (0+ / 0-)

      Because that comment speaks to you too.

    •  HUH? (0+ / 0-)

      Did you read a different diary than I did? If so, I would personally appreciate a link to verify your conclusions.

      For instance, I didn't see...

      • anything about "dumping" the current political system.
      • hating Democrats
      • wanting a third party system
      • wanting this site to embrace third party politics
      • any evidence that the diarist despises this site

      Perhaps my public schooling education is failing me and I am simply unable to read the words and statements you seem to be able to see with ease.

      If that is the case, then please accept my humble apologies. Otherwise....

      HUH?

  •  well I think you misunderstand. (10+ / 0-)

    Many see OWS in terms of only short-term, immediate gratification, ie: "will it win 2012 for the Democratic team?"

    I see the movement as seeking to force change in the system by a populous public education program. One that isn't being done by the politicians or the Corporate Fourth Estate, with rare exceptions.

    The media is afraid to tell the public the truth: DC, both parties, work not for conservative agenda against a liberal one, but rather the 99% v. The 1%. And the 1% have been winning for 50 years.

    If they succeed in reframing the debate those serving the current system can adapt, or they will fail to survive.

    Consider we have a DEMOCRATIC President that campaigned on addressing Global Climate Change. He is now on the verge of unilaterally approving the Keystone pipeline. This will please the Koch Brothers, and big oil and the infuriate his own base and have potentially disastrous results to our environment. The problem runs much deeper than who wins 2012.

    At this point, far more people have now been arrested for protesting Wall Street's mortgage fraud crimes than have been for committing and presiding over them.

    by Scott Wooledge on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:40:41 AM PDT

    •  Thank you (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hippie bitch

      for posting an intelligent, well-reasoned comment.  I believe we may be largely in agreement about the issues, as you frame them in your comment.

      I'm beginning to wonder if the tone of the majority of the comments here is providing me with a default answer to why there are things about this site I don't get, and may never get.  I'm not meant to get them.  I'm meant to either step into line or shut the fuck up.

      •  Not exactly (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mapamp, fcvaguy, glorificus
        I'm meant to either step into line or shut the fuck up.
        You're meant to either support Democrats or shut the fuck up.

        Electing Democrats = Purpose of the site.
        Electing Third Parties = Not the purpose of the site.
        Electing Republicans to teach the Democrats a lesson = Really fucking not the purpose of the site.

        OWS is not a political movement.  It is a social and economic justice movement.

        Sarcasm. Just one more service I provide.

        by Grannus on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 10:46:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  "will it win for the Democratic team" (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sylv

      is not what I think of. I think about will it result in more progressive government? But that won't happen if those who support the OWS movement reject the very idea of voting.

  •  After All the Occupy Activities... (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steveningen, mapamp, elmo, glorificus, Sylv

    ...you're still going to have to vote to get any change.

    Many thanks to the Occupy movement for waking people up and giving us a rallying point, but we will have to make the change we want.  That means political action.

    And I'm not convinced that all the people in the Occupy movement are as monolithic in their beliefs as you seem to assert.

    •  But I DID vote for change! (3+ / 0-)

      Look what I got.  A protector of the status-quo.

      If it's only one thing I learned, it is that the whole voting is the only way to get change-memo is utter rubbish.  I cannot see how you can still believe this?  What's that saying--- doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of stupidity.

      Sorry, I am not calling you stupid, I don't know you, but that idea you posted has been validated as False.  

      •  So show me the success stories (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fcvaguy, InquisitiveRaven, Sylv

        of not voting? Because from where I sit, the failure story of not voting is staring us right in the face. Not enough people who believe as we do bother to vote, and this was true even in 2008. Sure, we got to elect a president, but we failed to get a filibuster proof Senate, and in 2010 we lost the House.

        It isn't enough for you to vote for change, you've got to get enough other people to vote for it, too.

  •  My understanding is that the site does not (10+ / 0-)

    allow posters to advocate for candidates from other parties.  OWS does not advocate for any party, but their ideals are very progressive.  How OWS plays out is going to be interesting because the system is broken, but currently it is the only game in town.

    #Occupy Wallstreet - Politicians will not support the movement until it is too big to fail.

    by Sychotic1 on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:53:42 AM PDT

  •  First There's No Unanimous Consensus Anywhere (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mapamp, Sylv

    yet. Even those who say "the" system is broken are divided on what's broken about it.

    Clearly our own government worked vastly better for the masses of people for about a 50-60 year period in the past --many important population blocks excepted, admittedly-- so there are good arguments being made to restore the programs and regulations of the best of that period. Much of the working class lived a middle class life style with access to education, upward mobility, opportunity for leisure and travel, and a secure if not necessarily comfortable retirement.

    So maybe restoring those policies is most of what needs done.

    There are many who feel the 2 party system is what's broken. They say if we had a different vote counting system we could have multiple parties which would allow for much better representation of the people.

    Almost everyone feels the huge amounts of money flooding into elections from the rich and from global corporations is what the real problem is.

    And there have always been complaints about the Constitutional system itself. Some feel it has particular omissions or shortcomings, some feel the entire concept is bad. Some think it always was; some others say maybe it wasn't originally but resource shortages and climate change require national action beyond what's possible or legal under the Constitution.

    Remember some of us have been singing out about what was being done to the country and its future over the entire last 35-40+ years that is finally, finally becoming evident to most people.

    So there's 1/3 of a century easy already spent trying to prevent or fix the specific complaints we're hearing.

    Short term operations like the union mobilizations and now OWS are not going to turn the country around nor are they going to find definitive answers. After all there was serious dissatisfaction with monarchy in the 1760's if not earlier; independence took another 20 years and it was around 30 years before we had adopted a definitive solution to the core problems of governance we'd faced.

    Today we don't even know yet if the answer to our crises is entirely or mostly in the recent past of our own nation and political party, or if it lies in another new revolution in the entire concept of participatory governance.

    As for dKos it's quite acceptable to say the Democratic Party can't be supported just leaving it as it is, if you're talking about reform and replacement from within, even if that involves external activism and organizing. That seems to extend to changing aspects of the Constitutional system. I think where you hit the electric fence here is to advocate abandoning the party in favor of joining or creating another.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 09:56:42 AM PDT

    •  Yes, "here," but this is only one website. (0+ / 0-)
      I think where you hit the electric fence here is to advocate abandoning the party in favor of joining or creating another.
    •  thank you (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Friend of the court

      I enjoyed reading your comment, and I agree with nearly all of it.  I'm pretty sure, however, that I never advocated abandoning the Democratic party in favor of joining or creating another.  I advocate a lot of things--too many, in fact, to go into them in any detail here--but not that.

      But let me say again that I appreciate your well thought out and informative response.  That's the kind of food for thought I was hoping to see by posting this.  There is much in your comment which relates to and informs my understanding of the site's rules of engagement and how they mesh with coverage of the occupy movement.

  •  since you say you haven't been around much, (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mapamp, diffrntdrummr, glorificus

    maybe you should just read alot of what the website owner has been writing for the past 3 months.

    I would tell you, but it would be better for you to just read it for yourself.  Easy-peasy--just go to "search", "users", type in "kos", then click on his name.

    I see two things:

    1)  Just like OWS, this site is evolving.  It is not static, just like Life.  So, the FAQ's and the site mission are merely outlines for what are guidelines.  If the mission statement was actually enforced---good-bye Pootie Diairies, etc.

    2)  You sure do seem sensitive about the "Purge".   You mention it enough that it seems to have effected you more than some.  Is there a personal reason for that?

    I personally found the effects of the Boycott to have had more of an over-all effect on this site than the "Purge".   The "Purge" only effected about 1-2 dozen users, out of 300,000+.  The exodus during the Boycott showed users what this place could be like without the non-stop discussion interruptions, and users liked what they saw. But that is just my opinion, from my observations.

    From these two points, I get the feeling that this diary has quite alot of "Concern-Troll"ing about it.  You seems to be overly concerned that this site's mission is "inconsistent".  I personally don't care if it is "inconsistent".  I like that it has become a great news source for #OWS.  So does Markos.

    So, OK, your concern is duly noted.  Anything else?

    •  I think you're confusing (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hippie bitch

      my curiosity with concern.  The two aren't mutually exclusive, and they often coexist side by side.  But they don't have to, and they often don't.  Not to put too fine a point on it, but they're far from the same thing.

      I'd recommend against interpreting my diary and comments as a case of mysterious personal concern, then using that as the basis for a diagnosis of oversensitivity.  That's a skinny limb you're on, there.  And I ought to know, I've broken a few.

      I'm glad to hear your take on the evolution of the site, and how the Purge/Boycott/Exodus may have influenced it.  Your knowledge of that subject is clearly more advanced than mine, and I appreciate the input.  

  •  the system is broken, totally agree. (3+ / 0-)

    the fix is the sticking point.  right now, voting is all we legally have, however.  unfortunately, voting is the system.  what to do?  your post started a conversation and that's why i read here.  thank you.

  •  Is one of the core principles (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hippie bitch, BigAlinWashSt, Sylv

    behind the OWS movement "that the political system is broken"?  I agree that the political system is broken or pretty damn close to it, in terms of facilitating needed economic changes, but I'm not sure that's a "core principle" behind those that are on the front lines.  

    I thought the core principle was economic justice.

    Depending upon which "core principle" you chose to focus on, you may or may not find an inconsistency with the site's major focus.

    I guess that means the answer to your question lies in the framework that each individual uses to understand not only  the events of the OWS movement AND the current crisis in our political and economic power centers, but also the purpose of the site.    

    Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

    by a gilas girl on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 12:46:12 PM PDT

    •  thoughtful and interesting (0+ / 0-)

      Thank you.  I agree that personal perception is at the very center of each person's understanding of the issues you mention, and indeed pretty much everything else.  We can't realistically hope to ever bring everyone's personal perceptions into complete agreement, but we can hope to have enough success in that area to make some good things happen.  And to set the stage for more good things to happen, some day.

      Unfortunately, this is also a slippery slope.  The reality of our individuality, and how it informs our unique understandings, presents us with some dangers as well.  It means that it's entirely possible that consensus on critical issues may never reach the tipping point where effective action becomes possible.  Faced with that possibility, some shrink away, muttering 'why bother?'.  Others maintain that anything is possible, if enough people believe it is.  I'm not sure I possess the pure faith of the latter, but I definitely will never align myself with the former.

  •  OWS and the Democratic Party (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BigAlinWashSt

    are to a large degree working at cross purposes.  Obama is profoundly unpopular among OWS participants polled-

    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/...

    I think if this site wants to limit the discourse contained on the site to tribal Democrats, ones who are committed to voting only for Democrats and enforce that by excluding viewpoints typical of OWS supporters, then as the OWS movement gains momentum (assuming it does) the site will become increasingly irrelevant, just as the Democratic Party itself will become increasingly irrelevant as it continues advocating policies that are clearly in the interests of the 1% who feed them money and against the interests of the rest of the country and the planet.

    The elephant in the room is of course that the mainstream Democratic Party is deeply corrupted, perhaps even to the point where it can no longer function as an effective advocate for the 99%. OWS largely gets this, that the system is broken. That's why they act outside of it.  The Democratic Party can adapt to the new reality that OWS is working towards or it can keep doing what it does, that's up to them.  Where the Democratic Party is willing to advocate profound and real change then it should be supported; where it drags its feet, says one thing and does another or simply continues doing the wrong things, it must be opposed. A party is only as worthwhile as the work it does. Supporting a party unconditionally will always be the fastest way to disempower oneself within it.  Once they know you'll vote for them whatever they do you no longer have any voice.  

    Advisors for President-Elect Barack Obama feared the new administration would face a coup if it prosecuted Bush-era war crimes, according to a new report out this morning.

    by Kurt Sperry on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 01:35:30 PM PDT

    •  What a crock (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      glorificus

      A perfect example of someone desperately attempting to project their own desires onto OWS.

      Lets take a close look at some of the questions asked:

      3. If the 2012 election for the U.S. House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate in your district?
      Democratic candidate.............................................42 Republican candidate................................................4 Wouldn’t vote.......................................................22 Someone else.......................................................32

      Oh wow, the plurality of OWS protesters plan to vote for a Democrat. Imagine that.

      6. How likely do you think it is that this protest will change the views of politicians in the Democratic Party?
      Very likely..........................................................26 Somewhat likely...................................................44
      Not very likely......................................................22
      Not at all likely......................................................8

      7. How likely do you think it is that this protest will change the views of politicians in the Republican Party?
      Very likely..........................................................15 Somewhat likely...................................................22
      Not very likely......................................................31
      Not at all likely.....................................................32

      An overwhelming majority believe and hope that their efforts will change the views of the Democratic Party, while an overwhelming majority believe it will have zero effect on Republicans. THat tells me OWS protesters still hope that the Democrats can and will listen to their issues.

      And did you see the part where only 25% of OWS protesters identify themselves as Democrats?

      How about the question where they are asked who they hope the Republican nominee would be? The top vote getter besides "NOT SURE", was Ron Paul. Go figure.

      60% of OWS protesters said they voted for Obama in 2008. Now, 36% say they will and 36% say "other". Not great numbers, but given the circumstances, I'd say that isn't "overwhelmingly opposed" to Barack Obama.

      So where you do you stand? Will you be voting for Barack Obama in 2012? Or are you advocating for a third party candidate? Or perhaps a Republican like Ron Paul?

      •  What a Crock? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ShainZona

        Whatever happened to "don't be a dick"?

        And when you put stuff in quotes like for instance "overwhelmingly opposed" that were never in the post replied to it makes you look incapable of making an honest argument. Why otherwise do the strawman anyone can scroll up less than a screen height and see is one?

        Anyway.

        This is what got my attention, the first question in the poll:

        1. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president?
        Approve……………………………………………………..27%  
        Disapprove…………………………………………………. 73

        How is characterizing this as "profoundly unpopular" a "crock"?

        I haven't decided how I'll vote the top of the ticket yet.  I likely won't vote for Obama/Biden, they are just too much unapologetic tools of the 1% for me to stomach.  But like I said I haven't decided.

        What do you think should be done with members here that in the light of our collective disappointment cannot support the 2012 Democratic presidential ticket?  Should we just STFU?  Be banned outright? Should we all fall into line behind the designated by others authority figure under orders from above? Pepper sprayed like dirty fucking hippies?

        More than anything else we need more and better ideas. OWS is gestating them. They are not operating within the rigid confines of the 1%'s thought boundaries- unlike the major parties.  The Democratic Party can avail themselves of this creative primal energy or they can fade into irrelevancy. As can this site.

        We don't really much care either way.  We will be heard.

        Advisors for President-Elect Barack Obama feared the new administration would face a coup if it prosecuted Bush-era war crimes, according to a new report out this morning.

        by Kurt Sperry on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 03:01:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You're asking me (0+ / 0-)

          what happened to "don't be a dick"? Who's the one tossing around abusive HRs? And its not your first time at that rodeo. In fact, your record of abusive HRs and abusive uprates speaks for itself..

          And when you put stuff in quotes like for instance "overwhelmingly opposed" that were never in the post replied to it makes you look incapable of making an honest argument.

          You're so right. Here's your actual quote. Like there's a spit of difference between "overwhelmingly opposed" and:

          Obama is profoundly unpopular

          Which is complete wishful thinking on your part. So many who despise the Democratic Party and hope and pray that Obama gets primaried or flat out loses are doing backflips in projecting what they want to see onto OWS. You're just one more.

          I haven't decided how I'll vote the top of the ticket yet.  I likely won't vote for Obama/Biden, they are just too much unapologetic tools of the 1% for me to stomach.  But like I said I haven't decided.

          So, you're considering Republican? Perhaps Ron Paul? Or maybe Ralph Nader? Those of you who are constantly tossing around your passive/aggressive attacks on others here who support the Democratic Party and this President should have the courage of their convictions and just be straight up about their intentions. So many don't or won't. Makes you wonder what you really hope to accomplish on a blog who's purpose is to elect more and better Democrats.

          Frankly I don't care what this site does with people who have no intention of supporting Democrats in 2012. I'm just going to insist you be honest about your intentions and stop attacking those who do support Democrats on a Democratic blog.  And, I say that as a Democrat, an Obama supporter, and someone who is all in with OWS - I've been to 3 rallies thus far, donated $430, a case of gatorade, a box of sweatshirts, and this weekend a dozen rain parkas. Some of us actually DO stuff.

          •  WTF? (0+ / 0-)
            You're asking mewhat happened to "don't be a dick"? Who's the one tossing around abusive HRs? And its not your first time at that rodeo. In fact, your record of abusive HRs and abusive uprates speaks for itself.

            I haven't ever given more than a handful of HRs here and none that could plausibly be described as "abusive".  They were to a one flagging posts that I found gratuitously uncivil- usually an ad hom directed at another member. I've never HRed a comment for simple disagreement with the political opinion expressed in it which I find by far the most common and problematic HR abuse here. And I'm not sure what an "abusive uprate" is. I'm sure I've never uprated a post for any reason beyond simple agreement except perhaps once or twice in reaction to what i found to be an obviously abusive HR.

            Advisors for President-Elect Barack Obama feared the new administration would face a coup if it prosecuted Bush-era war crimes, according to a new report out this morning.

            by Kurt Sperry on Sat Oct 29, 2011 at 07:30:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Just wait, more weirdness will come in 2012. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Situational Lefty

    Cuts to Medicare/Medicaid, another war, more foreclosures and unemployment.
    Will the American public split down the middle again with the two parties?  Stay tuned for another installment of
    "American Democracy".

  •  Wow, really? TU status? (0+ / 0-)

    This makes me wonder about the standards one must meet in order to gain TU status.  Seriously, you don't want me to be a TU around here.  Last time I checked, the things I believe qualify me for little more than troll status by DK standards (or, at least by the standards of the loudest and most righteously indignant contingent of DK).  Even I don't trust me.

  •  Late to this ... (0+ / 0-)

    ... but:

    During the DK Great Purge of 2011, people were banned for suggesting much the same thing.  Kos explicitly warned the entire community that anyone openly espousing the idea that broader and stronger support of the Democratic Party and its candidates was not The Answer To All Our Problems would be dealt with severely.  To make sure everyone believed he meant it, he suspended or deleted the accounts of members whose on-site activities fit that description.

    ... you completely mischaracterize this.

    •  okay, but... (0+ / 0-)

      I'd be more convinced if you were offering something to substantiate my unsubstantiated claim.  I'm trying to learn about something I admit I don't understand, not to convince anyone to not understand it with me.  You apparently are cosigning on the idea that I don't get it.  Not very helpful, but thanks for stopping by.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site